PROCEEDINGS OF THE
SECOND EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
PEMSEA Office, Quezon City, Philippines
14-15 March 2008
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
A.
Introduction
1
B.
Opening
Message
1
C.
Adoption of Agenda and Organizational Matters
1
1.0
Recruitment of the Executive Director and
PRF
Technical
Services
Staff
2
2.0
GEF/UNDP Project on Implementation of the SDS-SEA
4
3.0
Framework
of
Partnership
Programmes
5
4.0
State of Coasts Reporting System,
6
5.0
PRF
Sustainability
Plan
7
6.0
PEMSEA
Legal
Personality
9
7.0 2nd EAS Partnership Council Meeting
11
8.0 EAS
Congress
8.1
EAS
Congress
2009
13
8.2 3rd
Ministerial
Forum
14
8.3
EAS Congress 2012 Host Country
14
9.0 PRF
Operations
9.1
PEMSEA
Trust
Fund
15
9.2
Work
Programme
and
Budget 16
9.3
Development and Implementation of a QMS
17
9.4
ICM Training Course and Manuals
18
9.5
ICM Code and Recognition System
18
9.6
PSHEM Code and Recognition System
19
9.7
Activities of the Executive Committee
19
10.0
Other
Business 20
D.
Closing
21
Annex 1 List of Participants
22
Annex
2
List
of
Documents
25
Annex 3 Second Executive Committee Meeting Agenda
28
Annex 4 Procedures for the Recruitment and Appointment of the
31
Regional Programme Director for the Implementation of
the SDS-SEA and the Executive Director of the PEMSEA
Resource Facility (PRF)
Annex 5 List of New and Transferring Staff for the
33
PRF Technical Services Posts
Annex 6 2nd EAS Partnership Council Meeting Provisional Agenda
35
Annex 7 Proposed Activities to be Supported by the Trust Fund
39
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
PROCEEDINGS OF THE SECOND EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
PEMSEA Office, Quezon City, Philippines, 14-15 March 2008
A. INTRODUCTION
i.
The Second Executive Committee Meeting was held at the PEMSEA Office,
Quezon City, Philippines on 14-15 March 2008.
ii.
The Meeting was attended by the EAS Partnership Council Chair, Dr. Chua Thia-
Eng; the Intergovernmental Session Chair, Dr. Li Haiqing; and the Technical
Session Chair, Mr. Hiroshi Terashima. During the discussion of Agenda Item No.
8 on PEMSEA's Legal Personality, members of the Technical Working Group on
the Recognition of PEMSEA's Legal Personality, and representatives from the
Philippines National Focal Agency and United Nations Development Programme
(UNDP) Country Office attended the meeting. The PEMSEA Resource Facility
(PRF) served as Secretariat.
iii.
A full list of participants is attached as Annex 1.
B.
OPENING MESSAGE
i.
The Acting PEMSEA Regional Programme Director and Interim PEMSEA
Resource Facility (PRF) Executive Director, Mr. Stephen Adrian Ross, welcomed
the members of the Executive Committee to the Meeting. Mr. Ross informed the
Meeting of the major agenda items to be discussed, including the GEF/UNDP
Project Document, the 2nd EAS Partnership Council Meeting, and recognition of
PEMSEA's Legal Personality.
ii.
On behalf of the Executive Committee, Dr. Chua Thia-Eng, Council Chair,
expressed appreciation to the Secretariat for the arrangements made for the
Executive Committee members. Dr. Chua emphasized the delineation of roles
between the Executive Committee and the PRF. As representative of the EAS
Partnership Council, the Executive Committee looks into the interest of both
State and Non-State Partners while the PRF implements the decisions of the
EAS Partnership Council and executes the GEF project. With PEMSEA's move
towards self-sustainability, Dr. Chua expressed his confidence that, in the long-
term, PEMSEA will transform from a UN-driven mechanism into an organization
highly driven by the interest of Partners.
C.
ADOPTION OF AGENDA AND ORGANIZATIONAL MATTERS
i.
Dr. Chua introduced the meeting documents (Annex 2) and the provisional
agenda.
ii.
In addition to the meeting agenda, Mr. Ross informed the Meeting that a request
had been received from the International Center for the Environmental
Management of Enclosed Coastal Seas (EMECS) for inclusion as Non-State
1
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
Partner. He informed the Meeting that the request would be discussed under
Agenda Item 10.0 on Other Business. Mr. Ross then briefed the Meeting on
general organizational matters.
iii.
The Meeting adopted the Agenda, as contained in Annex 3.
BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE 1ST EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
1.0
RECRUITMENT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND PRF TECHNICAL
SERVICES
STAFF
1.1
The Meeting was updated on the status of PRF staff recruitment for the new
GEF project.
Recruitment of the ED
1.2
The Meeting was informed that the interview of candidates for the Regional
Programme Director/PRF Executive Director was completed and the results had
been submitted to UNOPS. The UNOPS' internal review panel is now reviewing
the report of the Selection Committee prior to submission to UNDP New York for
final confirmation of the Regional Programme Director. The Meeting was advised
that the Council Chair, Dr. Chua, participated as a member of the Selection
Committee.
1.3
Dr. Chua briefed the meeting on the Selection Panel's decision concerning the
RPD post. He informed the meeting that among the four candidates, Atty.
Raphael P.M. Lotilla was selected as the preferred candidate based on his
experience in intergovernmental affairs, knowledge of the region, expertise in the
Law of the Sea, and demonstrated skills as a high ranking government official,
including Secretary of Energy and Undersecretary of the National Economic
Development Authority in the Philippines.
1.4
The Meeting discussed a number of issues regarding the recruitment and
appointment process for the RPD/ED post, as follows:
a. The post has two functions, namely the Regional Programme Director of the
GEF project, and the Executive Director of the PRF;
b. UNOPS as Executing Agency of the GEF project appoints the Regional
Programme Director, while the EAS Partnership Council appoints the ED of
the PRF;
c. In the future, a problem could arise if the Executing Agency and the Council
disagree with the selection of the preferred candidate.
1.5
As a consequence, the Meeting decided that a formal procedure needed to be
established for any future situation involving the selection and appointment
process for the RPD/ED post.
1.6
At the request of the Meeting, the PRF drafted a procedure for the recruitment
and appointment of the RPD and ED. The draft procedure was presented by the
PRF to the Executive Committee for consideration, refinement and adoption.
2
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
The EC recommended that:
1.7
The Procedure for the recruitment and appointment of the Regional Programme
Director for the Implementation of the SDS-SEA and the Executive Director of the
PEMSEA Resource Facility, as refined and agreed to by the Executive
Committee (Annex 4), be endorsed to the 2nd EAS Partnership Council Meeting
in July 2008 for adoption.
1.8
Atty. Lotilla be appointed Executive Director of the PEMSEA Resource Facility, in
accordance with the adopted Procedures, recognizing that UNOPS is still in the
process of appointing Atty. Lotilla as the Regional Programme Director.
1.9
A full report of the recruitment and appointment process be submitted to the 2nd
EAS Partnership Council.
1.10 The new ED/RPD be formally introduced to the EAS Partnership Council at its
next meeting in July 2008.
1.11 The PRF inform UNOPS of the procedure adopted by the EC.
Recruitment of the PRF Staff
1.12 The Meeting was briefed on the status of recruitment for PRF staff. Nine new
staff have been recruited through open competition and nine existing staff are
being transferred from IMO to UNOPS contracts. The PRF posts and the names
of the new and transferring staff are provided in Annex 5.
1.13 The Meeting was informed of the assistance provided by the PRF to assist
UNOPS throughout the recruitment process. The assistance was necessary for
two reasons, namely: a) UNDP Manila was unable to provide UNOPS with the
required support due to staff shortages and the short timeframe for recruitment
(January to March 2008); and b) UNOPS does not have the capacity to recruit at
the local level.
1.14 The Meeting was advised that UNDP Manila would be unable to issue the PRF
staff contracts by the end of March 2008. In order to facilitate the process, the
PRF was offering to provide two or three staff to support UNDP Manila with the
preparation of documents/contracts for the staff, which needed to be issued by
the end of March.
The EC noted that:
1.15 The service provided by UNOPS and UNDP Manila during the PRF staff
recruitment process did not meet the expectations of Council. UNOPS and
UNDP Manila appeared to have limited capacity to manage and implement the
recruitment process, relying heavily on the PRF to complete the work on their
behalf, despite the fact that substantial GEF project funds had been committed to
both organizations. While recognizing that such delays might be due to the
change of executing agency, the Meeting stressed the importance of establishing
3
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
PEMSEA's legal personality which could resolve most of such problems in the
future.
1.16 The EC expressed its appreciation to the PRF for its efforts and efficient conduct
of the recruitment process.
The EC recommended that:
1.17 The PRF prepare a list of current PRF posts, both open and filled, for discussion
at the 2nd EAS Partnership Council Meeting.
2.0
GEF/UNDP PROJECT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SDS-SEA
2.1
The Meeting was advised that the GEF/UNDP Project on Implementation of the
SDS-SEA had been signed by four participating countries, namely, Cambodia,
the Philippines, Indonesia and Timor-Leste, as well as by the Executing Agency
(UNOPS) and the Implementing Agency (UNDP) represented by UNDP Manila.
The project is scheduled for start up on 1 April 2008.
2.2
It was emphasized that, in accordance with UNDP requirements, all GEF-eligible
countries must sign the Project Document in order for GEF funds to be
committed to project activities within the respective countries. Therefore, further
efforts are required to obtain the signatures of the UNDP Focal Agencies in
China, Lao PDR, Thailand and Cambodia in order to facilitate the start up of
project activities in those countries. Dr. Li agreed to follow up on the status of the
project document signature in China and provide feedback to the PRF before end
of March 2008.
2.3
A number of issues related to the start up and implementation of the new GEF
project were discussed by the Meeting, including:
a. The IMO, UNDP and GEF have agreed to extend the Regional Programme to
31 March 2008, using the residual funds from the existing project, in order to
facilitate a smooth transition from the Regional Programme to the SDS-SEA
implementation project;
b. Communication with DPR Korea has been very difficult since the close of the
UNDP office in Pyongyang. The few times that communication has been
successful are when the call, fax or email originates in DPR Korea; and
c. With the recent initiative on a planned joint scientific survey of the South
China Sea involving China, Philippines and Vietnam, it was suggested that
the PRF should give special attention to developing subregional seas
initiatives with Partners and collaborators, including the Sulu-Sulawesi
Seascape, Mangroves for the Future, Coral Triangle Initiative, the Yellow Sea
LME project, and the Timor-Arafura Seas project.
The EC concluded that:
2.4
By facilitating the sharing of information among various subregional activities,
PEMSEA's value as a regional partnership network would be further recognized
and appreciated. The Technical Session of the EAS Partnership Council provides
4
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
a means and opportunity for State and Non-State Partners to put forward and
access information on subregional projects, as well as explore mutually beneficial
working arrangements among Partners.
The EC recommended that:
2.5
The PRF make every effort to establish contact with NFPs in China, Lao PDR,
Thailand and Vietnam to secure the signature of the project document and to
initiate country work programmes in April 2008.
2.6
The PRF include GEF and UNDP focal points in all future interactions in order to
establish and maintain strong relationships.
2.7
In view of the current difficulty in communicating with DPR Korea, the PRF
explore coursing communication through China as virtual office, until direct
communication is reestablished.
2.8
The new ED conduct a mission trip to DPR Korea to strengthen the working
relationship between the PRF and the government.
2.9
The PRF setup a small working group to look into subregional activities and
create new proposals that will enhance the synergies between and among these
activities.
2.10 The PRF invite the various subregional Partners and collaborators to share
information concerning their work through such actions as
submissions/participation in the Technical Session of the EAS Partnership
Council, Tropical Coasts articles, and co-convening workshops during the EAS
Congress 2009.
3.0 FRAMEWORK OF PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMMES
3.1
The Framework of Partnership Programmes is a methodology being developed
by the PRF for the purpose of gathering, collating and evaluating the
programmes and project initiatives of State and Non-State Partners in support of
SDS-SEA implementation. The status, progress and the test result of the
Philippines case study of the Framework of Partnership Programmes was
presented to the Executive Committee.
The EC concluded that:
3.2
The case study must convince the State and Non-State Partners of the EAS
Partnership Council to develop their respective Framework of Partnership
Programmes, and as such the benefits derived from the Framework must be
clearly understood and appreciated.
3.3
The Framework should help State Partners identify where resources are already
available as a basis for what else needs to be done.
5
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
3.4
The Framework should serve as the basis for preparation of MOAs between
PEMSEA and State Partners for the implementation of the SDS-SEA.
3.5
Non-State Partners should be able to use the Framework to define their specific
contribution to the implementation of the SDS-SEA, as well as where they can
further contribute (e.g., donors; NGOs; private sector).
3.6
The Framework should provide a foundation for joint planning between State and
Non-State Partners. The initial baseline study/information gathered by the RPO
in 2005 provides a good baseline for the Framework of Partnership Programmes
in the respective countries, and can be employed by the PRF in drafting the
Frameworks for each country.
The EC recommended that the PRF:
3.7
Make further effort to refine the Philippines case study in order to demonstrate its
usefulness and value in the region.
3.8
Focus on the preparation of the case study and refinement of the template for
presentation and endorsement by the 2nd EAS Partnership Council meeting.
3.9
Proceed with the development of Framework of Partnership Programmes with
Non-State Partners only, for submission to the EAS Partnership Council in July
2008.
4.0 STATE OF COASTS REPORTING SYSTEM
4.1
The SOC is being developed primarily to monitor the progress and impact of ICM
implementation of local governments. It monitors the economic, social and
environmental benefits of ICM and closes the loop of the efforts in the region with
respect to SDS-SEA implementation through ICM. It will be developed and
applied as a regular reporting system which will be updated on an annual basis
at the local level.
4.2
The Meeting was informed that an initial case study for Batangas was
accomplished in about 5-6 months involving 3 stakeholders' workshops, which
included representation from local and national government agencies,
nongovernmental organizations, the private sector and the academe. An SOC
guide is also currently being developed by the PRF and should be ready by end
of March. An early draft of the SOC report for Batangas was presented to the EC.
The EC concluded that:
4.3
The SOC report, and the indicators used in the analysis, should be consistent
with PEMSEA's Sustainable Development Framework for Coastal Areas,
covering both governance and sustainable development aspects of ICM
programmes.
6
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
4.4
The case study must demonstrate a comprehensive analysis of the sustainable
development indicators, and inform the local Chief Executive of areas where
progress has been made, and areas where improvements are still required.
4.5
Information in the SOC report must be reliable and sound, and therefore there
needs to be quality assessment and quality control of all information and the
analysis, including discussion of trends.
4.6
The matrix of the indicators and information gathered should be appended to the
report.
4.7
The SOC should be prepared and presented as an operational tool for local
governments, not as a research report. The refined report will be presented to
the EAS Partnership Council in July 2008.
4.8
The implementation of the SOC reporting scheme should be focused at the local
level until it is demonstrated that the system is working. The value and
uniqueness of the SOC reporting is that it is built into ICM programs and
implemented at the local level.
4.9
The Regional SOC report should be developed as an integration of the ICM site
reports and should be linked with other subregional and regional reporting
initiatives, such as the Assessment of Assessments (AoA) initiated by the United
Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and Intergovernmental Oceanographic
Commission (IOC).
The EC recommended that:
4.10 The PRF refine the SOC case study for Batangas in line with the Sustainable
Development Framework, and demonstrate the use of the SOC as an operational
tool for local governments.
4.11 The refined report be submitted to the 2nd EAS Partnership Council Meeting in
July 2008 for endorsement as an operational tool for local governments
implementing ICM.
4.12 The PRF interact with other Partners and regional collaborators (e.g., IOC) who
are currently working on regional and subregional reporting systems, with a view
to integrating the local governments' SOC reports into the regional/subregional
reports, for the production of a regional SOC report.
5.0 PRF SUSTAINABILITY PLAN
5.1
The development of the PRF Sustainability Plan is in line with the decision of the
1st EAS Partnership Council Meeting (July 2007) to further assess viable options
for moving toward the goal of a long-term sustainable regional mechanism for
SDS-SEA implementation (para. 3.35 Technical Session, and para. 2.8,
Intergovernmental Session of the 1st EAS PC Meeting).
7
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
5.2
The Meeting was advised that the proposed Sustainability Plan will be exploring
four particular options for achieving a sustainable PRF, namely:
a. Engaging other donors at the local, national and regional levels;
b. Cost-sharing the PRF services across State and Non-State Partners through
CSAs or similar arrangements;
c. Recovering costs for PRF services, as requested and provided to State and
Non-State Partners and collaborators;
d. A combination of: (a), (b) and (c).
5.3
The Meeting was presented with an example of a sustainability plan for a specific
PRF service, namely the Port Safety Health and Environmental Management
Code and Recognition Service. The proposed sustainability strategy includes a
three-level Award of Recognition to organizations that have complied with the
PSHEM Code and have shown considerable improvement on their ports' safety,
health and environmental performance. The PRF will offer, additionally, related
services ranging from audits for the award process to training to companies
seeking award/recognition.
The EC concluded that:
5.4
While the sustainability plan seemed viable, there is no appreciation of how
State Partners view a cost-recovery strategy, even though cost-sharing
arrangements have been implemented with State and Non-State Partners in the
past.
5.5
Packaging and presentation of the PRF services in a readily understandable
format is crucial to the success and acceptance of the proposed plans or
strategies by the State Partners.
5.6
There is a need to explore various ways to recover PRF's costs while, at the
same time, carefully balancing its operations in relation to the implementation of
the SDS-SEA.
5.7
The demand for a PEMSEA Award implies that the PSHEM Code can become
an industry standard. This will require building credibility and prestige for the
Code. Based on the success of the previous recognition of the Port of Bangkok
and PTP Johor, the PRF should explore arrangements with the other ports. If
more ports will strive towards PSHEM recognition, the PRF can implement the
SDS-SEA while achieving safety in the ports.
5.8
The PRF must ensure that it has access to sufficient and skilled manpower to
address and serve the demand, once the PSHEM Code and recognition system
is rolled out. The mobilization of the PEMSEA Regional Task Force (RTF) is
seen crucial in addressing this concern. Another option is to become an
accrediting body, where the private sector can participate by providing training
services in adherence to the PSHEMS standard, while the award-recognition will
solely be by the PRF.
8
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
The EC recommended that the PRF:
5.9
Formulate a Sustainability Plan in line with the four options identified above, for
submission to the 2nd EAS Partnership Council Meeting in July 2008.
5.10 Consider other options for sustaining the PSHEM Code and Recognition Service,
including developing proposals for donor support in collaboration with selected
ports as beneficiaries.
6.0
PEMSEA LEGAL PERSONALITY
6.1
The Technical Working Group (TWG) for Recognition of PEMSEA's Legal
Personality was established in September 2007 following the recommendation of
the Executive Committee. The TWG consists of: Atty. Raphael P.M. Lotilla,
Chair, former Secretary of the Department of Energy; Prof. Merlin Magallona,
Former Dean of the School of Law, University of the Philippines; Dr. Antonio La
Via, Dean of the Ateneo School of Government; Atty. Maria Teresita G.
Lacerna, consultant; and Mr. S. Adrian Ross, Acting Regional Programme
Director and Interim PRF Executive Director. Atty. Lotilla introduced the following
documents: a) the Concept Paper on the Establishment of PEMSEA's Legal
Personality Towards a Self-Sustaining Regional Mechanism; b) the Protocol to
the Haikou Partnership Agreement, and c) the proposed work plan of the TWG,
to November 2009, the proposed date for signature of the Protocol.
Need for Legal Personality
6.2
During the ensuing discussion, the following points were iterated by the EC
members and the various participants:
a. Countries are not ready for regional seas convention, as was evident during
the two-year long consultation and consensus-building process leading to the
Haikou Partnership Agreement;
b. It is important to inform the countries that the recognition of PEMSEA's legal
personality will not result in the assessment of contributions. Contributions
will be on a voluntary basis only;
c. As international organization, PEMSEA will be able to:
· Receive funds from donors and international agencies and organizations
without paying management fees (however, this would not preclude
PEMSEA from implementing UN projects); and
· Enter into contracts with other Partners and collaborators that do not sign
the Protocol. Such contracts will be recognition of PEMSEA's legal
personality;
d. Recognition of PEMSEA's legal personality should be established as a lasting
benefit to State Partners, and something to which Partners willingly agree,
such as materializing the SDS-SEA;
e. Involvement of the Partners in the decision-making process for the
recognition of PEMSEA's legal personality is critical. Separate discussions
may be pursued with countries to enhance their level of understanding and to
build consensus; and
9
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
f. Eligible Partners under the Haikou Partnership Agreement can sign the
Protocol.
6.3
Mr. Kyo Naka, Deputy Resident Representative, UNDP Manila, informed the
Meeting that UNDP is very supportive of PEMSEA's move from a project-based
activity to an institution that can execute projects on its own. He added that
PEMSEA needs to consider opportunities for revenue generation, as a major
challenge of operating outside the UN framework;
6.4
Atty. Analiza Rebuelta-Teh, DENR Assistant Secretary, informed the Meeting
that the Philippines is rationalizing its commitments to different organizations in
the region and that currently, they are mainstreaming PEMSEA activities with
national plans and programmes. The Secretariat was requested to provide
assistance to the DENR in order to facilitate their effort to spearhead securing the
recognition of PEMSEA's legal personality in the Philippines.
The EC concluded that:
6.5
A letter needs to be prepared to all State Partners of PEMSEA, providing strong
justification to Partners of the urgent need for, and benefits to be derived from,
recognition of PEMSEA's legal personality.
6.6
There should be clear strategies to have a buy-in by countries, as well as deeper
involvement of State Partners in the process of recognizing PEMSEA's legal
personality.
6.7
The engagement of the PEMSEA National Focal Points is a first step in country
buy-in, in order to assess any political sensitivities associated with the legal
recognition of PEMSEA, and to determine the respective legal processes. The
PRF will need to interact closely with the National Focal Points.
6.8
The purpose of the Protocol may be more easily understood with a title change,
such as "Protocol to Give Effect to the Haikou Partnership Agreement".
6.9
Priority countries for promoting the signature of the Protocol are States that have
already demonstrated their commitment to PEMSEA's sustainability, namely:
China, Japan, RO Korea and the Philippines.
6.10 The EAS Congress 2009 should be an occasion to celebrate the recognition of
PEMSEA's legal personality. Activities for the Congress should include a site
visit to the PEMSEA Office Building. The Secretariat should ensure that the
efforts of the Philippines will be given recognition and made known to the
Partners and the rest of the Congress participants.
The EC recommended that the PRF/TWG:
6.11 Refine the concept paper and protocol to emphasize the benefits to be derived
by countries with recognition of PEMSEA's legal personality, including: a)
achieving a sustainable regional mechanism; and b) providing added value to
country efforts in materializing the SDS-SEA. The Protocol should be simplified
to be easily understood by State Partners.
10
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
6.12 Draft a cover letter explaining the rationale and significance of the recognition of
PEMSEA's legal personality. The PRF to provide assistance in facilitating the
circulation of these documents to the EC members for comment initially, and then
to National Focal Points for information and internal consultation process with
their respective Ministries of Foreign Affairs. Feedback should be collected from
State Partners for presentation to the 2nd EAS Partnership Council Meeting in
July 2008.
6.13 Draft a Headquarters Agreement for consideration by the Government of the
Philippines, including preparation of a strategy and process to facilitate signature,
in consultation with the EC.
6.14 Develop/implement a marketing plan for recognition of PEMSEA's legal
personality among State Partners.
6.15 Start linking up with other organizations (ASEAN, Asian Disaster Center, Asian
Institute of Technology-Bangkok, etc.) to market PEMSEA in the region.
6.16 Work on getting the endorsement of the four State Partners that have already
made commitments in support of a sustainable regional mechanism, namely:
China; RO Korea; Japan and the Philippines. Three other state partners that may
buy in are Cambodia, Timor-Leste and DPR Korea. Develop strategic
approaches for each country to secure their endorsements in accordance with
their national legal processes and try to secure three signatures even before the
EAS Congress 2009.
6.17 Encourage Philippine DENR and Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) to
champion the recognition of the legal personality of PEMSEA at the EAS
Partnership Council, including development of a strategy to assist the Philippines
to champion the endorsement of the Protocol.
6.18 Be prepared to provide briefings on the working documents, and participate in
consultations at the country level upon the request of the NFPs.
6.19 With respect to the expanded members of the TWG, the National Focal Points
should be requested to recommend appropriate officials or legal advisers to
contribute to the drafting of the working documents as required.
NEW BUSINESS OF THE 2ND EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
7.0 2ND EAS PARTNERSHIP COUNCIL MEETING
7.1
The status of the preparation for the 2nd EAS Partnership Council Meeting and
provisional agenda were introduced to the EC.
7.2
The Meeting discussed various options for organizing the 2nd EAS Partnership
Council Meeting as an effective venue for promoting joint planning and mutual
benefits among Partners. In particular, the Meeting agreed to include the
following items in the Agenda of the EAS Partnership Council Technical Session:
11
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
a. Subregional Transboundary Initiatives, with the aim of encouraging input from
and closer collaboration between subregional projects and programmes and
PEMSEA initiatives in the region, in line with the implementation of the SDS-
SEA;
b. Climate Change Adaptation, with the objective of promoting the application of
Integrated Coastal Management (ICM) as a tool to facilitate local government
response to sea level rise and climate change, and encouraging State
Partners to consider applying for external funds, e.g., GEF/UNDP's Climate
Change Adaptation Fund, when developing/implementing ICM programmes;
and
c. Critical/Emerging Issues, such as Coastal Reclamation and Coastal Use
Zoning, for the purpose of promoting the further development of these topics
as themes during the EAS Congress 2009 and/or the Ministerial Forum.
7.3
With regard to the Intergovernmental Session, the Meeting agreed to highlight
the matter of PEMSEA's Legal Personality in order to enhance the understanding
and cooperation of the State Partners.
7.4
The Meeting was informed that a PEMSEA-MLIT joint seminar currently being
organized by Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism will be
conducted following the Council Meeting. For information to all Council members,
the Meeting suggested the inclusion of the said seminar in the proposed 2nd EAS
Partnership Council Meeting Agenda.
Securing Japanese Government's Confirmation
7.5
Based on informal communication between the Japanese Government and PRF,
the Meeting was informed that the tentative date for the 2nd EAS Partnership
Council Meeting is scheduled on 1417 July 2008 at the Toranomon Pastral
Hotel, Tokyo, Japan.
7.6
However, the Meeting was further informed that the confirmation letter from the
Japanese Government would not likely be available until early to mid-April 2008.
The Meeting noted that the delay in official confirmation would delay the release
of announcement and invitation to all Partners.
7.7
Mr. Terashima indicated to the Meeting that he would communicate with Mr.
Suzuki, the National Focal Point for PEMSEA in Japan, to seek the confirmation
to host the EAS Partnership Council Meeting, as well as the date and venue of
the meeting.
The EC recommended that the PRF:
7.8
Revise the provisional agenda in line with the Meeting discussions (see revised
Provisional Agenda in Annex 6).
7.9 Include information concerning the PEMSEA-MLIT joint seminar in the
Provisional Agenda.
12
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
8.0
EAS CONGRESS
8.1
EAS CONGRESS 2009
8.1.1 An update was provided on the status of preparations for the East Asian Seas
(EAS) Congress 2009, which is scheduled for 23 to 27 November 2009 in Manila,
Philippines.
8.1.2 In addressing the challenges identified, the Meeting highlighted the need to
establish the following:
a. A unique and interesting programme focusing on practical issues/topics
relevant to the region and in line with the objectives and action programmes
identified in the Sustainable Development Strategy for the Seas of East Asia
(SDS-SEA);
b. A good implementing and marketing strategy that would reach out to the
target and other potential participants of the EAS Congress, giving priority to
the need to engage Partners, previous Congress participants and supporters,
collaborators and other organizations or stakeholders from within the region;
and
c. Ensure the linkages of the past two Congresses with the EAS Congress
2009.
8.1.3 The Meeting emphasized the significance of the EAS Congress as an intellectual
marketplace and a platform/opportunity to establish the concept of Partnership as
a reality. By engaging key PEMSEA Partners (both State and Non-State) and
other potential partners and making them the core group, the sustainability of the
EAS Congress will be significantly enhanced.
The EC recommended that the PRF:
8.1.4 Revise the EAS Congress Programme, using the Sustainable Development
Framework for Coastal Areas as a guide for developing the central themes of the
International Conference, and focusing on practical issues relevant to the region
that will highlight the uniqueness of the EAS Congress.
8.1.5 Engage PEMSEA Partners (both State and Non-State) and other potential
partners in the organization and identification of key issue-areas or Partners'
programmes that can be aligned with the EAS Congress.
8.1.6 Formulate and implement a good marketing strategy to entice participation and
support for the EAS Congress and mobilize necessary funding.
8.1.7 Identify and secure the participation of leading experts to serve as key speakers
for plenary sessions or workshops of the International Conference and provide
financial support for their participation, as required and available.
8.1.8 Accelerate preparations for and promotions of the EAS Congress 2009, including
the new PRF Executive Director establishing improved communication/
interaction with DENR.
13
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
8.1.9 Communicate with the GEF to ensure that there will be no conflict between the
EAS Congress 2009 schedule and the GEF IW Biennial Conference 2009.
8.1.10 Explore a new conference format by combining selected workshops with the
exhibition.
8.2 3RD MINISTERIAL FORUM
8.2.1 The status of preparations for the 3rd Ministerial Forum was introduced.
8.2.2 The EC made a number of suggestions concerning the Ministerial Forum as its
status as a regular event for Ministers of the region, including:
a. Each participating Minister be requested to make a policy statement
concerning topical policy issues in the region. In such a situation, it would be
essential that the Minister or Vice-Minister attend on behalf of their
Government;
b. Arrange a half-day discussion of major issues, such as Ocean Policy, Coastal
Reclamation, and Coastal and Island Management;
c. Feature a report from the EAS Partnership Council on the progress of work
during the past three years;
d. Conclude each Forum with a report on the achievements of the Ministers, in
the form of a Declaration, covering important topics and/or emerging issues
such as coastal governance, ocean security, etc.; and
e. Organize a Ministerial banquet and field trip as opportunities for Ministers to
interact with Congress participants and stakeholders.
The EC recommended that:
8.2.3 The PRF organize the 2009 Ministerial Forum taking into consideration the
following aspects:
· Ministerial policy statements;
· EAS Partnership Council progress report on SDS-SEA implementation;
· Signing of the Protocol for Recognition of PEMSEA's Legal Personality;
· A Ministerial Declaration or Statement;
· A field trip or side event, such as mangrove planting or sea turtle release; and
· Facilitating closer and dynamic interaction between and among the
participants and Ministers.
8.3
EAS CONGRESS 2012 HOST COUNTRY
8.3.1 The Meeting was reminded of RO Korea's expression of interest to host the EAS
Congress 2012 in conjunction with the EXPO 2012. However, recent
developments in the country, and in particular the governmental reform plan by
the new President, have resulted in the dismantling of the Ministry of Maritime
Affairs and Fisheries (MOMAF), PEMSEA's national focal agency. MOMAF's
responsibilities have been allocated to two ministries, namely, Ministry of Land,
14
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
Transport and Maritime Affairs (MLTM) and Ministry for Food, Agriculture,
Forestry and Fisheries (MFAFF).
The EC recommended that:
8.3.2 The PRF maintain communications with RO Korea with the objectives of:
a. Determining the new focal agency for PEMSEA;
b. Securing the participation of the new focal agency at the 2nd EAS Partnership
Council Meeting; and
c. Confirming RO Korea's interest to host the EAS Congress 2012.
9.0 PRF
OPERATIONS
9.1
PEMSEA TRUST FUND
9.1.1 The IMO/PEMSEA Trust Account is scheduled for closure at the end of March
2008, with the departure of IMO as Executing Agency. The Trust Account was
set up to provide the Regional Programme with a means of depositing and
utilizing revenue generated from the sale of publications and technical assistance
projects, as well as from registration fees for training workshops and the EAS
Congresses 2003 and 2006. The funds in the Trust Account were dedicated to
capacity development initiatives among PEMSEA participating countries in the
region. The current Trust Account balance is USD676,000, of which USD162,000
is identified as EAS Congress funds.
9.1.2 At present, UNOPS has indicated its willingness to open up a Trust Account and
transfer the funds from the IMO/PEMSEA Trust Account. The service
commission by UNOPS is expected to be 3%, but this has not been confirmed.
UNOPS is in the process of drafting an agreement for submission to PEMSEA,
however it is unlikely that such an agreement will be in place by 31 March 2008.
UNOPS has indicated that IMO has informally agreed to extend the
IMO/PEMSEA Trust Account to 30 April 2008.
9.1.3 During the ensuing discussion the EC made the following points:
a. With regard to the usage of the PEMSEA Trust Fund, proposed activities to
be supported by the Fund (Annex 7) must be in line with the development of
technical skills in coastal management;
b. EC will sign an MOA with UNOPS on behalf of the EAS Partnership Council
to address the issue during the intersessional period and oversee that the
funds are properly allocated by the PRF;
c. Transferring the funds to UNOPS is acceptable but it should be confirmed
that the EC will be responsible for managing the money; and
d. The PEMSEA Trust Fund should be used as a means to leverage
collaborative activities with Partners and facilitate cost-shared activities and
projects;
e. The Fund should: 1) be used for the benefit of the countries; 2) attract other
sources of funding as co-financing, through project proposals; 3) fill gaps in
capacity for SDS-SEA implementation; 4) catalyze additional funding; 5)
15
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
support the organization and implementation of the EAS Congress 2009; and
6) support/generate additional funds for the EAS Congress 2012.
f. Each EAS Congress should have a cost-recovery mechanism for
sustainability.
g. Corporate partners need to be identified and nurtured in order to finance
some activities in line with CSR. PRF needs to be aggressive in leveraging
the support of corporate partners, as an area of priority.
The EC recommended that:
9.1.4 The PRF/EC negotiate with UNOPS regarding the terms of the MOA, including
the roles and responsibilities of the two Parties, and the commission charges on
the PEMSEA Trust Fund.
9.1.5 The EC sign the MOA with UNOPS regarding the PEMSEA Trust Fund, on
behalf of the EAS Partnership Council.
9.1.6 The PRF set up the principles and policy of the use of the PEMSEA Trust Fund
for review by the EC.
9.1.7 The PRF identify priority areas for project development and implementation, and
leveraging co-financing support from donors, private sector and other entities.
9.2
WORK PROGRAMME AND BUDGET
9.2.1 The Meeting was informed that as a result of the depreciating US dollar (from
USD 1 = PhP 55 to USD 1 = PhP 40), there will be a budget shortfall of USD
97,000 in the GEF project, if all identified posts are filled. At the same time, the
costs of PRF Secretariat Services has increased but remained within the budget
allocation for 2008.
9.2.2 To address the forecast budget deficit, several actions were proposed that would
result to an estimated savings of USD 177,000, which can then serve as cushion
against further depreciation of the US dollar and increased operating cost. The
proposed actions include: the deferment of staffing of two international posts in
the PRF Technical Services (i.e., Programme Officer for the Learning Center;
Programme Officer for Partnership Applications) and three national posts in the
PRF Technical Services (i.e., one Country Programme Manager; a Programme
Officer for Project Development; and an IT Assistant); maximize the use of PRF
Secretariat Services staff to support project implementation activities;
development and implementation of the PEMSEA National Task Force (NTF)
and Regional Task Force (RTF) to support field activities.
The EC recommended that the PRF:
9.2.3 Inform the State Partners of the current budgetary restrictions of the PRF arising
from the US dollar depreciation at the EAS Partnership Council meeting.
16
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
9.2.4 Inform the three contributing countries (PR China, Japan, RO Korea) of the PRF
budgetary constraints and appeal to them to send their contributions in their
respective currencies.
9.2.5 Proceed with the proposed actions, in particular:
a. defer staffing of two international posts in the PRF Technical Services (i.e.,
Programme Officer for the Learning Center; Programme Officer for
Partnership Applications) for at least one year;
b. defer staffing of three national posts in the PRF Technical Services (i.e., one
Country Programme Manager; a Programme Officer for Project Development;
and an IT Assistant) for a period of 6 to 12 months;
c. in the interim, to cope with the staff shortage the two international staff of the
PRF Secretariat Services will be assigned technical activities; and
d. develop and implement the PEMSEA National Task Force (NTF) and
Regional Task Force (RTF) to support field activities.
9.2.6 Review the situation in 6 to 12 months to gauge the viability of undertaking
additional staffing, and further explore possibilities of co-financing with State
Partners, solicit additional funding from the GEF; and develop new project
proposals for submission to donor agencies and other organizations.
9.3 DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A QMS
9.3.1 The status of developing Quality Management System (QMS) for PRF operations
was reported. The PRF is now developing the QMS to ensure a systematic
approach and strategic improvements in the conduct of its operation and delivery
of services. The QMS will ensure streamlining its processes to avoid duplication
of work and generate economies of scale in its operations and by continuously
monitoring its performances to find areas for improvement in its operations.
9.3.2 A business process map for the PRF operations was developed including the
process description of core and support services. The process of developing
standard operating procedures and work instructions for various services are on-
going. After the rolling out of the procedures, there will be a regular internal audit
to ensure that the system is functioning properly.
9.3.3 The EC expressed that it is important that: a) the PRF staff fully understand and
support the QMS development; b) the cost effectiveness and efficiency of the
PRF is improved through implementation of the QMS; and c) clients of the PRF,
including the EAS Partnership Council, should benefit from the Quality
Management System and serve as proof that the QMS is working.
The EC recommended that:
9.3.4 PRF administration/management take a strong role in explaining and engaging
the PRF staff in the development and implementation of the QMS.
17
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
9.4 ICM TRAINING COURSE AND MANUALS
9.4.1 The Meeting was informed that the existing ICM training curriculum has been
modified to make it more effective and responsive to the needs of the clientele.
The new ICM training curriculum is structured into 3 levels.
9.4.2 Training manuals have been developed for each level to serve as model courses
for the ICM training courses. It was emphasized that the strength of the PEMSEA
ICM training curriculum is that it incorporates its 14 years of experience and
lessons learned in ICM implementation. The training manual for Level 1 has been
completed and is being reviewed by Dr. Chua. The timetable for completion of
Level 1 and Level 2 is end of April and May respectively.
9.4.3 A number of challenges were identified in the implementation of the new ICM
training curriculum, such as: a) the need to establish a pool of lecturers with
experience and exposure to the PEMSEA ICM approach; b) the need to translate
the training manuals into other languages (Chinese, Vietnamese and Bahasa) to
ensure the effective delivery of the course; and c) the need to develop a cost-
recovery mechanism to be able to respond to the future demand for the course
and related materials by individuals and institutions.
9.4.4 The Chair emphasized that the new ICM training curriculum is designed to
complement the ICM Code and attempts to develop a standard training that will
cover various aspects of the sustainable development framework.
The EC recommended that the PRF:
9.4.5 Proceed with the testing of the newly developed ICM training course curriculum
prior to publication.
9.4.6 Continue with its plan to organize the Training of Trainers for the newly
developed ICM training course curriculum and involve the academe.
9.4.7 Explore the role of academe and other institutions in the conduct of training and
develop mechanism for the accreditation of these institutions.
9.4.8 Identify measures to ensure quality control in the delivery of the ICM training
courses including an auditing system for training providers.
9.4.9 Give priority to parallel sites in the selection of participants for the national ICM
training courses for wider dissemination/transfer of knowledge. These
participants for the parallel sites are potential members of the National Task
Force.
9.5
ICM CODE AND RECOGNITION SYSTEM
9.5.1 The ICM Codification project consists of the following: a) the ICM Code; b)
Guidance on the application of the ICM Code; c) Guidance on the ICM
implementation cycle; d) Guidance on the ICMS levels of recognition; and e)
18
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
Delineation of the ICM Code relationship with other international standards. The
ICM Code is scheduled for peer review by April 2008.
9.5.2 It was emphasized that there is a need to accelerate the validation and testing of
the ICM Code and Recognition System in response to the increasing interest
among local/national governments and PEMSEA ICM sites. Although, the Project
Document calls for Code implementation at only two sites, the ICM Code is now
being recognized as an essential component of national ICM scaling up
programs in several countries.
9.5.3 The EC underscored the rationale for developing the ICM Code which is to
formulate a systematic approach to integrated coastal management and to
standardize ICM practice in the region. Thus, the Code will provide guidance to
local governments in ICM implementation. Moreover, it was stressed that several
environmental organizations are skeptical on the initiative and are challenging
PEMSEA in proving the Code is applicable. It was emphasized that the ICM
codification project should be one of PRF's key success areas for the new phase.
The EC recommended that the PRF:
9.5.4 Focus its efforts on the testing of the ICM Code and in securing two to three sites
to be awarded with the ICM Code recognition in the next 3 years.
9.5.5 Ensure that the development of the ICM Code will be carefully studied to ensure
that it is practical and doable.
9.6 PSHEM CODE AND RECOGNITION SYSTEM
9.6.1 The PSHEM Code and Recognition System was discussed as part of Agenda
Item 5.0 PRF Sustainability Plan. Please refer to paragraphs 5.3 to 5.8 of this
document.
9.7 ACTIVITIES OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE (20082010)
9.7.1 The Meeting was informed that in addition to its normal oversight functions,
members of the Executive Committee are expected to conduct visits to each
participating country in 20082009 for the purpose of:
a. briefing Ministers of National Focal Agencies on the PEMSEA regional
mechanism, the EAS Congress and the Ministerial Forum 2009;
b. interacting with Ministries of Foreign Affairs to discuss the PEMSEA
partnership arrangement and government recognition of PEMSEA's legal
personality; and
c. interacting with donor agencies related and mobilizing additional funding for
the operation of the PRF.
19
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
The EC concluded that:
9.7.2 Taking into consideration the hectic schedule of the EC members, the EC be
mobilized only when the need arises.
9.7.3 The PRF ED take the lead role and responsibility in negotiating with countries for
the identified initiatives.
9.7.3 The EC members may be invited to accompany the ED to countries where
assistance is deemed necessary.
9.7.4 EC members may visit related ministries in their own countries to assist in
securing endorsements for the PEMSEA Legal Personality and promotion of the
EAS Congress 2009 and Ministerial Forum.
The EC recommended that:
9.7.5 The PRF explore the possibility of a financial package (including full-fare air-
ticket, terminals, departure tax, allowance/DSA, local transport, etc.) to enable
members of the EC to travel smoothly and comfortably without having to
subsidize their trips.
10.0 OTHER
BUSINESS
10.1 REQUEST OF EMECS FOR INCLUSION AS NON-STATE PARTNER
10.1.1 The request from the International Center for the Environmental Management of
Enclosed Coastal Seas (EMECS), dated 19 February 2008, for inclusion as a
Non-State Partner of PEMSEA was reported to the EC. The overview of
EMECS, the benefits and risks of the potential partnership with EMECS, and the
nature of the Partnership relative to the SDS-SEA implementation were also
presented.
10.1.2 EMECS is a non-profit organization, located in Kobe, along the Seto-Inland Sea
in Japan. The Seto-Inland Sea is the origin of the development of the total water
pollutant load control system in Japan. EMECS has strong networks of
nongovernmental organizations, researchers and prefectural governments
regarding the pollution reduction and preservation of the environment of the
Seto-Inland Sea. In addition, EMECS has multisectoral networks including
concerned national government agencies, i.e., Ministry of Environment.
10.1.3 The EC members expressed their approval to include EMECS as a Non-State
Partner of PEMSEA, for the following reasons:
a. EMECS is a well-known international organization based in Japan and has
sound experiences and knowledge regarding marine environment of the
Seto-Inland Sea; and a partnership with EMECS is expected to bring benefit
to PEMSEA; and
b. EMECS has made a significant contribution in addressing the transboundary
issues along the Seto-Inland Sea in Japan. EMECS expertise/experience in
20
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
enclosed and semi-enclosed seas and in addressing transboundary issues
combined with PEMSEA's efforts in Integrated Coastal Management (ICM)
can further strengthen the implementation of the SDS-SEA.
The EC recommended:
10.1.4 The acceptance of EMECS as a full Non-State Partner of PEMSEA, for
endorsement to the 2nd EAS Partnership Council Meeting in July 2008;
10.1.5 The PRF enter into an MOA with EMECS to delineate terms of cooperation.
10.2 Schedule of the Next Executive Committee Meeting
10.2.1 The EC recommended that the next EC Meeting be conducted on 13 July 2008
prior to the 2nd EAS Partnership Council Meeting in Japan.
D. CLOSING
i.
The Chair thanked the Secretariat for the organization of the Meeting and
advised the Meeting to prepare for the 2nd EAS Partnership Council Meeting to
be held in Japan in July 2008.
ii.
Mr. Ross thanked the EC members for their thoughtful inputs to the various
matters raised during the Meeting and the direction provided to the PRF in
preparation for the next phase of PEMSEA.
iii.
The Chair declared the Meeting closed at 4:40 PM, 15 March 2008.
21
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
Annex 1
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
22
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
Second Executive Committee Meeting
Manila, Philippines
14-15 March 2008
List of Participants
Executive Committee
Philippines
Dr. Chua Thia-Eng
Atty. Merlin Magallona
Council Chair
Professorial Lecturer and Former Dean
EAS Partnership Council
UP College of law
Email: chuate@pemsea.org
University of the Philippines
Bocobo Hall, U.P. Law Center
Dr. Li Haiqing
University of the Philippines
Intergovernmental Session Chair
Quezon City 1101
EAS Partnership Council
Philippines
and Executive Director
Email: merlin.magallona@up.edu.ph
State Oceanic Administration (SOA)
1 Fuxingmenwai Avenue
Atty. Antonio G.M. La Vina
Beijing, 100860
Dean
People's Republic of China
Ateneo School of Government
Email: hqli@soa.gov.cn
20 Rockwell Drive, Rockwell Center
Makati City 1200
Mr. Hiroshi Terashima
Philippines
Technical Session Chair
Tel.: +632 8994587
EAS Partnership Council
Telefax: +632 8905695
and Executive Director
Ashoka Email: tlavina@ashoka.org
Ocean Policy Research Foundation
Ateneo Email: alavina@aps.ateneo.edu
Kaiyo Senpaku Building
Personal Email: tonylavs@gmail.com
1-15-16 Toranomon Minato-ku
Tokyo 105 0001
Atty. Analiza Rebuelta-Teh
Japan
Assistant Secretary and
Email: h-terashima@sof.or.jp
PEMSEA National Focal Point
Department of Environment and Natural
Mr. Stephen Adrian Ross
Resources
Acting PEMSEA Regional Programme
DENR Compound, Visayas Avenue,
Director
Diliman, Quezon City
and PRF Interim Executive Director
Philippines
Tel: +632 9296626
Fax: +632 9268074
Technical Working Group
Atty. Maria Teresita Lacerna
Atty. Raphael P.M. Lotilla
Consultant
Former Secretary
PEMSEA
Department of Energy
c/o U.P. Institute of International Legal
Studies
University of the Philippines
Diliman, Quezon City 1101
23
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
Supporting Agency
PEMSEA Secretariat
Mr. Kyo Naka
Dr. Won-Tae Shin
Deputy Resident Representative
Programme Specialist
United Nations Development Programme
Secretariat Services
30th Floor, Yuchengco Tower
RCBC Plaza, 6819 Ayala Avenue
Ms. Kazumi Wakita
Makati City, Philippines
Programme Officer
Tel.: +63 2 9010224
Partnership Programmes
Fax: +63 2 9010200
Email: kyo.naka@undp.org
Ms. Diana Factuar
Training Officer
Ms. Clarissa Arida
Programme Manager
Ms. Magnolia Uy
United Nations Development Programme
Technical Officer for Communications
30th Floor, Yuchengco Tower
RCBC Plaza, 6819 Ayala Avenue
Ms. Kathrine Rose Gallardo
Makati City, Philippines
Technical Officer
Tel.: +63 2 9010223
Events Management and
Fax: +63 2 9010200
SDS-SEA Monitoring and Evaluation
Email: clarissa.arida@undp.org
Ms. Daisy Padayao
Technical Assistant for Research
Dr. Andre Uychiaoco
Consultant
24
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
Annex 2
List of Documents
25
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
Second Executive Committee Meeting
Manila, Philippines
14-15 March 2008
List of Documents
ITEM
AGENDA ITEM
DOCUMENT
DOCUMENT
NO.
NUMBER
1.0
Organizational Matters
List of Documents
EC/08/DOC/01
2.0
Adoption of Agenda
Provisional Agenda
EC/08/DOC/02
Annotated
Agenda
EC/08/DOC/03
Business Arising from the 1st
Executive Committee
Meeting
3.0
Recruitment of the
EC/08/DOC/04
Executive Director and
PRF Technical Services
Staff
4.0
GEF/UNDP
Project
on
EC/08/DOC/05
Implementation of the
SDS-SEA
5.0
Framework
of
EC/08/DOC/06
Partnership Programmes
6.0
State of the Coasts
EC/08/DOC/07
Reporting System
7.0
PRF Sustainability Plan
EC/08/DOC/08
8.0
PEMSEA
Legal
EC/08/DOC/09
Personality
New Business of the 2nd
Executive Committee
Meeting
9.0
2nd EAS Partnership
EC/08/DOC/10
Council Meeting
10.0
EAS
Congress
10.1
EAS Congress 2009
EC/08/DOC/11
10.2
3rd Ministerial Forum
EC/08/DOC/12
10.3
EAS Congress 2012
EC/08/DOC/13
Host Country
11.0
PRF
Operations
11.1
PEMSEA Trust Fund
EC/08/DOC/14
11.2
Work Programme and
EC/08/DOC/15
Budget
11.3
Development
and EC/08/DOC/16
Implementation of a
26
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
QMS
11.4
ICM Training Course and EC/08/DOC/17
Manuals
11.5
ICM Code and
EC/08/DOC/18
Recognition System
11.6
PSHEM Code and
EC/08/DOC/19
Recognition System
12.0
Activities
of
the
EC/08/DOC/20
Executive Committee
(2008-2010)
27
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
Annex 3
Second Executive Committee Meeting Agenda
28
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA Office, Quezon City, Philippines
14-15 March 2008
Provisional Agenda
Day 1 (Friday)
09:00 09:15
Introductions and Welcoming Remarks
09:15 09:30
1.0
Organizational Matters
2.0
Adoption
of
Agenda
Business arising from the 1st Executive Committee and Council Meeting:
09:30 12:00
3.0
Recruitment of the Executive Director and PRF
Technical
Services
staff
4.0
GEF/UNDP Project on Implementation of the SDS-SEA
5.0
Framework
of
Partnership
Programmes
6.0
State of Coasts reporting system
7.0
PRF
Sustainability
Plan
12:00 13:30 Lunch
13:30 17:30
8.0
PEMSEA Legal Personality
19:00 21:00 Dinner: Partnership Night at PEMSEA Office
Day 2 (Saturday)
New Business of the 2nd Executive Committee meeting
08:30 12:00
9.0
2nd EAS Partnership Council Meeting
10.0
EAS
Congress:
10.1 EAS Congress 2009
10.2
3rd Ministerial Forum
10.3 EAS Congress 2012 host country
29
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
11.0
PRF
Operations:
11.1
PEMSEA
Trust
Fund
11.2 Work programme and budget
11.3 Development and implementation of a QMS
11.4 ICM Training Course and Manuals
11.5 ICM Code and Recognition System
11.6 PSHEM Code and Recognition System
12.0 Activities of the Executive Committee (2008-2010)
13.0
Other
Business
12:00 12:30
Summary
***
30
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
Annex 4
Procedures for the Recruitment and Appointment of the
Regional Programme Director for the Implementation of the
SDS-SEA and the Executive Director of the
PEMSEA Resource Facility (PRF)
31
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
Procedures for the Recruitment and Appointment of the
Regional Programme Director for the Implementation of the SDS-SEA
and the Executive Director of the PEMSEA Resource Facility (PRF)
The recruitment and appointment of the Regional Programme Director for the
Implementation of the SDS-SEA and the PRF Executive Director shall be undertaken in a
collaborative manner involving the Executing Agency of the GEF Project, where applicable,
and the EAS Partnership Council, represented by the Council Chair or his designated
representative from the Executive Committee.
The procedure for the recruitment and appointment shall entail the following:
1. Preparation and adoption of the terms of reference;
2. Advertisement of the post vacancy internationally by the PRF;
3. Establishment of a Screening Committee within the PRF, which shall collate and evaluate
all applications and shortlist the candidates;
4. Review and approval of the shortlisted candidates and the establishment of the
Interview/Selection Panel, which shall include the Council Chair or his designated
representative from the Executive Committee as a member of the Selection Panel;
5. Agreement on the most appropriate candidate by consensus by the Selection Panel;
6. Appointment of the Regional Programme Director and PRF Executive Director by the
Executing Agency, where applicable, and the Executive Committee on behalf of the EAS
Partnership Council Council, respectively; and
7. Report of the Executive Committee on the recruitment and appointment process to the
EAS Partnership Council.
32
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
Annex 5
List of New and Transferring Staff for
PEMSEA Resource Facility (PRF) Technical Services Posts
33
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
PEMSEA RESOURCE FACILITY
STAFFING FOR TECHNICAL SERVICES
Post Title
Candidate
Transferring Staff
1. Country Programme Manager
Ms. Cristine Ingrid Narcise
2. Senior Country Programme Manager
Ms. Nancy Bermas
3. Training Officer
Ms. Diana Factuar
4. Senior Accountant
Ms. Mary Ann dela Pena
5. Senior Administrative Assistant
Ms. Rachel Josue
6. Artist
Mr. Jonel Dulay
7. Executive Assistant
Ms. Caroline Velasquez
8. Programme Assistant I
Ms. Diwata Cayaban
9. Programme Assistant II
Ms. Marlene Mariano
New Staff
1. Technical Officer for Project Development
Mr. Andre Jon Uychiaoco
2. Technical Assistant for Project Development
Ms. Daisy Padayao
3. Audit/Certification Officer
Mr. Renato Cardinal
4. Country Programme Assistant
Mr. Danilo Bonga
5. Country Programme Manager
Ms. Belyn Rafael
6. Technical Assistant, Learning Center
Ms. Maida Aguinaldo
7. IT Specialist
Mr. Rommel Caballero
8. Editor
Ms. Anna Rita Cano
9. Webmaster
Mr. John Eric Dylan Saet
34
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
Annex 6
2nd EAS Partnership Council Meeting
Provisional Agenda
35
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
2nd EAS Partnership Council Meeting
1417 July 2008 (tentative)
Tokyo, Japan
Provisional Agenda
14 July 2008
Registration
Opening Ceremony
Group Photo
Coffee Break
A. COUNCIL
SESSION
1.0
Organizational Matters
2.0
Adoption of Council Meeting Agenda
3.0
Rules of Procedure for the EAS Partnership Council Meeting
4.0
Report of the Council Chair on Executive Committee matters
5.0
Report of the Regional Programme Director/PEMSEA Resource Facility (PRF)
Executive
Director
6.0
Introduction of New Partner(s)
Close of Session
B.
TECHNICAL SESSION
1.0
Matters Pertaining to SDS-SEA Implementation
1.1
GEF/UNDP/UNOPS Implementation of the SDS-SEA
1.2
GEF/World Bank Pollution Reduction Investment Fund
1.3
Subregional Transboundary Projects
1.4
ICM Linkage with Climate Change Adaptation
36
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
2.0
Areas of Collaboration among Partners
2.1
Recognition of PEMSEA's Legal Personality
2.2
Framework of Partnership Programmes
2.3
Implementation of SOC Reporting
2.4
EAS Congress 2009/Ministerial Forum
2.5
National Task Force (NTF)/Regional Task Force (RTF) Development and
Implementation
2.6
PEMSEA Training Programme
2.7
PEMSEA ICM and PSHEM Codes and Recognition Systems
2.8
Corporate Social Responsibility
2.9
Areas of Excellence work programme
2.10
Twinning
Arrangements
2.11 PEMSEA Network of Local Governments (PNLG)
2.12 New
Initiatives
3.0
Critical and Emerging Issues in the Seas of East Asia
4.0 Other
Business
5.0
Conclusions and Recommendations of the Technical Session
6.0
Partners' Reports on SDS-SEA Implementation
7.0
Review and Adoption of the Proceedings of the Council and Technical Sessions
Close of Session
Field Trip
C. INTERGOVERNMENTAL
SESSION
1.0
Adoption of Conclusions and Recommendations of the Council and Technical
Sessions
2.0
Action Plan for the Transformation of PEMSEA
2.1
Recognition of PEMSEA's Legal Personality
2.2
PEMSEA Partnership Fund
2.3
PEMSEA Resource Facility (PRF) Sustainability Plan
3.0
Intersessional Work Programme 2008-2009
3.1
EAS Congress 2009
3.2
Ministerial Forum 2009
3.3
Regional Cooperation and Collaboration
37
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
4.0 GEF/UNDP/UNOPS
Implementation
of
SDS-SEA: Work Plan and Budget (2008-2010)
5.0
Other Business
6.0
Conclusions and Decisions of the Intergovernmental Session
Close of Session
18 July 2008
PEMSEA/Japan Joint Seminar
***
38
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
Annex 7
Proposed Activities
to be Supported by the Trust Fund
39
Proceedings of the 2nd Executive Committee Meeting
PEMSEA EC Meeting Report 2
Proposed Activities to be Supported by the Trust Account (2008-2010)
Estimated Trust Fund
Category of Activity
Details
Allocation (2008-2010)
Good Practices in coastal
25,000
reclamation (1)
Development and
implementation of sea-use
75,000
zoning (3)
1. Regional training
Integrated river basin and
25,000
coastal area management (1)
Preparation/application of
pollution reduction financing
25,000
and investment plans (1)
EAS Congress 2009
162,000
Case studies/good practices in
2. Knowledge Sharing
50,000
ICM in East Asia
PRF Internship Programme (4)
30,000
Water conservation/restoration
25,000
(Cambodia)
Disaster
management/response
25,000
(Philippines)
Alternative livelihood
3. Sustainable development
programmes (Timor-Leste;
50,000
aspects: ICM project initiatives Lao PDR)
Low-cost pollution
reduction/waste management
25,000
alternatives (Cambodia)
Adaptation to climate change
25,000
(Indonesia)
Project proposals/resource
mobilization for SDS-SEA
50,000
4. Sustainable regional
implementation
mechanism
RTF/NTF technical
assistance/coaching for ICM
84,000
sites and pollution hotspots
Total Allocation
676,000
40
Document Outline
- Proceedings of the Second Executive Committee Meeting cover.pdf