Project Proposals on Sustainable Use of Living Resources
STRENGTHENING MANAGEMENT AND MONITORING, CONTROL AND SURVEILLANCE (MCS)
CAPACITY OF FISHERIES MANAGEMENT ORGANISATIONS IN SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA
1. IDENTIFIERS
Project Number: RES-4
Project Title:
Strengthening management and monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS)
capacity of fisheries management organisations in sub-Saharan Africa
Requesting Countries: Côte d'Ivoire, The Gambia, Ghana, Kenya, Mauritius, Mozambique, Nigeria,
South Africa, Senegal, and Tanzania
Requesting National
Organization (s): Côte d'Ivoire: Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources; Ministry of
Higher Education and Scientific Research
The Gambia: Department of State for Fisheries, Natural Resources and the
Environment
Ghana: Ministry of Environment and Science; Ministry of Food and
Agriculture
Kenya: Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
Mauritius: Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Economic Development
Mozambique: Ministry of Fisheries
Nigeria: Federal Ministry of Environment
Senegal: Ministry of Environment
South Africa: Department of Environmental Affairs & Tourism
Tanzania: Division of Fisheries
Executing Agencies:
Côte d'Ivoire: Direction de l'Aquaculture et des Pêches
The Gambia: National Environment Agency, Department of Parks and
Wildlife Management
Ghana: Marine Fisheries Research Division, Directorate of Fisheries
Kenya: Fisheries Department
Mauritius: Ministry of Fisheries
Mozambique: National Directorate for Fisheries Administration / Ministry of
Fisheries
Nigeria: Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Federal Department of Fisheries,
Federal Ministry of Environment, Nigerian Institute of Oceanography and
Marine Research (NIOMR)
Senegal: Direction des Pêches (DOPM), Centre de Récherche
Océanographique (CRODT)
South Africa: Department of Environmental Affairs & Tourism (DEAT),
Coastal Provincial Departments
Tanzania: Division of Fisheries, Dar es Salaam, Division of Fisheries,
Zanzibar
Required National Partners:
Côte d'Ivoire: Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research, Ministry of Equipment
Ghana: Marine Fisheries Research Division, Department of Oceanography and Fisheries (University
of Ghana)
Kenya: National Environment Management Authority, Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute
(KMFRI),
Mauritius: Ministry of Tourism, AHRM and other NGOs
Mozambique: Institute for Fisheries Research (IIP0, Institute for the Development of Small Scale
Fisheries (IDPPE), Universidade Eduardo Monlane (UEM)
South Africa: Department of Defence (Navy), Department of Safety and Security (Water Wing Unit),
Institute for Maritime Technology (IMT)
Nigeria: Federal Ministry of Environment, Niger Delta Development Authority Oil Producers
Section
Senegal: Ministry of Environment and Classified Establishments
Tanzania: University of Dar es Salaam
Ministry of Defence and Ministry of Foreign Affairs of each of the requesting countries
Priority Issue Addressed:
GIWA issue(s): Overexploitation of fisheries and other living
resources
Regional Scope:
Côte d'Ivoire, Ghana, The Gambia, Kenya, Mauritius, Mozambique,
Nigeria, Senegal, South Africa and Tanzania
Project Location:
Coastal and marine areas in all participating countries
Project Duration:
Four (4) years
Working Group
of the African Process
Sustainable Use of Living Resources
2. SUMMARY:
The focus of this project is addressing overexploitation of fishery resources in Sub-Saharan Africa
(SSA) through effective monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS) of fishing operations. The
capacity of the requesting countries to assess stocks of fishery resources in their maritime waters and
to address issues of illegal, unregulated and unreported (IUU) catches and to manage marine fisheries
is addressed. The emphasis is on regional or sub-regional approaches to enforcing fisheries regulations
through a co-ordinated approach of monitoring, control and surveillance.
The Project aims at facilitating the development of mechanisms for improved fisheries monitoring,
control and surveillance (MCS) as a basis for, and complementary to, improved management of
transboundary fish stocks in SSA, some of which are of extremely high value. The focal problem is a
lack of efficient and effective MCS of fishing activities, stemming from lack of institutional capacity
to develop and operate efficient MCS systems. This lack of capacity makes it difficult to detect illegal
fishing activities (e.g. poaching, non-compliance with fishery regulations) and to enforce measures for
the proper environmental and fish stock conservation.
The project will assist the requesting countries to build national MCS capabilities and legal structure
in support of improved fisheries management. The project will also assist the participating states
towards fulfilment of national and international obligations resulting from the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and subsidiary international legal instruments. In this
regard, the project will assist in the adoption of management obligations of signatories to these UN
laws and agreements, including the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, including countries
where these have yet to be adopted.
The Project Objective is to (a) enhance national capabilities for efficient, cost-effective and
sustainable fisheries and environmental monitoring; and (b) establish mechanisms for effective
regional co-operation in fisheries and environmental monitoring.
Project activities will include regional surveys of fishery resources, national and regional training of
fisheries trainers, inspectors, observers and managers; long-term and short-term technical assistance;
workshops at regional and national levels; planning and cost control of MCS activities and monitoring
of operational effectiveness. The project will provide support for more effective and regionally
harmonised fisheries legislation on MCS and improved regional communication with a view to
enhanced control of shared stocks and international fisheries. New technologies for MCS (such as
vessel monitoring/ tracking systems) will be employed in addition to placement of observers and
inspectors aboard as many industrial-fishing vessels as possible.
Monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS) activities are to be undertaken at all levels starting from
enforcement of present national fisheries laws and regulations as applied to indigenous artisanal
fisheries to the control of national and international industrial fishing fleets operating within the
Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of the requesting countries and within the sub-region.
The results of the project will include a more efficient and cost effective national MCS capacity as a
basis for the creation of regional co-operation on the management of common stocks and fisheries.
Approaches to the monitoring and control of activities of international fishing vessels will be
harmonised. National fisheries legislation will be strengthened so as to better provide for MCS,
fisheries management and conservation. Modern standards such as the principles enshrined in the FAO
Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries will be incorporated. Marine environmental protection will
be improved and regional fisheries co-operation, communication and training enhanced.
Several benefits are expected from strengthening management, regulation and monitoring of natural
resources like fisheries through this project. Measurable benefits, which could be realised within a
decade or so and could, in part, be attributed to the project, include recovery of fish stocks that would
ensure sustainability of fisheries and avoidance (or minimisation) of conflicts between various sectors
of the fishing industry.
3. COSTS AND FINANCING (MILLION US $)1
International & bilateral sources:
Subtotal
international
financing
:
18.470
Co-financing:
Governments in cash & kind
: 8.108
Subtotal
Co-financing
:
8.108
Total
Project
Cost:
:
26.578
4. GOVERNMENT ENDORSEMENT (S)
Côte d'Ivoire: Minister, Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources
Ghana: Professor Dominic Fobih, Minister of Environment and Science; Ishmael Ashitey, Minister of
State for Fisheries
Kenya: The Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
Mauritius: Ministry of Economic Development
Mozambique: Ministry for Co-ordination of Environmental Affairs
South Africa: Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism
Nigeria: Chief (Dr) I. Okopido, Minister of Environment (State)
Senegal: Ministry of Environment
Tanzania: Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Natural Resources & Tourism
5. GOVERNMENT FOCAL POINT(S)
Côte d'Ivoire: Direction des Pêches; Centre de Recherches Océanologiques
Gambia: Department of Parks and Wildlife Management
Ghana: Professor Dominic K. Fobih, Minister of Environment and Science
1 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.
Kenya: Director: Fisheries Department
Mauritius: Ministry of Fisheries, Ministry of Environment
Mozambique: Mrs. Lidia Abiba, National Director of Fisheries Administration
Nigeria:
Dr. Solarin, Director of Federal Fisheries Department, Abuja
Senegal: Fatima Dia Toure, Direction de l'Environment et des Etablissements Classés
South Africa: Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism
Tanzania: The Director, Institute of Marine Sciences
6. AFRICAN PROCESS WORKING GROUP FOCAL POINTS
Co-ordinator and experts of the Sustainable Use of Living Resources Working Group on the
Programme of Interventions of the Partnership Conference of the African Process were:
Co-ordinator: Dr Barry Clark, Zoology Department, University of Cape Town, South Africa
Experts:
Mr Jacob Ochiewo, Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute, Kenya
Dr Kwame Koranteng, Marine Fisheries Research Division, Ministry of Food and
Agriculture, Ghana
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
1. Background & Justification
Throughout sub-Saharan Africa, resources in coastal waters are overexploited or are under severe
stress from exploitation. It is obvious that the demand of people living in coastal areas in Africa
exceeds the capacity of available resources.
Overexploitation of living resources was identified by virtually all of the eleven countries that
participated in the first phase of the African Process as being amongst the top five GIWA issues in
terms of their impacts on the coastal zone and the livelihood of coastal communities. In Kenya,
overexploitation was identified as a contributing factor in the impact of prawn trawling in the Malindi-
Ungwana Bay. A review of existing policies and regulations governing trawling was envisaged as one
of the activities necessary to address the problem. For Mozambique, a proposal was put forward to
improve management capacity to address over-fishing. In Ghana, the country report indicated that the
collapse of a fishery resource like the sardinella would not only bring economic hardships but would
also dislocate important socio-cultural activities such as annual festivals of many of the ethnic groups
which derive their successes largely from incomes generated during the peak sardinella season.
Fishing is an important economic activity that provides livelihood for many coastal communities in the
requesting countries. There are both artisanal and industrial fisheries with the former contributing over
60% of landings in many of the countries, especially in West Africa. The multiplicity of gears in the
artisanal fisheries and the sophistication of certain industrial fishing vessels often result in conflicts
between the sectors and overexploitation of the fishery resources.
The issue of loss of biodiversity or changes in species assemblage structure as a result of
overexploitation is also highlighted in some of the country reports. However, given the absence of any
data on the impact of modification of ecosystems on biodiversity and given the difficulties involved in
valuing the existence and option values, it is not possible to assess the socio-economic impact of loss
of biodiversity.
The underlying cause of over-exploitation of fishery resources, especially by artisanal fishers, is
poverty. For industrial fisheries, overcapitalisation of the fishing industry is the primary cause of
overexploitation. It is common practice for excess capacity in fisheries of developed countries to be
directed to developing countries. Poaching of fishery resources by unlicensed vessels (usually from
countries outside SSA) is widespread as a result of lack of operational or effective Monitoring Control
and Surveillance.
In many of the SSA countries, fishing licence fees are low and not commensurate with the value of the
catches. This means that where industrial (especially foreign-flag) fishing fleets operate in the fishery,
direct benefits to the coastal States is usually minimal and consequently governments do not have
sufficient money to put management measures in place to regulate the fisheries.
To address over-fishing, effective monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS) of fishing operations at
several levels is imperative. MCS is the mechanism for implementation of agreed policies, plan or
strategies for fisheries management. It is an integral and key component for the implementation of
fisheries management plans.
Fish do not know or respect national boundaries hence management of the fishery resources and
control of exploitation is best done on sub-regional basis. For this reason, the Food and Agriculture
Organization (FAO) of the United Nations has statistical regions within which fish stocks are shared
by the countries. For example, the western Gulf of Guinea area (FAO Statistical Division 34.3.4)
made up of Côte d'Ivoire, Ghana, Togo and Benin is one such sub-region that has a number of fish
stocks shared by the four countries, especially of pelagic fish species.
The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible
Fisheries enjoin neighbouring States to cooperate and collaborate efforts in the management of the
resources that they all exploit. MCS is an expensive venture and collaboration between States in this
management measure ensures efficiency of resource use and minimises costs of operations.
2.
Objective & Expected Results
The overall objective of this project is to assist the requesting countries to build or strengthen their
capacity to manage living marine resources, especially fisheries, through the preparation and
implementation of fisheries management plans and enhanced monitoring, control and surveillance
activities. The immediate objective of the project is to facilitate the development of mechanisms for
improved fisheries monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS) as a basis for, and complementary to,
improved management of transboundary fish stocks in Sub-Saharan Africa.
The project would facilitate the introduction of a vessel monitoring system (VMS) at national and sub-
regional levels and the compilation of a sub-regional register of fishing vessels. It is expected that
these activities would lead to stock recovery, sanity in exploitation, avoidance of conflicts and control
of illegal, unreported and unregulated catches.
The MCS would be a combination of sea-borne patrols and inspection, shore-based inspection and
possibly aerial surveillance. This will result in an integrated means of monitoring licensed fishing
vessels, enforcing compliance of fisheries laws and regulations and providing deterrence against
poaching and other illegal and unregulated fishing activities.
Each licensed fishing vessel will be equipped with a transponder that will transmit information about
its coordinates at any time to a control centre to be manned by fisheries enforcement agents and
military personnel). The vessel would also be fitted with a catch-reporting device that is now required
to meet regulatory reporting requirements within the VMS. Fisheries patrol vessels and aircrafts, to be
equipped with interrogator devices, will be put in operation to monitor activities of the licensed vessels
and intercept and arrest unlicensed ones. It is anticipated here that the vessels will be provided by the
Navy and the aircraft by the Air Force of each participating country wherever possible. Consequently,
only operational costs of these crafts have been accounted for in costing the project. Where such
vessels or aircrafts are not available, it is anticipated that neighbouring states could assist through a
sub-regional collaborative arrangement whereby an aircraft from one country would also carry out
fisheries surveillance activities in the neighbouring country.
Fisheries inspectors and observers will board vessels on fishing expeditions, inspect vessels in port
and police designated areas of ecological importance. The expected output of this combined operation
is the provision of a system to implement MCS, resources management and conservation measures.
3.
Project Components/Activities
The project would have the following five components with a number of activities:
Component 1: Assessment of Stocks of Fishery Resources within the Jurisdiction of the
Requesting Countries
Activity 1.1: Undertake annual sub-regional surveys of fishery resources and establish optimum
exploitation levels
Activity 1.2: Preparation and implementation of national and sub-regional fisheries management
plans and annual reviews
Activity 1.3: Exchange of information amongst the countries to assess regional stocks and
trends
Component 2: Development of Sustainable Fisheries Management Systems
Activity 2.1: Review of national laws and regulations on fisheries management and MCS to
conform to FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries
Activity 2.2: Preparation of sub-regional guidelines for licensing and control of fishing vessels
and access agreements
Activity 2.3: Capacity building activities (including training) for fisheries authorities to adapt
the guidelines to national practices and regulations
Component 3: Strengthening Institutional Framework for Monitoring, Control and Surveillance
of Fishing Operations and Exploitation
Activity 3.1: Review of systems and assessment of needs for Monitoring, Control and
Surveillance (MCS) in the project countries
Activity 3.2: Formation of national MCS operational committees and regional/sub-regional
consultative bodies
Activity 3.3: Compilation/revision/updating of national register of licensed fishing vessels and
fishing companies
Activity 3.4: Preparation of composite sub-regional register of licensed fishing vessels
Activity 3.5: Establishment of MCS fund (national)
Activity 3.6: Upward revision of fishing licence fees
Activity 3.7: Annual review meetings of sub-regional coordinating committee
Component 4: Capacity Building for MCS Activities
Activity 4.1: Identification of appropriate Vessel Monitoring Systems (VMS) at country level
with linkages between base stations in the sub-regional via the Internet.
Activity 4.2: Acquisition and installation of VMS hardware and software (including catch
reporting device), training of operatives and support for 4 years
Activity 4.3: Recruitment and training of fisheries inspectors and observers
Activity 4.4: Acquisition of other logistics (vehicles, computers, communication equipment,
etc)
Activity 4.5: Field operations of Fisheries Observers and Inspectors
Component 5: Deployment of Fisheries Patrol Vessels and Surveillance Aircrafts
Activity 5.1: Consultation with national navy, air force, and other law enforcement agencies
Activity 5.2: Equipping surveillance (military) vessels and aircrafts with interrogators
Activity 5.3: Sea and aerial field operations
4.
Linkages to Other National or Regional Activities / Transboundary Aspects
Some countries in the project area have had projects in the past that bear some resemblance to this
project. For example Ghana secured a loan from the World Bank to implement a Fisheries Sub-Sector
Capacity Building project that included some aspects of MCS. Nigeria utilized a similar facility for a
dedicated MCS project. Some countries in the SADC region (e.g. South Africa, Mozambique and
Namibia) have recently acquired vessel-monitoring systems of the type envisaged in this proposal.
The project would have links with the Project RES-1: "Assessment and mitigation of the ecological
and socio-economic impacts of destructive fishing practices in Sub-Saharan Africa" (especially in the
area of provision of alternative sustainable livelihoods to mitigate the social cost of enforcing fisheries
laws and implementing fisheries management measures.
The project would also have links with a number of ongoing or planned initiatives in the participating
countries, especially with the Benguela Current Large Marine Ecosystem (BCLME) Initiative (South
Africa), the Western Indian Ocean Large Marine Ecosystem (WIOLME) Initiative (South Africa,
Mozambique, Kenya and Tanzania), the Guinea Current Large Marine Ecosystem project (Côte
d'Ivoire, Ghana, Nigeria) and the Canary Current Large Marine Ecosystem project (The Gambia and
Senegal). Others are the Marine and Coastal Programme of IUCN East Africa Region and the IUCN
project on "Advancing the understanding and management of small-scale fisheries".
Experiences gained in some of these projects and the data collected would be beneficial in the
direction of implementation of this project. The project can also benefit from capacities built through
the projects mentioned above and critical analysis of some of the results can pass as pilot study for this
project.
5. Demonstrative
Value
&
Replicability
Almost all coastal areas in west and east Africa are characterised by overexploited fisheries. Poaching
of fishery resources by unlicensed vessels is widespread as a result of non-existent or weak fishery
management policies and lack of operational MCS. This project will address these issues to ensure that
fishery resources are rationally exploited and the benefits to coastal states granting access to foreign
fishing fleets will be maximised.
Because of the widespread nature of overexploitation of fishery resources, this project can be
replicated in every country in sub-Saharan Africa.
6.
Risks and Sustainability
A project of this nature does not lend itself to a full conventional economic evaluation. As an
institution-strengthening project, direct correlation between quantifiable benefits and project activities
cannot be established. However, measurable benefits, which could be realised within a decade or so
and could, in part, be attributed to the project, include recovery of fishery resources. A second type of
benefits would be of a socio-cultural nature. The collapse of artisanal fisheries, which account for
over 60% of fish catches in the project area, would have devastating effect on the socio-economic
fabric in coastal communities where alternative employment possibilities are rather limited.
The MCS activities would introduce sanity and controls in exploitation that would ensure
sustainability of a number of fisheries in the project area. A fishing licence fee in the amount of at
least 5% of the value of catch would generate substantial incomes to the requesting countries. Fines
that would be imposed as a result of infractions of the law, could also contribute significantly to
project cost recovery. However, this is an unreliable source of revenue and is likely to shrink with
sensible fisheries management by the licensing and management authorities and compliance on the
part of fishers.
The following risks are likely to affect the project and undermine the project objectives:
-
Failure by governments to provide political support for the necessary measures including
implementation of fisheries management plans and to apply appropriate sanctions on
offending fishing vessels and companies.
-
Lack of motivation of staff of the implementing agencies, especially the fisheries
inspectors; this could lead to bribery and corruption on the part of the inspectors.
-
Non-release of counterpart funding by governments of the participating countries.
-
Non-availability of vessels and aircraft from the Navy and Air Force respectively of the
participating countries.
-
A country without an operational surveillance aircraft or vessel may not feel comfortable
to allow such vessel or aircraft from a neighbouring country to operate in its waters.
In addition, increasing fishing licence could also be a risk in itself as fishermen are likely to contest
such increases, at least initially. The project will not achieve its set objectives if:
-
activities at the national and regional levels are not co-ordinated with all participants; and
-
there is no broad agreement on the respective roles and responsibilities of service
providers.
The level of risks associated with the proposed project is considered "acceptable" in the context of the
clear need to support this valuable renewable natural resource in Sub-Saharan Africa and the stated
commitment to this process. A number of measures have been incorporated into the project design to
mitigate these risks where possible:
-
The objectives of the project are clear and endorsed by the requesting countries as realistic
in the project time frame.
-
The use of pilot phase during implementation will allow a flexible approach to project
management;
-
An emphasis on both internal and external monitoring should reduce the risk of failure.
To assist in the assessment of risk, a table of risks and assumptions are identified in the Logical
Framework. From this it is clear that the project should be considered to be "low " risk.. It is
expected that the national governments and other parties (donors, private sector, NGOs) will ensure
that their participating institutions are provided with adequate budgetary means in the future to
maintain the activities and approaches established through project support.
7.
Stakeholder Participation
The stakeholders in this project are fishers, fisheries managers and administrators, fisheries and
oceanographic research institutes, CBOs and NGOs. The research institutes will undertake scientific
assessment of the resources and lead in the preparation of fisheries management plans.
The various Fisheries Departments and relevant ministries will undertake the review of laws and
regulations, control licensing and direct monitoring, control and surveillance activities. The Ministry
of Foreign affairs in each country will facilitate international linkages within the sub-region. NGOs
and CBOs will facilitate organisation of user groups and will be included in national and sub-regional
steering committees.
8.
Project Management & Implementation Arrangements
It is envisaged that this project would have a number of sub-regional nodes, e.g. Senegal to Guinea,
Côte d'Ivoire to Benin, Nigeria to Gabon, Angola to South Africa (on the Atlantic side of Africa),
Mozambique to Kenya and the Island States (on the Indian Ocean side). All countries within each
sub-region would benefit from participating in the project. The project nodes on the Atlantic side
would be under the umbrella of the Abidjan Convention and the Indian Ocean nodes would be under
the Nairobi Convention. Coordination roles could be assigned to the Regional Co-ordination Unit of
each Convention.
In each country, the project would have a project co-ordinator, a project steering committee and an
implementing/executing agency as indicated under Project Identifiers. The steering committee will be
a cross-sectoral body and would include persons from the Ministries of Environment, Foreign Affairs,
Defence, Agriculture, civil society and stakeholders.
At the sub-regional level, a committee made up of representatives from the various project countries
will ensure parallel implementation, co-ordination and evaluation. Regular (annual) consultation of
the regional committee will be essential.
Activity centres will need to be identified in the project area. For assessment of resources, institutes
like CRO in Abidjan, MFRD in Ghana and NIOMR in Nigeria (for countries in west Africa) and
Institute of Marine Sciences in Tanzania, KEMFRI in Kenya (for east Africa) may be considered.
Also organisations like the Western Indian Ocean Marine Science Association and OAU-STRC can
play important roles in the project.
Initially, the following skills and expertise will be required for successful implementation of the
project: marine and fisheries scientists (including stock assessment experts), resource economists,
MCS experts, maritime lawyers, and fisheries administrators. Persons with such expertise are
available in some of the countries in the project area. Also required is paramilitary training for
fisheries inspectors and observers. For the design of fishery management plans, review and
harmonisation of laws and regulations, and technical aspects of designing and setting up MCS
operations, it may be essential to contract consultants from both within and outside the project area.
9.
Project Financing & Duration
This project is to be implemented over a four-year period with the various components and activities
being carried out in parallel and/or in sequence.
In Table 1, each activity is costed separately although some activities will be implemented jointly and
by the same experts. For this reason, no costs have been allocated to some activities. The operational
cost of each patrol vessel, estimated at US$300,000 annually, will depend on the size of vessel which
could differ from country to country. For the air-borne surveillance, an estimated cost of US$600 per
hour of flying has been used although the actual cost using a military aircraft could be lower than this.
For the research vessels, it may be essential initially to charter from countries that already have
vessels. In the long term, the African Union (ex- Organization of African Unity) may look for funding
to purchase a vessel that could be used for fisheries surveys throughout SSA. Alternatively, sub-
regional political bodies could acquire research vessels for fisheries and oceanographic work in their
coverage areas. Acquisitions of such vessels have not been considered in the costing of this project.
Funding for the project would be from both external and internal sources both in cash and in kind. Co-
financing by project countries could be in the form of secondment of paid staff of the relevant
institutions, provision of office accommodation and direct cash contributions. External financing
would be sought from IFIs donors and development agencies and partners.
Table 1: Component & Activity Financing2
External Source of Funds
National Government
Total
Source
1 Source
2 Source
3 Cash
In-kind
Component 1
2,500
Activity
1.1
1,600
800 2,400
Activity
1.2
40
40
20 100
Activity 1.3
Component 2
203
Activity
2.1 58
25
83
Activity
2.2
-
Activity 2.3
80
20
20
120
Component 3
212
Activity
3.1
34
10
44
Activity
3.2
12
10
22
Activity
3.3
-
Activity
3.4
10
10
20
Activity
3.5
-
Activity
3.6
-
Activity
3.7
86
40
126
Component 4
17,458
Activity
4.1
5
3 8
Activity
4.2 11,250
5,000
16,250
Activity
4.3 500
300
800
Activity
4.4 300
100
400
Activity 4.53
-
1 Component 5
6,205
Activity
5.1
10
10
Activity
5.2 495
200
695
Activity
5.3 4,000
1,500
5,500
Total 16,870
1,600
60
8,048 26,578
Note: 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.
10. Monitoring, Evaluation & Dissemination
Monitoring and evaluation would take many forms. Firstly, this would be through half-yearly
implementation support missions of the IFI or donor agencies. The World Bank, for example, has
such monitoring and evaluation mechanism. The team for the implementation assistance missions
would include both international and national experts and stakeholders. It would be necessary also to
institute review meetings of the project steering committee at national and sub-regional levels. Sub-
2 All figures are in 1,000 US$. External Source 2 has been identified as NORAD
3 Cost included in Activity 4.3
regional review meetings could be bi-annual or annual. Internally, regular consultation with
stakeholders would be carried out as project activities.
Regular auditing by external auditors would be essential and would be based on established financial
and administrative regulations of the project and in line with the rules and regulations of sponsoring
IFIs. Project co-ordinators would be expected to produce project progress reports that would include
project financing and disbursement.
Specific measurable indicators would be established for each component of the project. For MCS
activities, for example, the indicators would include number of surveillance flights made, number of
sea-borne patrols completed, number of arrests made and prosecutions completed, etc. For fisheries
management, one could consider number of surveys conducted, stakeholders' exposure to and
understanding of the fisheries management plans and compliance of requirements of such plans and
fisheries laws generally.
Table 2: Work Plan and Timetable
1.1
Year
1 2 3 4
1.2
Quarter
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
Component 1
Activity
1.1
Activity
1.2
Activity 1.3
Component 2
Activity
2.1
Activity
2.2
Component 3
Activity
3.1
Activity
3.2
Activity 3.3
Activity 3.4
Activity 3.5
Activity 3.6
Activity
3.7
Component 4
Activity 4.1
Activity 4.2
Activity 4.3
Activity 4.4
Activity 4.5
2 Component 5
Activity 5.1
Activity 5.2
Activity 5.3
ANNEX 1: LOG FRAME
Summary
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Means of Verification (Monitoring Focus)
3 Critical Assumptions
Overall Goal of the
i.
Increase in the catch per unit
i.
Stock assessment and fishery
Political and financial commitments of
Intervention: To address
effort (CPUE)
statistics reports
governments
overexploitation of fishery
ii.
Increase in mean size of fish
ii. Assessment reports, observations and
resources in Sub-Saharan Africa
landed
Interviews of operators
through management and
iii. Arbitration reports and interviews
effective fisheries monitoring,
iii.
Decrease in conflicts in the
control and surveillance (MCS)
industry
Objective of project
i.
Fish stocks assessed and
i.
Reports of stock assessment surveys
Availability of funds; Political
Fishery Management Plans produced
undertaken and Management Plans
commitment of governments in the sub-
region
ii.
National MCS systems
ii. Reports on installation and operation
established and operational in
of national MCS systems
requesting countries
iii. Reports of sub-regional MCS meetings
iii.
Cooperation in MCS
increased in all sub-regions covered by
the project
Component 1: Assessment of
i.
Stock biomass of fishery
i.
Scientific reports of stock assessment
Availability of research vessel and funds;
Stocks of Fishery Resources
resources estimated, and Total
surveys
Governments will grant permission for
within the Jurisdiction of the
Allowable Catch established for
foreign research vessels to work in their
Requesting Countries
various fisheries
territorial waters; Political commitment
ii. Reports on Management Plans and
of governments; cooperation of fishing
ii.
National and sub-regional
Legislative Instruments backing the
operators
Fishery Management Plans prepared
Plan
and implemented
iii. MCS Reports; Interviews of operators
iii.
Reduction in incidence of
irresponsible fishing practices
Summary
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Means of Verification (Monitoring Focus)
4 Critical Assumptions
Component 2: Development of
i.
Reports of reviews and
i.
Published Reports
Sustainable Fisheries
revisions of fisheries laws and
Management Systems
regulations
ii.
Report on guidelines for
ii.
Regional Guidelines for
licensing of fishing vessels
licensing of fishing vessels in place
Component 3: Strengthening
i.
Reports of review of national i.
Reports of review of
Commitment of Governments and
institutional framework for
MCS systems
national MCS systems
cooperation of operators
Monitoring, Control and
ii.
National needs for MCS
ii.
Reports of national
Surveillance of fishing operations
operations identified
needs assessments for MCS operations
and exploitation
iii.
National MCS committees
iii.
Reports of national
and sub-regional consultative bodies
MCS committees and sub-regional
established and operational
consultative bodies
iv.
Baseline information on
licensed fishing companies and
iv.
Registers of national
vessels at national and sub-regional
and sub-regional licensed fishing
level compiled
companies and vessels
v.
Account details of MCS fund
v.
Reports on and
vi.
Increase in revenue from
statement of account of the MCS fund
fishing licence fees
vi.
Publicised revised list
of fishing licence fees
Component 4: Capacity Building i.
National VMS system
i.
Reports of consultants
for MCS activities
identified
ii.
Installation reports, MCS
ii.
VMS installed and
reports and observation
operational
iii.
Training reports and
observation of trained personnel
iii.
Trained personnel operating
performing
VMS
iv.
Inspection of store vouchers,
invoices, inventory report
iv.
Inspection or inventory of
logistics
Component 5: Deployment of
i.
Establishment of consultative
i.
Reports of consultative
Cooperation of Navy, Air Force and
Fisheries Patrol Vessels and
group
meetings
other agencies; Availability of patrol
Surveillance Aircrafts
ii.
Procurement of interrogators for
ii.
Installation Reports; inspection vessels and aircrafts; willingness of
vessels and aircraft
of equipment on vessel and aircraft
countries to admit military aircrafts from
iii.
Vessels and aircrafts in operation
iii.
Cruise and flight reports
neighbouring countries at short notice;
iv.
Observers and inspectors placed
iv.
Observer reports
cooperation of operators
on fishing vessels