Project Proposals on COASTAL EROSION

Supporting the Development and Implementation of Integrated Coastal Area
Management (ICAM) in Sub-Saharan Africa


Project Number: COS 2

Project Title: Supporting the development and implementation of Integrated Coastal Area Management
(ICAM) in Sub-Saharan Africa

Requesting countries: Seychelles, Mauritius, Ghana, Cote d'Ivoire, Nigeria, Kenya, Senegal and Gambia.
Countries participating only by sharing information and experiences are Tanzania, South Africa and
Mozambique.

Requesting Regional or National Organisation:
Seychelles - Ministry of Environment
Mauritius - Ministry Environment
Ghana - Ministry of the Environment
Cote d'Ivoire - Ministere de l'Enseignement Superieur et de la Recherche Scientifique
Kenya - Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources
Senegal - Ministère de la Jeunesse, de l'Environnement et de l'Hygiène Publique
Nigeria - Federal Ministry of Environment
The Gambia - National Environment Agency (NEA)

Executing Agencies (proposed by national coordinators):
Seychelles - Ministry of Environment - ICZM Unit
Mauritius - Ministry of Environment - ICZM Unit
Ghana - Committee including Environmental Protection Agency, Ghana Ports and Harbours Authority,
Hydrological Services Department, Ghana Tourist Development Company, Fisheries Department, Town and
Country Planning Department
Cote d'Ivoire - Centre de Recherche Oceanologiques (CRO)
Kenya - Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources, National Environment Management Authority
(NEMA)
Nigeria - Nigerian Institute of Oceanography, Federal Ministry of Environment, Niger Delta Development
Corporation (NDDC)
Senegal - Direction de l'Environnement et des Etablissements Classés
The Gambia - National Environment Agency, Coastal and Marine Environment Working Group (multi-
sectoral body)

Required national partners:
Seychelles - Ministry of Land Use and Habitat
Mauritius - Beach Authority, Ministry of Local Government, Ministry of Economy and Industry, AHRIM
Ghana - District Assemblies of Coastal Districts, Ghana Shippers Council, Ghana Hoteliers Association,
Museum and Monuments Board
Cote d'Ivoire - Port Autonome d'Abidjan, Centre Ivoirien Anti Pollution (CIAPOL), Universite de Cocody
Kenya - Forestry Department, Kenya Wildlife Service, Coastal Development Authority, Kenya Marine and
Fisheries Research Institute.
Senegal - Département de Géologie et LPA de l'Université Cheikh Anta Diop, Equipe Vulnérabilité des
zones côtières, Direction des Phares et Balises (PAD)
Nigeria - Nigerian Institution of Oceanography, Oil Producing Trade Sector (OPTS), NDDC
The Gambia - Department of State for Finance & Economic Affairs, Chamber of Commerce

Priority Issue addressed: GIWA loss and modification of Ecosystems and Habitat, shoreline change,
overexploitation of resources.

---

Regional scope: Indian Ocean SIDS (Seychelles, Mauritius), Kenya, Cote d'Ivoire, Senegal, Nigeria,
Gambia, Togo, Benin, Cameroon could join (commonality of issues and transboundary).

Project location:

Seychelles (site: Anse Volbert); Mauritius, Ghana (site: Ada/Anyanui Volta Delta Estuary Mangrove
Complex (AVDEAMC)), Cote d'Ivoire (site: Grand Bassam), Kenya, Senegal (site : Djiffere), Nigeria (all
coastline), Gambia ; Kenya (Ngomeni)

Project duration: First phase: five years

Working group of the African Process: Coastal erosion and possibly all other groups but particularly the
Key Habitats Working Group.

---

SUMMARY

Coastal zones are the economic epicentre for many of Sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries, and provide a
livelihoods base for tens of thousands of people in the region. However, due to human population pressures,
irrational decision-making, sectoral approaches to coastal management, the coastal environment is degraded,
threatening the livelihoods of coastal communities. Overexploitation, loss of key habitats, pollution, coastal
erosion are all key issues identified by countries across the region. A more holistic approach to coastal
management is needed to contribute to tackling these issues, especially coastal erosion, one of the most
critical problems in Western Africa. Although most countries in the region are developing or have developed
framework ICAM plans, few have managed to further implement these plans.

The aim of this project is to support and facilitate the development and/or implementation of Integrated
Coastal Area Management (ICAM) in Sub-Saharan Africa at the national level and in selected demonstration
sites where erosion has been identified as a main issue. To further the implementation and uptake of ICAM
at the national level, the project will assess the constraints to ICAM implementation and/or development.
The project will also emphasise the sharing of past experiences, lessons learned from previous projects and
studies through regional networks and initiatives as "although a number of initiatives in ICM have been
successfully implemented in Africa, there seems to be lack of a learning process, or of effective
mechanisms by which successes and failures can be shared. This is evident at the national level, and much
more so at sub-regional and Africa-wide levels" and "ICM initiatives do not necessarily lead to better
management of African coasts. What is needed is to develop, on the basis of project experience, proper
regulatory and institutional measures at the national level to initiate a process of sustainable coastal
management for Africa". (Finland/UNEP/PAP report, 1998) 1.

Countries will choose to participate to components of the project on a needs and capacity basis. The
implementation of ICAM will also be started in selected demonstration sites where erosion has been
identified as a main issue.

Activities will include: a series of workshops to identify the main problems and constraints to the
implementation of ICAM, sharing and analysing lessons learned and assessments from previous studies and
projects; contribute to the design of implementation strategies in partnership with national stakeholders;
promote intra-regional exchanges of expertise; disseminate information; facilitate capacity building activities
in conjunction with appropriate regional institutions; contribute to the establishment of effective stakeholders
involvement mechanisms and of strategies for increased public awareness; contribute to the definition of
sustainable financing strategies. Activities will be carried out at the national level and facilitated and
coordinated by a Sub-Regional Coordinating Unit.

Defining and implementing ICAM strategies will ensure a more holistic approach to the management of
coastal activities at the national and regional level and thus contribute to reducing anthropogenic driven
coastal erosion. It will also contribute to the sustainable use of coastal and marine resources. The
implementation of ICAM plans will benefit coastal user groups and management bodies and mitigate the
negative impacts on the socio-economic aspects.

ICAM has been identified as a priority at the regional level in the Jakarta Mandate of the Convention on
Biodiversity, in the Abidjan and Nairobi Conventions - Arusha Resolution on ICZM in East Africa including
the Island States (1993) and the further Seychelles Conference Statement (October 96) - as well as at the
national level in Seychelles, Mauritius, Cote d'Ivoire, Senegal, Nigeria, Gambia and Ghana.


1 Government of Finland/UNEP/PAP. Assessment of Integrated Coastal Management in Africa, 1998.

---

3. Costs and financing (Million US $) (Tentative)2


International & bilateral sources: 10.236
Governments in cash & kind:

Subtotal Co-financing: 1.66


Total Project Cost: 11.896


4. Government Endorsement

Seychelles - Mr. Lousteau-Lalane, Principal Secretary, Ministry of Environment
Mauritius - Ministry of Environment
Ghana - Ministry of Environment and Science
Cote d'ivoire - Ministere de l'Environnement et du Cadre de Vie
Kenya - Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources
Senegal - Ministère de la Jeunesse, de l'Environnement et de l'Hygiène publique
Nigeria - Endorsed
The Gambia -

5. Government Focal Points

Seychelles - Mr Rolph Payet. Director-General, Policy Planning. Ministry of Environment
Mauritius - ICZM Unit, Department of Environment
Ghana - Environmental Protection Agency
Cote d'Ivoire - Environnement Department, CRO-
Kenya - ­ Ali Mohamed, Coordinator, Coastal and Marine Programmes
Senegal - Mme Fatimata Dia-Toure, Direction de l'Environnement et des Etablissements Classés, Ministère
de la Jeunesse, de l'Environnement et des Etablissements Classés
Nigeria - Mrs Dublin-Green, NIOMR, Federal Ministry of Environment
The Gambia -

6. African Process Working Group Focal Points
Coastal erosion group: Dr. Isabelle Niang-Diop, Dr Alfonse Dubi and Dr Delphine Malleret-King


2 This budget is preliminary and has not undergone a full consultation process with the respective countries.
Therefore, it does not indicate the actual financial commitment that would be provided by participating
countries once the project proposal and its components are finalised.

---

PROJECT DESCRIPTION



1. Background and justification

A large percentage of infrastructure, economic activities and human settlements are located on the coastal
zones of SSA. Coastal resources provide food and livelihoods for coastal communities, which can represent
more than half of national populations as in Seychelles or Senegal. However, in the last decades, increased
population pressure, urban development and poverty have contributed to the destruction of coastal habitats,
to resource overexploitation, to extreme pollution and increased erosion rates. Through irrational and
sectoral decision-making processes, the use of coastal resources has been unsustainable thereby threatening
livelihood opportunities for coastal populations. Habitat destruction and loss of key species has contributed
to loss of tourism opportunities. Habitat degradation and irrational land use development has reduced the
protection of the coasts thus increasing retreat rates which threaten coastal settlements, cultural heritage and
tourism opportunities. Similarly, pollution caused by inadequate waste disposal and polluted effluents
impacts on human health and contaminates or contributes to the depletion of food sources such as in the
Korle lagoon in Ghana. Depletion of poorly or unmanaged fisheries resources affect the livelihood and food
security of coastal communities, and even more so as fishing is often seen an activity of last resort.

Population pressure, poverty, insufficient education and insufficient awareness are at the root of most coastal
issues. The lack of coordination of planning mechanisms, contradictory legislations, the lack of
communication between government departments, have also been identified as a major constraints to the
sustainable development and use of the coastal environment by country experts in the first phase of the
African Process. Sectoral and unwise management has particularly contributed to increased coastal erosion.
This project aims at addressing this issue and contributing to the implementation of a more holistic approach
to coastal management. To increase the integration of coastal area management in a sustainable way,
coordination mechanisms, and legislative tools need to be improved, legal, technical and institutional
capacity need to be strengthened, stakeholder involvement and public awareness need to be increased, and
sustainable financing mechanisms need to be defined.

The proposed project is part of a threefold strategy to improve erosion control in the region. This strategy
proposes to address the erosion issues through three components:
· An erosion control component (detailed in the COS1 project: Coastal erosion control) which aims at
assessing and implementing soft or hard measures to reduce or mitigate erosion,
· A management component (this proposal) without which erosion management cannot be sustainable
or effective (for erosion prevention to be improved, a more holistic approach to coastal zone
management is needed), and
· A last component which aims at taking account of future trends in coastal erosion, particularly at
increasing knowledge and improving prevention of the impacts of future changes triggered by sea
level rise and global climate change (details in COS3: Impacts of climate change (included sea-level
rise) on the coastal zones of sub-Saharan Africa).

As well as addressing coastal erosion issues, ICAM implementation will also result in addressing and
tackling issues associated with pollution, habitat degradation and tourism development. This project has to
be seen as the first phase towards ICAM implementation in the region.

1.1. The need to improve and implement ICAM has been recognised at the national and regional levels

Although coastal activities all impact and are impacted on by each other, decisions are mostly taken in a
sectoral way, disregarding downstream impacts (e.g. irrigation schemes affecting stream flows and sediment
budgets, causing accretion, erosion and beach depletion) and interactions between activities. Poor decision
making about infrastructure location, inappropriate mitigation measures, and resource extraction have been

---

identified by the World Bank (1995) 3 as causes for high rates of erosion. The lack of vertical and horizontal
integration of decision-making and coastal management has contributed to the unsustainable use of coastal
resources, increased erosion rates and has threatened the livelihoods of thousands of coastal communities. In
order to manage coastal zone resources and erosion more effectively, a more comprehensive approach to the
management and development of coastal activities is needed. This need has been identified as a priority
particularly by Mauritius, Seychelles, Cote d'Ivoire and Ghana in the first phase of the African Process.

In response to the increasing pressures and threats on the coastal environment, the importance of taking an
integrated approach to coastal area management at the national, sub-regional, regional and global levels was
underlined at United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro,
1992 - Chapter 17 of Agenda 21.

Since then, Integrated Coastal Area Management (ICAM) has been advocated at the regional and sub-
regional levels in SSA and steps towards developing ICAM strategies have been taken.

The Maputo and the Cape Town Declarations of 1998 emphasised the need for ICAM at the sub-regional
levels. Furthermore, one of the principal actions of the Jakarta Mandate of the Convention on Biodiversity is
to institute ICAM, including community based coastal resource management. Finally, both the Nairobi and
Abidjan Conventions, in their revival efforts, are taking actions to increase the coordination of monitoring
and management activities in the coastal zones. Erosion has also been identified as a priority at the regional
and sub-regional levels. At the second meeting of the COP of the Nairobi Convention in 1999 themes of
activities to be carried out included the monitoring of erosion as well as management related actions
addressing erosion, which was already identified as a priority in the Arusha Resolution (1993) and
Seychelles Statement (1996). Finally, at the third COP of the Nairobi Convention, in Maputo (2001),
monitoring of shoreline changes and erosion management were stated as being priorities and management as
well as mitigation of coastal erosion is part of the Nairobi Convention biannual programme 2002-2003.
Similar priorities were identified in the Abidjan Convention biennale work plan adopted during its 5th COP.

Several projects and programmes are or have been promoting ICAM implementation in the region. The
World Bank in its framework for integrated coastal zone management (1995), promotes the development of a
multiple use and system oriented mode of management for the coastal zones in order to "optimise the net
benefit flows from coastal resources to individuals and society by reducing user conflicts, mitigating adverse
development impacts and enhancing the productivity of coastal ecosystems." The main objective of the
Regional Programme for the Environment of the Indian Ocean Commission (PRE-COI) of the E.U,
implemented in the Indian Ocean SIDS (1995-2000), was to support national programmes and policies for
ICAM. The PRE-COI also contributed to the development of pilot projects. At the same time, SEACAM,
created in 1997, was to assist the region to implement and coordinate coastal management activities through
building capacity in the Eastern African region. SEACAM has already organised numerous training courses
for coastal managers, NGOs and initiated reflections on the sustainable financing of coastal management
programmes.

Compared to East and Southern Africa where there is a "high concentration of integration of coastal
management activities...Central and West Africa is the sub-region with few initiatives. Experience is recent,
and the number of relevant initiatives is quite limited in spite of a large number of countries in the area."
(Finland/UNEP/PAP, 1998). Although the Gulf of Guinea LME (GOG-LME) programme has recognised, at
the sub-regional level, ICAM planning as a focal area, activities were identified to enable the development of
ICAM but mainly oriented towards pollution control. This tendency to focus on a limited number of issues
was one of the points raised by the Finland/UNEP/PAP report: " The majority of ICM initiatives in the sub-
region are addressing the issue of institutional development and capacity building, normally an early stage
in instituting ICM as a process. Many of the projects which were area specific were addressing a limited
number of issues (i.e. pollution, wetlands, lagoons etc.) lacking a broader perspective of ICM".


3 World Bank, Africa: A Framework for Integrated Coastal Zone Management, Environmentally Sustainable Development Division
and Land, Water and Habitats Division, Africa Region, 1995.

---

Although there has been progress, efforts made, and a large number of initiatives in the SSA there is still the
need to develop implementation activities. This is a finding of the Finland/UNEP/PAP report of 1998 which
states that: "Africa, at least at the institutional level, is far beyond the stage of awareness of the need for
ICM" but "in spite of the large number of initiatives there is still need to develop further activities...
particularly in the area of implementation, and especially beyond the very small local scale." Furthermore
"it is evident form the assessment that there is growing activity in ICM in Africa but to lead to sustainable
development it is critical to maintain partnership and support from bilateral and multilateral donors and
international agencies".

The degree of development and implementation of ICAM in the SSA vary from country to country. For
example, national ICAM policies and strategies have been developed in Seychelles, Mauritius, Mozambique
and Tanzania but other countries such as Kenya have developed plans only at a site level. Other countries do
not have a plan such as Senegal or their plan is incomplete such as in Nigeria or in Cote d'Ivoire (see Annex
I).

Implementing mechanisms and tools are also at different stages in development. Countries such as Tanzania,
Kenya, Mauritius and Gambia have or are in the process of developing coordinating management bodies, but
in some countries such as in Senegal, these bodies still need to be developed in order to achieve a
comprehensive approach to coastal management and therefore to erosion protection. (see Annex I)

At the site level, some stakeholder involvement has been achieved (e.g. in Tanzania with IUCN and USAID
support) and public awareness on coastal issues increased (e.g. in Kenya through a WWF initiative in
Kiunga). In Kenya, a process is being developed to involve stakeholders in coastal management at the
national level through a Kenya Marine Forum - with the support of IUCN/USAID - however most countries
in SSA have no, or very little stakeholders' involvement mechanisms or public awareness strategies
implemented at the national level (Annex I).

The lack or regulatory tools and expertise have prevented enforcement of ICAM plans in Mauritius and
Seychelles, which is a common scenario across the region, and technical, legal or institutional constraints
were identified as the main hindrances to the development of ICAM plans in Western Africa by the GOG-
LME sub-regional programme. Furthermore, the ICM assessment in Africa shows that "The African
experience demonstrates that success depends, to a great extent, on pragmatic approach and careful
plan/programme/project development on recognizing inter-sectoral and inter-administrative level linkages
properly, taking into consideration environmental concerns in development planning and coastal resource
management" (Government of Finland/UNEP/PAP, 1998).

1.2. Coastal erosion, a critical issue which can not be dealt without ICAM implementation

Improving ICAM will contribute to increasing communication and coordination between policies at the
national levels and contribute to reducing overexploitation of resources, pollution but also to improving
coastal erosion protection both from human and natural causes. Although coastal erosion is only one of the
issues that ICAM will positively impact on, it is emphasised in this project, which is part of an integrated
package (COS2 is part a threefold strategy with COS1 and COS3, see section 1), aiming at improving
erosion control, one of the most critical issues in West Africa and in the Indian Ocean Island States.

Coastal erosion is a cause and an impact of habitat degradation, which in turn affects the productivity of the
ecosystem and the livelihoods of the communities depending on coastal resources through fishing, tourism,
farming etc. As recognised by the Abidjan Convention, the GOG-LME programme and the World Bank
(1995), erosion is one of the priority coastal issues in West Africa. Retreat rates are very high in the sub-
region; they vary between 1 to 3 meters and can be extreme in sensitive areas. 4 to 5 m erosion rates are
observed in The Gambia (Bijilo and Kololi beaches) and rates as high as 20-30 meters have been recorded in
Nigeria4 (Niger Delta, Lagos and Escravos Harbours), in Ghana (Keta) and in Senegal (Djiffere) affecting

4 The Victoria beach is the fastest eroding beach in Nigeria with average erosion rates of 20-30m annually. Between 1900 and 1959,
Victoria beach retreated by over 1km near the eastern mole, decreasing to about 400m some 3km eastwards in the area of the
Kuramo waters. However, the Lighthouse beach near the western breakwater accreted by over 500m within the same period. Annual
erosion rates of 25 - 30m had been reported between 1981 and 1985. This high rate of erosion has been linked to the construction of the
moles built to stop the silting up of the entrance to Lagos harbor. Erosion rates range between 18-24m annually at Ugborodo/Escravos

---

coastal infrastructure and development. Coastal erosion has thus been recognised as a critical issue at the
national level by Cote d'Ivoire, Gambia, Ghana, Nigeria and Senegal in the first phase of the African process
(see country reports).

Although coastal erosion is not as critical at the sub-regional level in Eastern Africa as in Western Africa, the
Nairobi Convention considers the management and monitoring of shoreline changes as a one of the priority
areas. High average retreat rates of 1 m per year are observed in Mauritius and Seychelles with more
extreme rates in sensitive areas. Rates of 2-5 m have been recorded in Mauritius (Flic en Flac, Pomponnette-
Riambel and Belle-Mare) and of 22 m in Mozambique (near Chinde inlet between 1927 and 1983). Coastal
erosion has been identified as a critical issue at the national level by Mauritius and Seychelles in the first
phase of the African process. Although erosion rates are unknown in Seychelles, it is a major concern for the
country. Increased wave intensity in Praslin Island and more frequent abnormal high tides increasingly
accelerate erosion. Finally, coastal erosion is often offset by coastal accretion, this is observed in
Mozambique, in Ghana and in Kenya where "Beach accretion has taken place, such that beach hotels have
lost their beach frontage" (Kenya National Report).

The lack of available socio-economic data was underlined in the first phase of the African Process by most
countries. This has prevented an accurate estimation of the socio-economic costs of erosion to be made.
However, the fact that the coastal zone is highly populated and is the location where most economic
activities take place means that the potential impacts of coastal erosion are very high in the region. For
example, as mentioned in the country reports prepared during the first phase of the African Process, 25% of
the population and 70% of industries are located on the coast in Ghana, 68% of the GDP is produced and
54% of the population is on the coast in Senegal, in Seychelles 85% of the human settlements and
infrastructures are also situated on the coast. Costs in terms of loss of coastal infrastructure, land, economic
opportunities and cultural patrimony are already high in the SSA.

Fish landing sites have been eroded in Gambia, the copra industry, situated on the beach, and thus the
livelihood of thousands of people is highly threatened in Ghana. Cultural heritage such as forts and castles
for example in Ghana, Gambia and Cote d'Ivoire have been damaged or are highly threatened. Houses have
been damaged and land values on the Mauritius coastal strip is affected, the loss of land and properties due to
coastal erosion in Cote d'Ivoire was estimated by the World Bank to be 1.9 billion FCFA in 1998. In Nigeria,
assessments showed that loss of land to erosion and sea level rise in the Lagos State would affect tourism,
commercial and residential facilities on the Victoria, Ikoyi and Lagos island to a cost of more that 12 billion
US$. In Senegal erosion has led to the destruction of a fishing factory, and of the Saloum Delta National
Park guards house resulting in the closure of the unit in august 1989. A village was abandoned and
population displaced due to erosion in Niodior and Dionewar (see National Reports).
· One of the most affected activities by coastal erosion is tourism. This was strongly emphasised in the
country reports of the first phase of the African Process. Tourism is the 1st pillar of Seychelles
economy (12.7% of the GDP and 2/3 of the labour force), the 3rd pillar of Mauritius economy, an
important sector in Cote d'Ivoire and growing in Ghana. Irrational land use planning and development
including insufficient set backs, dune and vegetation destruction by the tourism industry itself for
example, have resulted in higher erosion rates, led to destruction of coastal infrastructures and caused
a drop in tourism activities in areas where beach fronts have eroded away (e.g. Mauritius, Cote
d'Ivoire, Senegal and Gambia). This issue has led to the use of expensive protection methods for
example in Gambia where "Two of the Gambia's most prestigious tourist resorts, Kairaba Beach and
Senegambia Hotels, have already undertaken some very expensive protection measures to protect the
hotels against beach erosion. Kairaba Beach Hotel for example has spent US$ 400,000 on sand
bagging using geotextile sandbags whilst Senegambia Hotel spent about US$ 330,000 in 1998 to
protect its beach by a sandbagging method" (Gambia National Report). Failure to take a cross-
sectoral approach to resource use in the Ada- Volta Delta Anyanui Estuary Mangrove Complex

station, 20-22m annually at Forcados station, 16-19m annually at Brass Station, 15 - 20m annually at Kulama station, and 20-24m.
annually at Bonny station and 10-14m annually at (Opobo river entrance) station (Ibe et al., 1985) . Nigeria National Report.
Ibe, A. C., Awosika, L. F., Ihenyen, A. E., Ibe, C. E., and Tiamiyu A. I. (1985). Coastal erosion at Awoye and Molume, Ondo State,
Nigeria. A report for Gulf Oil Company Nigeria Limited. 123p.

---

(AVDEAMC) has caused erosion (due to overexploitation of mangroves) and sediment transport
changes (due to damming) resulting in key species habitat destruction and health hazards. This in turn
is preventing the development of the area for tourism (see Ghana National Report). In Senegal, a
touristic camp had to be displaced inside the islands due to erosion, however, new tourism
opportunities were created in Djiffere due to the accretion process and the creation of beaches along
the riverside (see National Reports).

Erosion is a threat to coastal activities but is also an impact of these activities. Indeed, anthropogenic
activities are the main cause of coastal erosion in the countries, which consider it as a critical issue. These
activities were found, in the causal chain analysis identified in the first phase of the African Process, to
account for 45-50% of the erosion in Mauritius and Seychelles, 70-90% in Ghana, Cote d'Ivoire, Nigeria and
Gambia. Sectors impacting the shoreline include farming through bad soil management and fisheries through
the building of reef passes (Mauritius). However, activities which have the most impact on erosion are the
energy sectors and urbanisation (including tourism). Damming for hydroelectric plants affecting stream
flows and sediment budgets (e.g. in Ghana), the construction of oil refineries and wells, gas and oil pipelines,
storage tanks with insufficient setbacks (e.g. in Nigeria) have been a main cause for erosion. Land
reclamation in Seychelles, the use of sand and coral for urban and tourism constructions and the use of
poorly designed sea defences (e.g. sea walls, groynes) have accelerated retreat rates in Ghana, Seychelles and
Mauritius (see National Reports).

Other causes for erosion indirectly linked to human activities include global climate change and sea level rise
which can be referred to as "sub-natural" phenomena have led to an increase in the strength and frequency of
natural phenomena such as tidal surges, storms and cyclones. It is considered that storms, cyclones, tidal
surges contribute substantially to shoreline changes in Seychelles and Mauritius where they are estimated to
account for 50%-55% of coastal erosion. (see National Reports). Anthropogenic activities reinforce the
effects of natural and sub-natural phenomena by reducing the natural capacity of the ecosystems to cope with
natural phenomena. This is the case when natural erosion protection systems such as mangroves, coral reefs
or marshes are overexploited and degraded.

Coastal erosion is a crucial issue for numerous countries in the region and contributes to exacerbating
poverty in coastal zones. Without strengthening or developing a multi sectoral approach to coastal area
management this issue cannot be tackled. This is true for other issues such as pollution, loss of key habitats
or tourism development.

2. Objective and Expected Results

The aim of this project is to reduce constraints and support the development and implementation of ICAM
process and its components, increasing sharing lessons learned, ensuring the sustainability of ICAM at the
national level and tackling coastal erosion as a common issue in specific sites. Steps necessary to implement
the project include identifying constraints to implementation or development of ICAM, reviewing lessons
learned, completing appropriate plans, establishing more effective cross-institutional implementation
mechanisms, stakeholders involvement mechanisms, public awareness programmes, strengthening legal,
technical and institutional expertise, enhancing enforcement and compliance, and the defining sustainable
financing mechanisms. The project will focus on the local and national levels and, at the same time, increase
the sharing of experience and lessons learned through the development of a regional network of expertise
and information dissemination on ICAM and erosion protection.

The implementation of this project, as part of an integral ICAM, will result in more effective coastal erosion
protection, which is a priority for Seychelles, Mauritius, Ghana, Gambia, Senegal, Cote d'Ivoire, and Nigeria.
Each of the components of the implementation process will contribute to ensuring the sustainability of ICAM
implementation at the national and regional level.

By improving coastal management, the socio-cultural and economic cost of erosion will decrease (loss of
cultural patrimony, loss of arable land, loss of key species/habitats, loss of tourism opportunities).
Conflicting resource uses will be reduced which is in accordance with the countries aim to alleviate poverty
and increase employment alternatives, one of the main employment alternatives identified at the national
level being tourism development.

---

Intermediate problems addressed by the project will be the lack of:
· Institutional mechanisms enabling effective implementation of ICAM strategies at the national and
local level (in the demonstration sites),
· Appropriate and practical stakeholders involvement mechanisms from the problem identification and
decision making to the implementation phases of ICAM at the national and local levels (in the
demonstration sites)
· Technical and legal capacity at the national and in the context of the demonstration sites,
· Public awareness on coastal erosion issues and on benefits of ICAM at the national and
demonstration sites level
· Information and experience sharing at the sub-regional and regional level
· Sustainable financial mechanisms for implementation in the long term
Without addressing these immediate problems, unsustainable resource use and coastal erosion will carry on
increasing.

Immediate issues addressed by the project: Facilitating the implementation process, the project will directly
address the lack of coordination of policies and management decision in relation to coastal activities and
resource use, in particular focusing on coastal erosion protection in some selected demonstration sites.

Indirect problems addressed by the project: By supporting ICAM implementation, the project will improve
coastal resources management and development as well as coastal erosion management. This project will
thus contribute to reducing resource use conflicts and indirectly address issues of poverty. Poverty alleviation
is the most crucial priority in the region. The project will indirectly contribute to poverty alleviation as, by
contributing to reducing resource depletion and erosion, it will contribute to the sustainability of existing
coastal resource based livelihood systems, prevent the loss of cultural patrimony and prevent the loss, at the
local level, of alternative employment opportunities, such as tourism.


TABLE 1: OBJECTIVES AND EXPECTED RESULTS OF THE PROJECT



OBJECTIVES
EXPECTED RESULTS


Overall Objective:
Overall results of the project:
·
Improve coastal protection and the
·
Improved and more coordinated resource use
sustainability of resource use by supporting the
strategies in the long term
development and implementation in the long
·
Improved and coordinated coastal erosion
term of ICAM policies in SSA particularly
protection in the long term
through the sharing of lessons learned and
·
Contribution to poverty alleviation
experience.
Immediate objectives:
·
Learn from past experiences and lessons
1. Assess the level of ICAM implementation or
learned
development in participating countries, build on
·
Understanding of gaps in implementation and
experiences and previous assessments.
development of ICAM at the national level

·
Identification of constraints to the
2. Analyse and assess constraints to the
implementation or development of ICAM in
development and or implementation
participating countries

·
Completed or improved ICAM plans at the
3. Reduce national specific constraints preventing
national level
ICAM implementation at the national level and
·
Strengthened national institutional, legal,
local levels in all components of ICAM (i.e.
technical capacity in relation to ICAM
institutional and legal aspects, human
development and implementation through capacity
resources/capacity building, coordination
building efforts where identified as a need.
mechanisms, stakeholders involvement, public
·
Improved or established management
awareness, monitoring and follow up). Emphasise
coordinating bodies if non existing and inter-
learning and sharing experiences.
ministerial coordination mechanisms at the

national level

·
Increased and more effective stakeholder

involvement mechanisms in the planning and

---

implementing stages of ICAM, Adaptive

management process achieved. ICAM

stakeholders' forums established (if Forums is

decided to be the most appropriate way at the

national level). Representative(s) of Forum

included as full member(s) of the management

coordinating body which would enable

involvement of stakeholders at all stages of ICAM

development and implementation

·
Increased public awareness on erosion and

coastal management issues

·
Improved or established monitoring and

follow up procedures in order for management to

be adaptive in time

·
Definition of more sustainable financing

mechanism for ICAM implementation at the

national level
4. Demonstrate at selected sites that increased

integration of coastal management can contribute
·
Increased local technical, institutional,
to improved coastal protection management
management and legal capacity at the site level

·
Improved management coordination at

selected sites
·
Increased involvement of stakeholders at the
site level
·
Increased coordination between local and
national ICAM implementation policies
5. Increase information dissemination and
·
Increased expertise and information sharing
expertise exchanges within the region, sharing
on ICAM in the region
successes and failures, through training and
capacity building (see objective 3 as well)


3. Project Components/Activities


Component 1. Constraints assessment and review of lessons learned and assessements
Activities include:
A1.1 ICAM status report/ identifying gaps: summarise existing information and complement
information on the steps already achieved at the national level on ICAM, implementation
and particularly in relation to coastal erosion.
A1.2. Identification of constraints affecting the development and/or implementation of
ICAM strategies: Identification of the constraints to the implementation of ICAM at the
national level. SRCU and national units or focal points decide on guidelines or strategy to
be applied to investigate constraints. National teams and or regional experts will interview
relevant stakeholders to identify constraint or series of workshops/meetings will be
organised between national government departments involved in managing activities on the
coasts, representatives of stakeholders. This is in order to determine at which level
implementation is stalling.
A1.3. review of lessons learned and evaluation studies of ICAM initiatives

Component C2: Reducing constraints- Strategy design
Activities include:
A2.1 Complementing or developing ICAM plans in countries where needed. The project will
coordinate and support the completion of plans where needed by facilitating consultation
between government departments, consultation with stakeholders, and disseminating
information. National teams will carry out this activity, supported if necessary by regional or
international experts if needed (coordinated by the SRCU) will carry out this activity.

A2.2 Series of workshops to identify ways forward to implement ICAM, particularly in
relation to addressing erosion/accretion issues. Constraint type based workshops will include

---

participating countries' government and administration (national and local levels) and
stakeholder representatives as well as experts/government representatives/stakeholder
representative of countries where process is more advanced and facilitators. Promote
sharing the lessons learned and experience (illustrating difficulties, to pitfalls and potential
solutions). Case studies from the region and outside the region may also illustrate some
potential solution to constraints.

A2.3 Agreement on way forward and designing strategies and guideline to ICAM
implementation tailored to each participating country. The way forward is to be identified
during the workshop. Strategies will be drafted by national teams with the help of
regional/international experts through the SRCU according to the countries capacity.

Component C3. Implementing constraint reduction strategy
A3. 1. Support the start of implementation of these strategies at the national level
On a needs basis:
Institutional coordination: Assess existing mechanisms, use existing mechanisms if
applicable or define new ones (or based on lessons from other countries) so that
decision-making process across institutions is easier and more efficient with the
institutions involved.
Legislation: Assess existing legislative tools; amend existing tools if needed/draw out
new legislation to empower the ICAM coordinating management body (including
stakeholders' representative) to carry out ICAM implementation.
Capacity building: Organise specific training for the country or on a constraint type
basis through institutions, which have expertise in training (e.g. SEACAM). Personnel
recruitment strategy designed.
More effective stakeholder involvement: Stakeholder analysis carried out to identify
that should be represented. Consult stakeholders. Assess the relationship between
government and stakeholders, empowerment mechanisms, look at existing working
mechanisms in other countries, see if appropriate, adapt. Survey perception of the
stakeholders at national level of ICAM and links with institutions...
Public awareness: Assess existing mechanisms and materials disseminated; assess
efficiency (quick survey of stakeholders to evaluate knowledge of ICAM and
particularly erosion issues and causes). Call in experts in the region to define cost
effective strategies.
Monitoring and follow up component: Define strategy to regular assess effectiveness of
implementation mechanisms, public awareness surveys, set up database or information
management system/ or give feed back to existing systems on coastal erosion protection
and prevention, strategy to assess regularly stakeholders involvement, their perception
on ICAM results and enforcement in relation to erosion.
Financing mechanisms: Assess existing financing mechanisms and define if necessary
strategies to increase the sustainability of ICAM financing (recurrent funding).

Component C4. Establishing ICAM plans and start implementation at the local level in selected
demonstration sites with erosion problems
A 4.1 Confirm site selection
Confirm the selection of demonstration sites. So far a preliminary selection has been made
and sites are listed in table 2. The sites selected have been designated as hot spots of
sensitive areas in the national reports. The common issue of these threatened sites is coastal
erosion or accretion (see national reports).

A 4.2. Establishment of a management plan and start implementation
A stakeholder analysis will be carried out at the site level. Issues will be analysed. Local
ICAM working group will be established comprising government and stakeholder
representatives. Assessment of resource use patterns contributing to the coastal erosion at the
site level and other factors contributing to erosion will be assessed through previous studies
and in conjunction with the work carried out in COS 1 (coastal erosion protection) and COS
3 (Impact of Global Climate Change on Coastal Zones. Linkages and information gathered

---

in the context of other projects at selected sites will be used and explored. Strategies agreed
at the national levels will be discussed and adapted at the same time to the local context with
the site working group. This activity is to set up integrated management mechanisms at the
site level. Establish a management plan and start implementation. Focus will be on
stakeholders involvement. Capacity building exercises will be carried out.

Component C5. Information dissemination and exchange of expertise/lessons learned
Activities include:
A5.1 Dissemination of workshop proceedings
A5.2 Feed back of results in information network database such as GOG-LME or Strategic
Network for Ocean and Coastal Management (SIOCAM) or SEACAM database
A5.3. Promote sharing of lessons learned and experiences through study tours in-between
pilot sites, dedicated intranet system for these pilot erosion sites, capacity building (at all
stages of the process) etc.

Component C6: Project Management
Activities include:
A6.1 Set up of sub-regional coordination unit: Consult with participating countries on the
institutional arrangements concerning the establishment and structure of a Sub-Regional
Coordinating Unit (SRCU), recruit personnel and identify on call experts in the region,
recruit project coordinator.
A6.2 Set up or identification of national focal points/coastal zone management coordination
bodies: institutional and stakeholders analysis. Consult with participating countries and
identify institutions and major stakeholders to be part of national coordination units
committees or use/enhancing existing coordinating bodies (e.g. Mauritius the Coastal zone
unit).
A6.3. Monitoring and evaluation of the project: provide quarterly activity reports and monitor
the quality of the work, which will enable quick adaptation of the process.


Country participation and sites proposed: countries will contribute to different components of the project
according to their capacity, needs and constraints. Although the national components of the project are to
establish mechanisms to deal with a broad array of coastal issues as well as coastal erosion (C1, C2, C3, C5),
demonstration sites proposed by participating countries especially target coastal erosion (C4).

Sites proposed correspond to hot spots identified during the first phase of the African Process where coastal
erosion is a main issue.

TABLE 2: SUMMARY OF COMPONENTS TO WHICH COUNTRIES WILL PARTICIPATE

Requesting countries
Components/Activities
Demonstration sites
Cote d'Ivoire
All
Grand Bassam
Gambia
C1, C2, C3, C5, C6

Ghana All
AVEAMC
Kenya
All
Ngomeni
Mauritius
C1,C2, C3, C5, C6

Nigeria All
Lagos
Islands
Senegal All
Djiffere
Seychelles All
Anse
Volbert,
Praslin
Non-requesting countries


sharing information and
experience
Mozambique C2,
A2..2,
C5
Tanzania C2,
A2..2,
C5

South Africa
C2, A2.2, C5

---

4. Linkages to Other National or Regional Activities/Transboundary Aspects

Other countries which could be interested in joining the project:
· Commonality of issues and transboundary considerations: Gambia, Benin, Togo, Cameroon,
Equatorial Guinea, and Gabon as part of the GOG-LME.
· On the grounds of commonalities of issues: Mozambique, Comores and Madagascar.

Links with Regional and sub-regional programmes: The project main objective is directly in line with the
Nairobi and Abidjan Conventions. Both Conventions have identified the institution and coordination of
ICAM at the sub-regional levels as a priority as well as shoreline erosion management and monitoring.
Similarly the project by focusing on implementation activities will strengthen and complement the GOG-
LME programme which is supporting the development of ICAM plans at the national level. The proposed
project would strengthen these processes at the national level (in participating countries) and take the process
a step further, to implementation.

Links with on-going projects: Through its different components the project links up with different on-going
initiatives at the sub-regional, national and local levels. It ties in and could benefit from the experiences of:
· IOC, COI-PRE, IUCN/NORAD initiative supporting the implementation of the Jakarta Mandate in
the East African region, ICRAN/UNEP Ecosystem management approach in East Africa (to be
started). The project will focus on activities which increase experiences in ICAM and contribute to the
implementation of ICAM initiatives advocated within the framework of these initiatives.

· USAID/University of Rhode Island programme which contributes to the development of coastal
management plans in Tanzania and Kenya (Kenyan Coastal Management Initiative, Tanzania Coastal
Management Partnership), the MICOA/DANIDA ICAM development support project in Mozambique
(coastal centre for sustainable development of coastal zones), the Coastal Zone Management Centre set
up by the Netherlands in Kenya. ADB project supporting the Design of the Environment Management
Plan for the Seychelles. SIOCAM projects on Integrated Management of the Lake Chad Basin and
Integrated Management of the Benguela Current Large Marine Ecosystem, the FFEM Supporting
project for the management of Senegal River. This project will increase the number of demonstration
sites integrating the lessons learned from these projects.

· World Bank programmes: Coastal Zone Integrated Management Program in Benin, Integrated
Marine and Coastal Biodiversity in Gambia, Coastal Wetlands Management in Ghana, Coastal Zone
Integrated Management and Preservation of Biodiversity in Guinea, Coastal and Biodiversity
Management Program in Guinea Bissau, Restoration of Round Island in Mauritius, Coastal and Marine
Biodiversity Management in Mozambique, Namib Coast Biodiversity Conservation and Management
Program in Namibia, Marine & Coastal Biodiversity Conservation in Senegal, Biodiversity
Conservation & Marine Pollution Abatement I, Marine Ecosystems Management and Biodiversity
Conservation - NEAP II in Seychelles, Cape Action Plan for the Environment: Implementation
Program in SA. The project will strengthen the World Bank activities in relation to ICAM through
increasing sharing lessons learned and experiences as well as through the supporting ICAM processes
at the national level.

· On stakeholders' involvement specifically: IUCN programmes in Tanzania, Guinea Bissau and
Comores supporting the development of community based fisheries/coastal management plans,
IUCN/USAID/ TCMP in Tanzania where cross sectoral mechanisms were set up and strong
stakeholder involvement were established to manage the coastal area and also could tie in with the
establishment the Kenya Marine Forum (IUCN/USAID). The Kenya Marine Forum is being set up to
facilitate coastal Stakeholders involvement in ICAM planning. Strong involvement of stakeholders in
the planning and management of coastal areas is also the focus of the UNDP project in Madagascar
and the WWF project in Mafia Island in Tanzania. This project will build on theses experiences.

· In terms of capacity building and public awareness the project could be linked up with the GOG
LME programme in West Africa, SEACAM in Eastern Africa, SIOCAM, WWF project in Kenya-
Kiunga (Kenya), UNEP (manual published for integration of Coastal education in school curriculum in

---

East Africa). The lessons learned and experience gained from all these programmes will benefit the
project which will encourage the sharing of these experiences.

· The project should link up with the "Eurosion" project lead by the National Institute for Coastal
Erosion (Netherlands). This project aims at assessing coastal erosion status in Europe, review
decision-making processes at the local level, improve decision-making by increasing information
sharing, provide latest coastal defences, provide policy recommendations and encourage stakeholder
involvement. The Eurosion as well as the COS 2 project could be strengthened by the promotion of
sharing lessons learned and experiences.

Linking with the projects and programmes could be done through the set up of an internet site
specifically for ICAM projects and programmes in Africa.

Baseline and lessons learned:
· On participatory process, awareness and local capacity building, the project will benefit from the
baseline studies and lessons learned from World Bank programme "building local capacity for ICZM
carried out in 1996-97 in Ghana.

· The project will also benefit from:
o Assessments on ICZM constraints in West Africa and country profiles done in the
framework of the GOG LME programme and by the World Bank national projects
developed in the framework for ICZM developed since 1995.
o The assessment of Integrated Coastal Management in Africa, done by the Government of
Finland/UNEP/PAP (1998) aiming at presenting at PACSICOM, an assessment of ICM
initiatives in Africa with the purpose to identify common elements in the approach, as well
as success factors and weaknesses so as to improve ICM projects development, preparation
and implementation.
o Methodological guide to ICZM, UNESCO 97 (including a case of Gabonese littoral ­
production of coastal sensitivity atlas);
o The work under MAP including `Evaluation d' initiatives de gestion integree des regions
littorales mediterraneennes';
o The project East Africa 5 supported by SIDA focused on development of ICAM strategies
for selected sites, implementation of ICAM projects and development and implementation of
ICAM priority project. Including published documents on ICZM for example on the Xai Xai
district coastal area management strategy.

5. Demonstrative Value and Replicability

The project will be implemented in the requesting countries, which will participate at different levels.
Countries advanced in the process of ICAM development and implementation will participate through
sharing information and lessons learned even if not requesting participation to the project. This is the case of
Tanzania, South Africa and Mozambique. Other countries will participate only in some of the activities and
components at the national level, this is the case of Mauritius, and some require the establishment of a
demonstration site and will participate at the national and local levels. Finally some countries such as
Senegal and Cote d'Ivoire will participate at all stages of this project.

Although the project will start in eight countries at different level of intervention, this tailor-made approach
can be easily replicated across the region where the improvement of coastal area management is recognised
as a need. Furthermore, peer pressure will encourage the replication of demonstration sites.

This project aims at establishing a process at the national and local level, which is easily replicable and
flexible. Later, participants will benefit from the lessons learned in this first phase as well as from the
information, expert network and from the coordination skills developed at the regional level by the SRCU.

6. Risks and Sustainability

---

The main assumptions for these project are: that there is a long term to commitment to ICAM and erosion
protection, that consensus between local users and government agencies is attainable and that stakeholder
consultation and empowerment is enabled at the national and local levels, that the political context in the
participating countries, and hence commitment remains relatively stable.

Risks: Risks are limited. The main risk is that government commitment is not carried because of the different
perception of the changing administrations.

Sustainability: Sustainability is an integrated part of the project design. The sustainability of projects
result will mainly depend on the effectiveness of the stakeholder involvement, the appropriateness of the
implementation ICAM guidelines to the national and local contexts, the adequate technical, legal and
institutional capacity and expertise at the national level and on the long-term political and financial
commitment of decision makers.

In order to ensure the sustainability of the results:
· For effective stakeholders involvement the project will ensure if needed:
Mechanisms to empower and facilitate consultation with local stakeholders groups and
authorities are part of the planning and implementation of ICAM.
Stakeholders awareness
Practical and adequate selection process of stakeholders' representatives who will participate
in stakeholder forums (if stakeholders forums are considered as appropriate).
Forums formalised and empowered for implementation with some enforcement if necessary
Links between policy makers are appropriate and "go both ways"
·
ICAM implementing measures will be tailored to the national needs. This will ensure that
measure and guidelines are appropriate at the national level. Constant interaction between the
regional, national and local levels will ensure that sub-regional coordination unit works in total
partnership with national focal points and in consultation of both national and local levels in the four
sites.
· Priority is put on capacity building at the local (including local authorities) and national
levels so that external expertise is not needed or only needed on a punctual basis. Most of
the expertise will be drawn from the region; intra-regional exchanges of experiences
and lessons learned will be promoted.
· Budget allocation to ICAM and policies express the government commitment to ICAM.
Mechanisms for the private sector and NGOS and CBOs to contribute financially or in kind
particularly through the commitment of personnel to ICAM enforcement/implementation
will be investigated

External Funding: The first phase (5 years) of the project will be funded externally with in kind help from
countries in the region (e.g. expertise, logistics for the SRCU).
External financing will support:
· The set- up of the ICAM implementation process in the first phase: constraints assessments,
series of workshops, establishment of the SRCU, capacity building (through existing sub-
regional organisations such as SEACAM), the set up of information management process on
ICAM, demonstration sites etc. will be partially funded by external sources under the
conditions that participating countries commit to make ICAM a priority through policy and
implementation efforts and commit a budget to ICAM at the national level and show effort
through out the process.

When the external support has ceased (recurrent funding) as envisaged- to be discussed:
· ICAM implementation: committed budgets at the national level will be complemented by
private sector contributions. These contributions should be encouraged, and could take the
form particularly through revolving trust funds...This will only work if the private sector
sees the funds are directly going to ICAM and they see the benefits of ICAM to their sector.
Contribution could also be in the form of expertise, work, and time for some of the
enforcement activities for example from local NGOs, CBOs.

---

· SRCU functioning: after the initial set up phase the SRCU should be low cost to run, one
staff/coordinator and small office. The SRCU's aim will be to provide a service to countries
on a needs basis and disseminate information. "Member countries" will be asked to commit
to partly (50%) sustain the SRCU through yearly direct contributions towards the payment
of the staff, office running and maintenance of the information network. The SRCU will also
seek funds for its sustenance complementing the countries contributions (50%).When a
service is needed, the SRCU will identify the best expert (ideally within the region) or a
team of experts and send it to the demanding country. The service will be paid by the
demanding country (fees of the expert(s) and cost of the travel, the demanding country will
also cover the cost of the SRCU if any). Agreements between "SRCU- member" countries
could include agreements on exchange of expertise etc.

To ensure that ICAM implementation is sustained, the SRCU will provide a yearly appraisal on progress of
ICAM implementation/enforcement at the national levels and give feed back to member countries, providing
recommendations on how to improve the process on no cost bases for the member states.

7. Stakeholder Participation

Project stakeholders: national agencies through cross-ministerial units, research institutes, coastal user-
groups including the tourism industry, coastal residents, local fishers, farmers, developers, sand mining
companies, CBOS and NGOs will be involved at all stages of the project. These stakeholders will be
involved and also the beneficiaries of the project.

Local administration, CBOs, NGOs and private industries will be involved through the establishment of a
forum in each participating country, if the format is agreed as appropriate. Stakeholders including local
authorities, CBOs and NGOs will select two "stakeholder representatives" who will participate to the
decision making at the national level or alternatively decisions voted by the forum on priority issues and
course of actions will be put forward to the cross-ministerial unit. In the latter case, the cross ministerial units
will give feed back and explanations on their decisions to the stakeholders or directly through the forum or
indirectly through stakeholders representatives. The Sub-Regional Coordination Unit will act then as a
facilitator to set up this two-way communication process.

Roles in the monitoring process will be allocated to stakeholders by stakeholders themselves through the
forum or other platform according to their capacity.

8. Project Management and Implementation Arrangements

A sub-regional coordinating unit (SRCU) composed of a regional expert network and a small permanent cell
will carry out activities in partnership with the coordinating units of the participating countries. The SRCU
will provide "on site" service and act as a facilitator and coordinator of activities at the national and sub
regional level. One of its main objectives will be to facilitate exchanges of information and lessons learned
within the region on ICAM as well as pull together regional expertise.

At the national level, steering committees/working groups or existing coastal zone units (e.g.: the Coastal
Zone Unit in Mauritius) will act as focal points. These focal points, led by the national executing agency,
will coordinate the activities in partnership with the SRCU and identify national teams to carry out
Components 1, 2, 3 and local teams to carry out component 4. Governmental agencies and representatives of
coastal user groups will be involved at all stages of the process through a representative Forum. At the site
level, a working group including local stakeholders, local and national government representatives will be
involved. The SRCU or the national focal point will be involved and facilitate the consultation process.
Representatives of the national level need to be represented in these sites working group to ensure a link
between processes developed at the site level and processes being developed at the national level.

The project will be carried out at the national and local level in the case of demonstration sites. However to
improve coordination, cost efficiency of capacity building, information dissemination and exchanges of
expertise and lessons learned within the region, it was felt that a regional dimension given by the SRCU
should be added.

---

9. Project Financing and Duration

The project will be funded for 5 years externally with in kind and cash help from participating countries.
Countries will be asked to take over the financing of the SRCU when external contributions come to an end
in order for the service provided by the SRCU carries on. Countries would provide in kind support to
maintain the SRCU in terms of logistics during the 5 years of the project. The grand total is estimated to be
11. 896 millions USD 1.66 of which would come as in kind co financing by participating governments.

The budget is tentative. It is based on the 8 countries participating at different levels. The budget will also
vary according to the number of constraints identified at the national level. The budget will need further
discussions.

---

TABLE 3: COMPONENT AND ACTIVITY FINANCING (Tentative)- Based on 8
participating countries at different level of intervention

External
Sources
National Government (s)
Total
of Funds

Cash
In-kind

Component 1: Constraints
340 000
180 000
520 000
assessment
Activity 1.1: ICAM status report
160 000
80 000
240 000
Activity 1.2 : Identification of
160 000
80 000
240 000
constraints
Activity 1.3 : review lessons learned
20 000
20 000
40 000
and studies of ICAM initiatives
Component 2: Reducing
880 000
220 000
1 100 000
constraints - Strategy design
Activity 2.1.: Complementing or
240 000
60 000
300 000
developing ICAM plans
Activity 2.2: Series of workshops
320 000
80 000
400 000
Activity 2.3: Agreement on way
320 000
80 000
400 000
forward
Component 3. Implementing
2 000 000
400 000
2 400 000
constraint reduction strategy
Activity 3.1: Support
2 000 000
400 000
2 400 000
implementation strategies at the
national level
Component 4: Demonstration sites
6 006 000
610 000
6 616 000
Activity 4.1. Confirm sites
6 000
10 000
16 000
Activity 4.2. Management plan and
6 000 000
600 000
6 600 000
start Implementation
Component 5: Information
600 000
160 000
760 000
dissemination and exchange of
expertise/lessons learned
Activity 5.1: Dissemination
200 000

200 000
Activity 5.2: Feed back of results in
100 000
100 000
200 000
information networks
Activity 5.3: tours and intranet
300 000
60 000
360 000
systems
Component 6: Project
410 000
90 000
500 000
Management
Activity 6.1: Set up of sub-regional
80 000
50 000
130 000
coordination unit (SRCU)
Activity 6.2: Set up or identification
80 000
40 000
120 000
of national units
Activity 6.3: Monitoring and
250 000

250 000
evaluation

Note: This budget is preliminary and has not undergone a full consultation process with the respective
countries. Therefore, does not indicate the actual financial commitment that would be provided by
participating countries once the project proposal and its components are finalised.

---

10. Monitoring Evaluation and Dissemination

Information dissemination: Information on the project results and progress, information on the exchanges of
best practices, lessons learned, up dates on the project progress will be disseminated through, peer-reviewed
publications, Information fed to existing databases and SRCU information network (if set up). Every year
presentation of results and progress to stakeholders in each participating countries (using oral presentation
and visual tools)

Monitoring and evaluation of project progress (see also logframe matrix):
· Quarterly reports of activities carried out produced by project manager endorsed by the national
focal points and stakeholders forums
· Involvement of stakeholders: yearly survey/ question answer sessions with stakeholders on the way
they feel their involvement is progressing, could be improved etc. by SRCU
· Yearly survey of government agencies on stakeholders involvement process and ways to improve it
by SRCU perception of their involvement
· Yearly appraisal of the public awareness campaigns, survey of stakeholders and evaluation of
progress on knowledge. Can be done by focal points.
· Monitoring of user conflicts by stakeholders forum
· Report number of people trained and interview (their perception of the training in relation to the task
they will have to carry out, what they feel they would need, this in consultation with the national
focal point).

Performance indicators of the project results: see Logframe Matrix.

---

11. Work Plan and Timetable
TABLE 4: TIMETABLE
Year
1 2 3 4 5
Quarter
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
Component 1: Constraints




















assessment
Activity 1.1: ICAM status report




















Activity 1.2 : Identification of




















constraints
Activity 1.3 : Review lessons learned




















and evaluation of ICAM initiatives
Component 2: Reducing constraints




















- Strategy design
Activity 2.1.: Complementing or




















developing ICAM plans
Activity 2.2: Series
of
workshops















Activity 2.3: Agreement on way




















forward
Component 3. Implementing




















constraint reduction strategy
Activity 3.1: Support implementation




















of these strategies at national level
Component
4:
Demonstration
sites









Activity 4.1. Confirm sites




















Activity 4.2. Management plan and




















start implement
Component 5: Information




















dissemination and exchange of
expertise/lessons learned
Activity 5.1: Dissemination
















Activity 5.2: Feed back of results in




















information network
Activity 5.3: Tours and intranet




















Component 6: Project management




















Activity 6.1: Set up of sub-regional




















coordination unit (SRCU)
Activity 6.2: Set up or identification of



















national focal units
Activity 6.3: Monitoring and




















evaluation

---

12. Logframe Matrix

2
Summary
Objectively verifiable
Means of Verification
Critical Assumptions

indicators
(Monitoring Focus)
and Risks



Overall goal of the intervention




- Improved and more coordinated resource use strategies in
- Satisfactory final reports received by year 5
- Long term commitment to
Improve coastal protection and the
the long term
- Peer review - publications, reports, manuals on
ICAM and erosion protection
sustainability of resource use by
- Coordination and management of coastal erosion protection
the process produced.
-Changes of priority with
supporting the development and
improved
- Implementation of ICAM carries on after
changes of government
implementation of ICAM policies in SSA
- Reduced resource based conflict
project ends in the region
- Poverty alleviation

Objectives




1. Report describing the status of ICAM implementation
1. By beginning year 2, ICAM status report
1. Assess the level of ICAM
and/or development in the participating countries done.
approved by national team/.focal points
implementation or development in

available.
participating countries



2. Constraints identified and described in a report
2. By the middle of year 2, constraints
2. Analyse and assess constraints to the

diagnosis report approved and reviewed by
development and or implementation

national focal points available.

3. Strategies defined to reduce constraints identified in the

3. Reduce local specific constraints
constraints diagnosis implemented. Mechanisms needed in
3. By year 5, report comparing constraints
preventing ICAM implementation at the
place for components of ICAM or nearly in place by year 5
identified and mechanisms being establishes,
national level and local levels

reviewed by national focal points available.

4. Improved coastal protection management in the sites.
4. By end year 5, report comparing coastal


erosion protection management in place at the
4. Demonstrate at selected sites that ICAM

beginning of implementation and at the end of
implementation contributes to improve
5. Improved and updated database of expertise in the region
the first phase of the project, reviewed by site
coastal protection
on ICAM and coastal erosion management. Information
working group and national focal points

dissemination improved.
available.
5. Improve and increase information and
5. Information and expertise fed into a new of
experience sharing within the region on
existing database. Peer reviewed publications.
ICAM and coastal erosion management.


Project Outcomes:






- Long term commitment to
1. Improved coordination and resource
1. 1. Decrease in conflicting measures
1. By end year 5. Final reports available
ICAM and erosion protection
management including improved
1.2. Decrease in number of stakeholders involved in
comparing the situation at the beginning of the
- Political context remains
management of coastal erosion protection
damaging/illegal activities
project (baseline studies) and at the end of the
stable in the participating
at the national level in the long term
1.3. Sustainable financial mechanisms in place
project.
countries

1.4. Sustainable stakeholders involvement mechanisms in


place


1.5. Increased public awareness on ICAM issues


1.6. Monitoring mechanisms in place


1.7. Reduced user based conflicts

---

2. Improved coastal erosion management
2.1.Increased local technical, institutional and legal capacity
2. By end year 5. Final reports available
at site level
at the site level
comparing the situation at the beginning of the

2.2. Improved coordination mechanisms
project (baseline studies) and at the end of the

2.3.Increased of stakeholders involvement
project.

2.4. Reduced number of resource based conflicts


2.5. Reduced number of conflicting legislations between


national and local level
3. By end year 5. Final reports available

2.6. Improved awareness material about coastal erosion issues comparing the situation at the beginning of the

3. Increase or stabilisation of the livelihood opportunities
project (baseline studies) and at the end of the
3. Contribution to poverty alleviation
basis at selected sites in the participating countries/
project.

Occupational structure


4. Information in databases and databases accessible at local,
4. By end year 5. Final report.
4. Increase information dissemination and
network of experts consolidated within the region

experience exchanges in the region




Project outputs







1. ICAM status report
1. By beginning year 2, ICAM status report underlining gaps
1. By beginning year 2, report reviewed and


in implementation available
approved by the national focal points.



2. by end month 3, year 2, diagnosis report on

2. Diagnosis of constraints on
2. Analysis and identification of constraints carried out by
the constraints available, reviewed by national

implementation or development of ICAM
national teams
focal points.

in countries participating to the project





3. 6 monthly progress report on ICAM plans

3. Workable ICAM plans
3. .By end year 2, ICAM plans completed
status reviewed by national focal points





4. Recommendation options and guidelines 4. On the basis of the diagnosis, strategies and
4. 1. By end month 1 year 3, workshop

to reduce identified constraints
recommendation options will be defined. By end year 2:
proceedings available and reviewed by national

4.1.. Strengthening of national and local
series of constraint themes workshops carried out and
focal points

institutional, legal and technical capacity
4.1 Legal, institutional and technical capacity assessed.
b. By mid, year 3 re port on strategies agreed

4.2.. Establishing coordinating bodies
Strategies on how to tackle the lack of capacity defined
upon available and reviewed by national focal

4.3. Involving stakeholders in ICAM
4.2. Existing coordinating mechanisms and bodies assessed.
points.and stakeholder "forums"

4.4. Increasing public awareness
Strategies on establishing coordinating mechanisms in the


4.5. Monitoring and follow up
participating countries defined. 4.3.a. Stakeholders analysis



done



b Stakeholders involvement status assessed. Strategies to

- Consensus between

improve involvement defined for participating countries.

government agencies at

4.4. Stakeholders awareness of ICAM issues, particularly on

national and local level and

coastal erosion assessed. Strategies to improve awareness in

stakeholders is attainable

participating countries defined.



4.5. Monitoring procedures assessed and strategies to

- Stakeholder consultation and

improve or establish them defined.

empowerment s enabled at the

4.6.a Assessments of possible financing mechanisms

national levels

b, Agreement on financial mechanisms achieved at the



national and local level

---

5. On a needs basis
5.1. - Report on number of personnel trained


5.1.a By end of year 4 training courses organised at site
reviewed by national focal points available


level, national or regional levels
- By end year 5 adequately trained


b. Trained personnel in ICAM related subjects present at sites personnel in position.

5. On a needs basis at the national and site
and at national level


levels (where appropriate)
c. Access for the coordinating body to technical expertise
5.2.- Yearly progress report on establishment of

5.1.Strengthened national and local
5.2a . By end of year 5 Memorandums of understanding
coordination mechanisms and bodies reviewed

institutional, legal and technical capacity
between institutions involved in ICAM present at national
by national focal points and site working group


and site levels
-By end year 5: coordinating mechanisms


b. By end of year 5 cross sectoral coordinating bodies in
in operation

5.2. Coordinating bodies
place and empowered (national)



c. By end of year 5 Presence of legal tools empowering the



coordinating body (national)
5..3. -.By end year 5 report on consultation



mechanisms in place in participating countries


4.3a. Consultative mechanisms in place (national and site
reviewed by national focal points available and


levels)
site working group.


b. Representation of all stakeholders in the decision making
- Results of yearly survey of government


process (site level)
agencies on stakeholders' involvement available

c. Information dissemination mechanisms to stakeholders
- Results of yearly stakeholders' survey on


present
their involvement in ICAM process available

5.3. Effective involvement of stakeholders
d. By year 5. Evolution in stakeholders' perception on their
- Report describing feed back mechanisms

in ICAM
involvement in the ICAM decision making process
status to the stakeholders reviewed by national


(stakeholders perception surveys).
focal points and stakeholders' forum



5.4. - By end year 5 status report on the changes

5.4.a..Materials and dissemination improved by year 5
in materials and dissemination reviewed by


b. By year 5 Improvement of stakeholders awareness of
national focal points available and stakeholder


ICAM issues after intervention compared to baseline survey
forum


done before information at sites (awareness surveys)
- Results of yearly stakeholders' awareness


c. Evaluation of effectiveness of mechanisms: practicability, surveys available (sites)

5.4. Increased public awareness
delays between decision and actions, enforcement capacity, 5.5. - By end year 5 report on monitoring


legal tools used and efficiency-look at the numbers of mechanisms status reviewed by national focal


infractions to IMCAM, the number processed, the perception points available and site working group


of the stakeholders on the enforcement. (national and site - By end year 5 some stakeholders


levels)
participate in the monitoring process (at sites)



- By end year 5 information and results


5.5.a. By year 5 Monitoring mechanisms in place (national
fed into information existing or established


and site levels)
information management system


b. By end of year 5 project information management system



in place (at national level)
5. 6. - By end year 5 report on financial options


analysis reviewed by national focal points



available and site working groups


5.6. a. By end year 5 options financial options identified
- By end year 1 written financial commitment

involving different user groups. (national and site)
from participating countries

5.5. Monitoring and follow up components
b. By end year 1 participating countries financial commitment 6. - By end year 5 results of process fed into

of ICAM process to be set up
for ICAM expressed
appropriate databases and available on a

---

regional, national and local basis


6.a. By end year 2 information management systems relevant


to ICAM in the region identified


b. By end month 6 existing databases in the region relevant to


ICAM identified

5.6. Sustainable financial mechanisms
By end year 5 results, case studies disseminated to


appropriate databases and available at the SRCU.





6. Information management system


Project components (C)/ activities



(A)




Activities carried out (refer to timeline and budget)
Quarterly activity reports to adapt project
Reports available and
C1. Constraints identification
management.
reviewed
A1.1. Background study on all


components of ICAM
A1.2. Identification of constraints/fact
finding missions on all components of
ICAM
A1.3. Review lessons learned and
previous evaluations of ICAM
initiatives

C2 Reducing constraints
A2.1 Complementing or developing
ICAM plans
A2.2 series of workshops
A2.3. Agreement on way forward

C3. Implementing constraint
reduction strategy
A 3.1: Support implementation of
these strategies at national level

Component 4: Demonstration sites
A 4.1. Confirm sites
A 4.2. Management plan and start
implement

---

C5: Information dissemination and
exchange of expertise/lessons
learned
A5.1 Dissemination of proceedings
A5.2 Feed back results in existing
databases
A5.3 Tours and intranet for pilot sites

C6: Set up management and
coordinating bodies
A6.1. Set up SRCU
A6.2. Identification national focal
points/composition
A 6.3. Monitoring and evaluation

---

ANNEX 1: Brief ICAM status (draft).

Country Definition
of Implementation of plan:
Follow up
Capacity
Public
Stakeholders
plan
- Coordinating body
and
building
awareness
involvement
- Legal, technical,
monitoring
institutional tools
- Implementation
objectives of plan
C.I.
Draft plan
-coordination of bodies on
- plan needs
-need more
Some through
?
going
to be revised
NGOs
-some
Ghana






Gambia
developed

Some
Needs
Some Some
with
Creation of a Coastal Zone
disposition
Recruitment
indications of
working Group
of personnel
actions to be
Need more capacity
need to be
taken by
Started
trained
respective
Departments
and sectors
Kenya
- Strategy and
- Coastal Management
Some. Mostly
Some
Some. Fact
Kenya Marine
AP for Nyali-
Steering Committee
because
training.
sheets and
Forum.
Bamburi-
operational. With
involvement
Need more
Beach Clean
Mechanism to
Shanzu,
Secretariat based in CDA.
of
institutional
ups..Marine
involve all types
others are
- Institutional and technical
stakeholders.
capacity.
Day etc.
of coastal user
following.
capacity in lead agencies
groups.
(NEMA, CDA, KWS,
The CMSG also
KMFRI). Legal capacity in
brings many govt.
Env. Mngt. Act (1999)
Dept and NGOs
- Activities to implement
together.
specific plan components
with USAID/CRC-URI
(public awareness,
demonstration sites,
capacity building)
Mauritius





Moz.
-
Inter-institutional
Limited
Yes
some
in
Yes in some areas
committee established and
particular areas
Centre for Sustainable
Development in Coastal
Zone established
- Yes
- Yes working on it
Nigeria
Incomplete
- Coordinating body about
No Some
Very
low
Low
to be created
- Some capacity
- No implementation
Senegal
No -
No
No No
No -little
Seych.






S.A.






Tanzania
- Draft
- Co-ordinating Body has
Monitoring
Some but
In progress.
- From planning
National ICM
been created ­ Tanzania
Plan in all
need more
Need more
to implementation
Strategy
ICM Office (TICMO)
coastal
work.
work.
of ICM plans.
(NICMS) and
should be operational in
districts.
Strength of TZ.
Action Plan to July 2002.
Monitoring
be
- Working towards
component in
implemented
implementation of the
NICMS and
July 2002.
Strategy and action Plan
AP.
has started in 3 Pilot
Coastal Districts.
- 7 out of 13 of Tanz.
Coastal districts have for
more than 5 years ICM
field based programs.
Source: country coordinators.

---