United Nations
UNEP/GEF South China Sea
Global Environment
Environment Programme
Project
Facility





Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends
in the
South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand








REPORT






Eighth Meeting of the Regional Working Group
for the Seagrass Sub-component

Sihanoukville, Cambodia, 21st ­ 24th May 2007












__________________________________________________________________________________
UNEP/GEF
Bangkok, May 2007

---

First published in Thailand in 2007 by the United Nations Environment Programme.

Copyright © 2007, United Nations Environment Programme

This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational or non-profit
purposes without special permission from the copyright holder provided acknowledgement of the
source is made. UNEP would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication that uses this publication
as a source.

No use of this publication may be made for resale or for any other commercial purpose without prior
permission in writing from the United Nations Environment Programme.

UNEP/GEF
Project Co-ordinating Unit,
United Nations Environment Programme,
UN Building, 2nd Floor Block B, Rajdamnern Avenue,
Bangkok 10200, Thailand
Tel.
+66 2 288 1886
Fax.
+66 2 288 1094
http://www.unepscs.org


DISCLAIMER:

The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of UNEP or the GEF. The
designations employed and the presentations do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever
on the part of UNEP, of the GEF, or of any cooperating organisation concerning the legal status of
any country, territory, city or area, of its authorities, or of the delineation of its territories or boundaries.

Cover Photo: The flower of Enhalus acoroides in a seagrass bed of Kampot Demonstration Site,
Kampot Province, Cambodia. Photo by Kim Sour.


For citation purposes this document may be cited as:


UNEP, 2007. Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of
Thailand. Report of the Eighth Meeting of the Regional Working Group for the Seagrass Sub-
component. UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3.

---

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3
Table of Contents
1.
OPENING OF THE MEETING................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 WELCOME ADDRESS ON BEHALF OF UNEP ........................................................................... 1
1.2 OPENING STATEMENT BY THE REPRESENTATIVE OF SIHANOUKVILLE GOVERNMENT ................. 1
1.3 INTRODUCTION OF PARTICIPANTS......................................................................................... 1
2.
ORGANISATION OF THE MEETING...................................................................................................... 2
2.1 ELECTION OF OFFICERS ...................................................................................................... 2
2.2 DOCUMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATIVE ARRANGEMENTS....................................................... 2
3.
ADOPTION OF THE MEETING AGENDA ............................................................................................. 2
4.
STATUS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS FOR 2006: PROGRESS REPORTS;
EXPENDITURE REPORTS; AND AUDIT REPORTS.......................................................................... 2
5.
STATUS OF THE SUBSTANTIVE OUTPUTS ...................................................................................... 3
5.1 PUBLICATION OF NATIONAL REPORTS IN NATIONAL LANGUAGES AND IN ENGLISH..................... 3
5.2 STATUS OF FINALISATION, ADOPTION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NATIONAL ACTION PLANS . 4
5.3 UPDATE OF THE REGIONAL GIS DATABASE AND META-DATABASE AND USE OF THE PROJECT
WEBSITE ............................................................................................................................ 4
6.
REVIEW OF THE SEAGRASS TRAINING COURSE.......................................................................... 5
6.1 REVIEW OF OUTLINE OF THE TRAINING COURSE MANAGEMENT MODELS AND STRATEGIES
FOR CORAL REEF AND SEAGRASS ECOSYSTEMS ................................................................... 5
6.2 ORGANISATION OF, AND SUPPORT TO THE NATIONAL ECHO-SEMINARS.................................... 5
7.
PROGRESS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION; EVALUATION; AND COMPLETION OF THE
DEMONSTRATION SITE ACTIVITIES.................................................................................................... 6
7.1 HEPU, CHINA ­ PROFESSOR XIAOPING HUANG...................................................................... 6
7.2 EAST BINTAN, INDONESIA - MR. TRI EDI KURIANDEWA ........................................................... 7
7.3 BOLINAO, PHILIPPINES - DR. MIGUEL FORTES ....................................................................... 7
7.4 PHU QUOC, VIET NAM - DR. NGUYEN VAN TIEN .................................................................... 7
7.5 KAMPOT, CAMBODIA - MR. OUK VIBOL.................................................................................. 8
8.
FINALISATION OF THE REGIONAL STRATEGIC ACTION PROGRAMME (SAP).................... 8
8.1 FINALISATION OF INPUTS FROM THE REGIONAL WORKING GROUP ON SEAGRASS TO THE
REVISED SAP..................................................................................................................... 8
8.2 NATIONAL WORKSHOP TO CONSIDER THE REVISED SAP ....................................................... 9
9.
CONSIDERATION OF THE TOTAL ECONOMIC VALUES FOR SEAGRASS ECOSYSTEM
DETERMINED BY THE REGIONAL TASK FORCE ON ECONOMIC VALUATION AND THE
OUTCOMES OF THE COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF ACTIONS DETAILED IN THE SAP ..... 9
10. PREPARATION FOR THE THIRD REGIONAL SCIENTIFIC CONFERENCE AND
MAYOR'S ROUND TABLE .....................................................................................................................10
11. WORK PLAN AND ACTIVITIES OF THE REGIONAL WORKING GROUP ON SEAGRASS..11
11.1 WORK PLAN FOR 2007 ­ 2008 .......................................................................................... 11
11.2 MAINTENANCE OF THE NETWORK AND PROJECT BENEFITS AFTER JUNE 2008........................ 11
12. DATE AND PLACE OF THE NINTH MEETING OF THE REGIONAL WORKING GROUP
ON SEAGRASS .........................................................................................................................................11
13. ANY OTHER BUSINESS .........................................................................................................................12
14. ADOPTION OF THE REPORT OF THE MEETING............................................................................12
15. CLOSURE OF THE MEETING................................................................................................................12

---

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3


List of Annexes


ANNEX 1
List of Participants.

ANNEX 2
List of Documents.

ANNEX 3
Agenda.

ANNEX 4
Details of the proposed National Echo-seminar to follow the "UNEP-GEF-SCS
Regional Training Course on Management Models and Strategies for Coral Reefs
and Seagrass".

ANNEX 5
Revised Estimates of the Costs of Actions Proposed for Inclusion in the Regional
Strategic Action Programme and Outcomes of the Cost Benefit Analysis.

ANNEX 6
Work Plan and Timetable for the Regional Working Group on Seagrass 2007 To 2008.

---

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3
Page 1
Report of the Meeting

1.
OPENING OF THE MEETING

1.1
Welcome Address on behalf of UNEP

1.1.1 Dr. John Pernetta, Project Director opened the meeting, at 0815 on 21st May 2007, and
welcomed participants on behalf of the UN Under-Secretary General and Executive Director of UNEP,
Dr. Achim Steiner; and the Deputy Executive Director of UNEP, and Officer-in-Charge of the UNEP
Division of Global Environment Facility Co-ordination, Mr. Shafqat Kakakhel.

1.1.2 Dr. Pernetta noted that this meeting was originally scheduled as the last during this phase of
the project but the Project Steering Committee had allocated funds for a further meeting during 2008
should the need arise. The Working Group would need to decide whether or not there was sufficient
business to warrant convening a ninth meeting in the first half of 2008.

1.1.3 Dr. Pernetta noted further that a major item of business was a consideration of the situation
with respect to the adoption of the National Action Plans and their relationship to the national level
discussions and adoption of the regional Strategic Action Programme (SAP).

1.1.4 In relation to the SAP Dr. Pernetta informed the meeting that the Regional Task Force on
Economic Valuation had recently completed its' work on the Total Economic Value of habitat goods
and services and had determined national mean standard values for seagrass habitats in the seven
countries and a regional mean standard value that had been used in a cost benefit analysis of the
actions planned in the Strategic Action Programme.

1.1.5 Dr. Pernetta suggested that the working group might wish to review the outputs of the RTF-E
in comparison with the outcomes for other coastal habitats and the work of Costanza et. al (1997)
concerning global estimates of habitat goods and services.

1.1.6 Dr. Pernetta welcomed His Excellency Mr. Sun Sokhan, Vice-Governor of Sihanoukville and
Mr. Nov Roitana Director of the Department of Agriculture and invited His Excellency Mr. Sun to
address the meeting.

1.2
Opening Statement by the Representative of Sihanoukville Government

1.2.1 His Excellency, Mr. Sun, the Vice-Governor of the Municipality of Sihanoukville formally
welcomed participants to Sihanoukville and to the meeting. He noted the importance, which
Sihanoukville as the second largest city in Cambodia and the major port in the country placed upon
sustaining the natural environment of the coast.

1.2.2 His Excellency noted that Sihanoukville had developed a master plan for uses of the sea
space under the guidance of IMO and PEMSEA, and emphasized that preserving the natural
environment was a top priority of the Cambodian Government as the basis for developing
Sihanoukville as a tourist hub.

1.2.3 On behalf of the Royal Government of Cambodia, he expressed his appreciation to the
UNEP/GEF South China Sea Project, especially Dr. John Pernetta, for their support. H.E. Mr. Sun
expressed the hope that the meeting would be successful in its' deliberations and that all members
would enjoy their stay in Sihanoukville.

1.3 Introduction
of
Participants

1.3.1 Members noted that Dr. Miguel D. Fortes had returned to the Philippines and once again
assumed responsibility as the Focal Point for Seagrass in the Philippines replacing Dr. Marco
Nemesio E. Montaño. Members recorded their appreciation for the contributions of Dr. Montaño to the
work of the group as both a member and former Chairperson. Dr. Pernetta invited participants to
introduce themselves to the meeting and the List of Participants is attached as Annex 1 to this report.

---

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3
Page 2
2.
ORGANISATION OF THE MEETING
2.1 Election
of
Officers
2.1.1 Dr. Pernetta reminded members that the Rules of Procedure state that, the Regional Working
Group shall elect, from amongst the members, a Chairperson, Vice-Chairperson and Rapporteur to
serve for one year, and that the rules state further that, officers shall be eligible for re-election no more
than once.
2.1.2 Members recalled that, during the seventh meeting in Beihai, China, 24th- 27th July 2006;
Dr. Montaño, Mr. Ouk Vibol, and Dr. Suvaluck were elected as Chairperson, Vice-chairperson and
Rapporteur, respectively. The meeting noted that since Dr. Montaño had ceased to be the focal point
for the Philippines he could not be re-elected, but that Mr. Vibol and Dr. Suvaluck were both eligible
for re-election.
2.1.3 Dr. Pernetta invited participants to nominate individuals to serve as Chairperson, Vice-
Chairperson and Rapporteur for the Regional Working Group on Seagrass. Dr. Fortes (Philippines)
proposed and Professor Xiaoping Huang (China) seconded the proposal that Mr. Vibol be elected as
Chairperson. Mr. Tri Edi Kuriandewa (Indonesia) proposed and Dr. Fortes seconded the nomination of
Dr. Hutomo Malikusworo (expert member) as Vice-Chairperson. Dr. Fortes proposed and Dr. Chittima
Aryuthaka (expert member) seconded the nomination of Professor Huang as the Rapporteur. In
accepting this nomination Professor Huang noted that he would not be present for the final session of
the meeting; he suggested therefore that Dr. Fortes be co-opted as co-rapporteur with responsibility
for presenting the report to the meeting. In agreeing with this proposal the meeting elected Dr. Fortes
and Dr. Suvaluck Satumanatpan (Thailand) as co-rapporteurs.
2.2 Documentation
and
Administrative
Arrangements
2.2.1 The Chairperson, Mr. Vibol, invited the Secretary, Dr. Pernetta, to introduce the documents
available to the meeting, a list of which was presented in document UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-
SG.8/Inf.2. Dr. Pernetta noted that the meeting documents had been lodged on the project website in
advance of the meeting, and noted further that additional national documents had been tabled by
members from China and Cambodia. The list of documents is attached as Annex 2 to this report.
2.2.2 In introducing the draft programme contained in document UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/Inf.3
the Chairperson noted that the meeting would be conducted in English and in plenary although small
working groups might be formed at the discretion of the meeting. He noted that since the
demonstration site was seventy kilometres away he proposed that the group leave the hotel at 0700
on 24th May as the low tide was around noon on that day.
3.
ADOPTION OF THE MEETING AGENDA
3.1
The Chairperson introduced the Provisional Agenda prepared by the Project Co-ordinating
Unit (PCU) as document UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/1, and the Annotated Provisional Agenda,
document UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/2. He invited members to consider the agenda and to propose
any amendments or additional items for consideration.
3.2
There being no proposals for amendment or, additional items proposed for inclusion, the
meeting adopted the agenda as it appears in Annex 3 of this report.
4.
STATUS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS FOR 2006: PROGRESS REPORTS;
EXPENDITURE REPORTS; AND AUDIT REPORTS
4.1 The Chairperson invited Mr. Sour, the PCU member to introduce document
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/4, "Current status of budgets and reports from the Specialised Executing
Agencies in the participating countries" and draw to the attention of the meeting any outstanding
issues or matters requiring the attention of the working group.
4.2
In presenting this agenda item Mr. Sour noted that progress and expenditure reports had
been received from all countries for the period 1st January - 30th June 2006 and that progress or
expenditure reports had also been received from all countries except Malaysia for the period 1st July ­
31st December 2006, by the time of preparation of the document. He noted further that subsequently a
draft progress report had been received from Malaysia.

---

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3
Page 3
4.3
Mr. Sour went on to report that progress and expenditure reports for the period 1st January ­
30th June 2006 had been received from all four demonstration sites but that no reports had been
received from Phu Quoc for the period 1st July ­ 31st December. Dr. Nguyen Van Tien stated that he
thought the reports had been submitted to the PCU but would check and ensure that they were
brought to the joint meeting at the end of the week.

4.4
Regarding the submission of audit reports for 2006 expenditures, members advised the
meeting of the current situation as follows:

· Mr. Tri Edi tabled a copy of the Indonesian audit report and noted that the original will be
sent by mail to the PCU by the National Technical Focal Point (NTFP). He noted that this
was a combined report for the subcomponents of the project in Indonesia and that
submission had been delayed by other components. The Project Director noted that it
was the responsibility of his organisation under the MoU to supply the audit report by the
due date (31st March) and not that of the Focal Ministry.

· Mr. Vibol noted that the auditors had previously expressed reservations regarding the
absence of individual project accounts in the Department of Fisheries in Cambodia
making it difficult to track individual project related income and expenditure. Dr. Pernetta
noted that this was an internal administrative matter for the Department of Fisheries but
noted that in the case of UNEP a single current account was maintained but individual
project accounts were maintained and audited relating to individual sources of income
and projects and programmes of the organisation.

· Mr. Kamarruddin bin Ibrahim noted that in the case of Malaysia the Government auditors
were very slow and expressed the view that in future he would contract a commercial
audit in order to comply with the UNEP requirements regarding annual audits.
Dr. Pernetta noted that without expenditure reports and an audit report he would be
obliged to seek the return of funds to UNEP.

4.5
A question was raised regarding combined audit reports for the two years 2006 and 2007.
Dr. Pernetta noted that both Thailand and Viet Nam had requested, and been granted, permission to
combine 2006 ­ 2007 audit reports. Mr. Kamarruddin noted that he hoped that the audit report for
Malaysia would be available next month and Dr. Fortes indicated that the audit report for Philippines
would be available in June and Professor Huang indicated that the Chinese report would also be
available around that time.

5.
STATUS OF THE SUBSTANTIVE OUTPUTS

5.1
Publication of National Reports in National Languages and in English

5.1.1 The Chairperson invited the PCU member to introduce document UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-
SG.8/5, "Status of the Substantive Outputs from the Specialised Executing Agencies for the Seagrass
Sub-component of the UNEP/GEF South China Sea Project" and draw to the attention of the meeting
any outstanding issues or matters requiring the attention of the working group.

5.1.2 Mr. Sour drew the attention of the group to Table 1 of the document, which listed the status of
publications in each country resulting from project activities. Members recalled that national seagrass
reports from all countries have been published and the reports in English have already been edited
and formatted, and are ready for printing.

5.1.3 During discussion members drew the attention of the meeting to new publications including 6
reports from the Hepu Demonstration site, two reports from the Bintan site, publication of the National
Action Plan for Cambodia and a number of items from the Bolinao demonstration site including: BSDS
Brochure (in English); seagrass awareness posters (5 designs, in Tagalog); comics (in Tagalog,); and
a draft of the National Seagrass Conservation Strategy and Action Plan (in English). The final draft of
the plan will be submitted by July 2007.

5.1.4 Mr. Kamarruddin indicated that he intended to publish a Field Guide for Seagrass of Malaysia
in Bahasa Malaysia if sufficient funds remained following publication of the National Action Plan.

---

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3
Page 4
5.2
Status of Finalisation, Adoption and Implementation of the National Action Plans

5.2.1 Mr. Sour drew the attention of members to Table 3 of document UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-
SG.8/5, which presented information regarding the status of finalisation and adoption of the National
Action Plans for the Seagrass Sub-component. Members of the RWG-SG were reminded that prior to
the sixth meeting of the RWG-SG in 27th - 30th September 2005, the first revised NAPs had been
received from all countries. Following the seventh meeting of the RWG-SG; members agreed to
provide final drafts by August 2006.

5.2.2 The final versions of the NAPs from Cambodia and China, were received subsequent to the
seventh meeting; and the NAP from Cambodia had been formal y adopted by the Cambodian Minister
of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries on 5th December 2006. The National Action Plan for China was
formally adopted by SEPA in April 2007.

5.2.3 In response to the Chairperson's invitation for the Focal Points to present any further updates
or revisions of their NAPs, Indonesia noted that a further revision had been undertaken but the date of
its' adoption by the government was not yet determined. Malaysia will submit its second revision by
June 2007, hoping that its NAP will be adopted in July 2007. The Philippines, had revised the NAP,
which would be submitted for adoption in July 2007.

5.2.4 Dr. Suvaluck made a brief presentation on the process of revision and elaboration of the NAP
in Thailand. She noted that the NAP had been renamed "National Strategic Planning and Action Plan
for Seagrass and Dugong" to encompass consideration of the conservation of Dugong and actions in
both the Gulf of Thailand and along the Andaman Coast. She noted further that although there was no
definite timetable for government approval of the NAP she had requested the advisory committee of
the Department of Marine and Coastal Resources to consider the plan during its meeting in June. She
noted that despite the absence of funding, continued consultations at the local level had resulted in
the action plan being built from the ground upwards and actions were already being implemented
locally in line with the guidance provided by the plan.

5.3
Update of the Regional GIS Database and Meta-database and Use of the Project
Website

5.3.1 Mr. Sour noted that Table 2 of document UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/5 presents information
regarding, the submission and up-loading of meta-database and GIS database electronic files to the
project website. He noted that all countries had developed meta-databases that had been uploaded to
the project website but apparently no new GIS or meta-data had been received or up-loaded since the
seventh meeting of the RWG-SG.

5.3.2 Mr. Sour reminded members that:
· it is the responsibility of focal points to ensure that new seagrass related GIS and
metadata sets are presented to the Project Co-ordinating Unit or directly up-loaded to the
project website as they become available at the national level;
· during the seventh meeting members had agreed to revise and add new meta-data to the
online meta-database by the end of September 2006.

5.3.3 Members were requested to advise the meeting of any new datasets placed on-line since the
seventh meeting and to indicate whether new data were likely to become available in the near future.
Mr. Vibol noted that in the case of Cambodia there was a need to check the exact number of entries
since the records of Cambodia and the PCU appeared to differ. China indicated that they would make
new data available within the next month. Mr. Tri Edi noted that he had experienced difficulty in
uploading two new metadata entries, and it was suggested that he contact Mr. Christopher Paterson
of the PCU for assistance in this regard.

5.3.4 Dr. Fortes noted that a CD of Philippines meta-data would be available in 2-week's time, the
production of which was part of an ongoing activity of the laboratory of the National Focal Point at MSI
to make available data sources nationally. At the moment, the database contains 2,160 metadata
entries, categorized into seagrass structure and dynamics, physico-chemical factors, environmental
aspects, and fisheries and management aspects.

---

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3
Page 5
5.3.5 Dr. Suvaluck noted that she needed to contact the person responsible for making the entries
available online and Dr. Tien noted that the Vietnamese meta-database had been compiled in a
booklet, entitled "Metadata of Vietnamese Seagrass".

5.3.6 Concerning the use of the project website for exchange of information and experience through
applications such as the e-fora, demonstration site pages and on-line up-dating of the regional meta-
database, it was noted that the RWG-SG had initiated an active discussion following the seventh
meeting of the RWG regarding inputs to the regional Strategic Action Programme (SAP). A total of 24
postings had been made in December 2006 but no postings were made subsequently.

5.3.7 During discussion all members recognised the importance of the e-forum, and agreed that it
should be continued. It was noted however that not everyone had found time or had the opportunity to
visit the project website during the inter-sessional period. Whilst it might be difficult for some members
to join the discussion on a regular basis, all members agreed and committed to post messages more
often in the future. The nature of these messages could range from those related directly to the
project`s objectives and activities to other matters relating to seagrass.

5.3.8 In conclusion it was noted that during the 6th meeting in Siem Reap, the PSC had agreed that
the PCU in consultation with SEA-START-RC convene an Information Technology (IT) workshop
regarding the further development and sustainability of the website. The aim of the workshop would
be to examine and recommend ways to enhance the capacity of members of the SCS network in
using this modern technology to sustain project activities beyond the GEF funding.

6.
REVIEW OF THE SEAGRASS TRAINING COURSE

6.1
Review of outline of the Training Course Management Models and Strategies for Coral
Reef and Seagrass Ecosystems

6.1.1 Members were reminded that it had been decided to offer a combined course covering the
management of both coral reef and seagrass habitats and that the Marine Science Institute of the
University of the Philippines (MSI) had agreed to conduct a training course entitled "UNEP-GEF-SCS
Training Course on Management Models and Strategies for Coral Reef and Seagrass Ecosystems".
Original y this had been planned to be conducted from 9th ­ 21st April 2007, but the dates have been
changed to 29th October ­ 10th November 2007.

6.1.2 The detailed proposal was available for review by the regional working group as document
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-S.8/6 "Training Course: Management Models and Strategies for Coral Reefs
and Seagrass". The Chairperson invited Dr. Fortes to make a brief presentation of the proposed
programme.

6.1.3 Dr. Fortes briefly outlined plans for the conduct of the course noting that it was scheduled to
last for 12 days and noting further that the Regional Scientific and Technical Committee had indicated
that a wider range of regional experts should be involved as resource persons in conducting the
course. He expressed the hope that some members of the RWG-SG might be available to contribute
to the operation of the course. Dr. Fortes requested members to make comments and suggestions
especial y on the topics, resource persons, and participants.

6.1.4 As a next step, it was agreed that Mr. Paterson would send to MSI the list of participants
earlier submitted by the Focal Points and the MOU for signature by MSI. Once the MOU was signed,
Dr. Pernetta would send formal invitations to the participants. If any nominated participant was unable
to attend then he would contact the seagrass focal points and the National Technical Focal Point to
obtain alternative nominations. It was noted that the preparations for the training course would provide
an opportunity for members to utilise more fully the e-forum.

6.2
Organisation of, and Support to the National Echo-seminars

6.2.1 Members were reminded that the trainees attending the regional training courses are
expected to conduct "National Echo seminars" over a 1 to 3 day period following the completion of the
regional training course, and that the Specialised Executing Agencies and the Focal Points for the
corresponding sub-component of the project are expected to provide logistic support.

---

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3
Page 6
6.2.2 There followed a discussion of the timing, numbers of participants and location of the national
echo seminars and the information was compiled in tabular form and is attached as Annex 4 to this
report. It was agreed that members would work on the preparation of the necessary budgets overnight
in order that these could be included in the amended budget for the third amendment to the
Memoranda of Understanding. It was agreed that members would finalise these amendments for
signature prior to the completion of the meeting.

7.
PROGRESS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION; EVALUATION; AND COMPLETION OF THE
DEMONSTRATION SITE ACTIVITIES
7.1 Hepu,
China
­
Professor Xiaoping Huang
7.1.1 At the commencement of agenda item 7 members were reminded that, not only do the Focal
Points have responsibility for periodically reporting on the status of the demonstration sites to the
RWG-SG, but also, the RWG-SG has a collective responsibility to ensure successful implementation
through the provision of oversight and guidance. The meeting noted that written reports of outputs
resulting from the implementation of the demonstration sites had been included in the documents of
the meeting, (UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/7-Kamp; UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/7-Hepu;
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/7-Bint; UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/7-Boli; and UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-
SG.8/7-PQ) and that the self-evaluation reports for Kampot, Hepu, Bolinao and Phu Quoc were also
available to the meeting. It was noted that these self-evaluation reports did not include copies of the
outputs generated to date some of which were made available during the meeting.
7.1.2 The Chairperson then invited the focal points to make presentations regarding the status of
activities in the seagrass demonstration sites. It was noted that copies of the presentations would be
lodged on the project website, and focal points were requested to highlight any lessons learned to
date.
7.1.3 Professor Huang started with a PowerPoint presentation of the highlights of the work at the
Hepu Seagrass site in Guangxi Province, China. He noted that implementation had focussed on
cross-sectoral management, sustainability of management, seagrass conservation efforts, and
education and training and that the mid-term evaluation had recently been completed.
7.1.4 Professor Huang noted that Management Board had met three times to discuss progress and
plans and that the Board had proved extremely successful resulting in additional Government
Departments becoming involved in project activities and joint efforts between seven government
agencies to remove il egal aquaculture enclosures from the site. He noted further that the reports of
the Management Board had gone forward to the Beihai City and Guangxi Provincial Governments
and that the management plan has been approved by, the Management Board and was currently
under consideration by the City Government. A recommendation had also gone forward for the
creation of the first national seagrass reserve.
7.1.5 Professor Huang informed the meeting that around 4,000 persons had visited the national
seagrass website that was maintained in association with the demonstration site. The economic
valuation of the site had almost been completed and the value of annual production was determined
as around US$ 3,000 per hectare per annum. In addition a plan for an eco-compensation scheme had
been developed for consideration by Government. He also noted that half yearly surveys of the site
were undertaken to assess biomass, biodiversity and various environmental factors with seagrass
watch being undertaken at fixed transects and a newsletter published on an ad hoc basis. Education
and awareness activities had been undertaken that appeared to have improved the general level of
awareness regarding seagrass amongst the local stakeholders, and the education centre was under
construction.
7.1.6 Dr. Suvaluck queried whether or not it was possible to state that there had been an
improvement in environmental state consequent upon the project interventions, and Professor Huang
indicated that it was impossible to state definitely that environmental state had improved but he noted
that the perception of local stakeholders was that conditions were better now than in the past.
7.1.7 Dr. Pernetta noted that during the mid-term evaluation visit he had been impressed by the
impact of the Management Board, which was acknowledged by all parties to have been a useful
mechanism for inter-departmental co-ordination. He noted further that it was the intention of the
Beihai City Government to use this model in other aspects of City management.

---

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3
Page 7
7.2
East Bintan, Indonesia - Mr. Tri Edi Kuriandewa
7.2.1 Mr. Tri Edi noted that although the East Bintan demonstration site Medium Sized Project had
not yet become operational a number of activities had been undertaken including a study of the
valuation of seagrass and a study of the tourism potential of the area.
7.2.2 In presenting the outcome of the valuation study Mr. Tri Edi noted that the direct use value
from capture fisheries and the indirect use value derived from tourism totalled 2,287 US$/ha.
Dr. Hutomo noted that 13,832 Singaporeans and other foreigners visit the site annually, spending on
average, two nights per visit. 9,620 local tourists visit the site annually.
7.2.3 It was noted that marine tourism, involved 150 households or 750 individuals, had contributed
US$2,447,640/year, to the area, while capture fisheries, involved the largest labour force of 574
households of 2,870 individuals, had contributed US $1,131,600/year. Dr. Hutomo noted that the
recommendation of the study on tourism potential had emphasized the need for integrated and
sustainable management of the resources at the site.
7.2.4
Dr. Pernetta noted that the Medium Sized Project proposal had been accepted for signature
by, the CEO of the GEF, subject to some minor amendments and hopefully would become
operational in the near future.
7.3 Bolinao,
Philippines
-
Dr. Miguel Fortes
7.3.1
Dr. Fortes' report on the progress and achievements in the implementation of the Bolinao
Seagrass Demonstration Site (BSDS) for the period September 2005 ­ May 2007, focused on the
milestones, and activities under each of the four project objectives. Highlights included: establishment
of the Bolinao Seagrass Reserve (formally adopted by the Municipality of Bolinao, 21st March 2007);
the Philippine National Seagrass Conservation Strategy and Action Plan (second revision, approved
in principle, for signing); completion of the brochures, posters, a 30 second video clip for screening on
national TV; a comic; T-shirts, bags, pins, and a 10 m x 4 m billboard at the entrance to the town.
7.3.2
Dr. Fortes noted that a significant achievement had been the support from the project to
enhance the quality of the local danggit (Siganus spp.) product in terms both of content and
packaging, which had more than doubled the original price of the product and raised its' acceptability.
7.3.3
Training/workshops on immediate concerns regarding seagrass, and evaluation of the levels
of involvement of the stakeholders had been undertaken. Dr. Fortes noted that of the 58 activities in
the project, those programmed for the first half of 2007 comprised 19%, while there remained 16% of
activities to be completed by December 2007.
7.3.4
Dr. Fortes noted that the report also included information regarding the process, outcomes
and indicators, emphasizing that time was too short for changes in environmental state to be
measurable. The Philippine National Seagrass Committee and the stakeholders recognised the
success of the project and in committing partial support to continuation of activities, requested that
UNEP and other funding agencies help extend the life of the project for at least three years to
December 2010.
7.3.5 Dr. Suvaluck sought clarification regarding the indicators of local stakeholder involvement and
requested information regarding the number of local fishers interviewed and whether or not there was
any evidence for an improvement in household incomes. Dr. Fortes noted that apart from the numbers
of fishers participating in project activities there was no evidence to suggest a change in fishers'
incomes other than the benefits derived from the improved quality of the danggit produced and that
the scope of indicators was not intended to evaluate changes in fishers' livelihoods over the reporting
period.
7.4
Phu Quoc, Viet Nam - Dr. Nguyen Van Tien
7.4.1
Dr. Tien, National Seagrass Focal Point for Vet Nam, presented the progress report for the
Phu Quoc Demonstration Site. He reported on the outcome of the extensive surveys of biodiversity at
the site, noting that the numbers of species in all groups known from the site had been significantly
increased since the commencement of the work. Some queries were raised regarding the
identifications made and Dr. Tien responded that, the identifications had been made by, taxonomic
experts, from the Hai Phong Institute of Marine Environment and Resources.

---

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3
Page 8
7.4.2 Dr. Tien noted that Phu Quoc is one of three core zones of the Kien Giang Biosphere
Reserve (KBR) (approved and accepted by UNESCO at the 19th meeting in Paris in October 2006).
He noted further that the main threats to seagrass in Phu Quoc were: destructive fishing; coastal
construction and sedimentation from development; oil pollution from fishing and tourist boats; and
over-fishing. He suggested that tourism could be used to increase local environmental awareness and
community participation in environmental management.
7.5
Kampot, Cambodia - Mr. Ouk Vibol
7.5.1 Mr. Vibol outlined some highlights from the report of activities in Kampot that included: an
economic valuation of fishing at the site amounting to US$750/ha/year contributing 90% of the income
of the population at the demonstration site; development of the management plan for the site will
commence in July 2007; and the GIS map of the site will soon be completed. Data for the map are
derived from 900 sampling points, at 500 metre intervals covering the entire seagrass area. For each
sampling point data on four parameters (depth, species, cover, and canopy height) have been
recorded.
7.5.2 Mr. Vibol noted that no major problems have been encountered with the joint management
scheme (with Viet Nam), although the illegal trade of dugong meat continues between the two
countries. Interestingly, a contributing factor to the harmonious interactions was the mutual agreement
not to discuss territorial boundaries during the meetings.

8.
FINALISATION OF THE REGIONAL STRATEGIC ACTION PROGRAMME (SAP)

8.1
Finalisation of Inputs from the Regional Working Group on Seagrass to the Revised
SAP

8.1.1 The full text for the first draft revision of the Strategic Action Programme was presented in
document UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/8 and members were advised that the draft had been
modified by the staff of the PCU on the basis of inputs from the RSTC, PSC and RTF-E meetings.
Mr. Sour noted that this was the first time that the working group had been presented with the entire
text of the SAP, and members were invited to compare and contrast the contents of the sections
relating to the other three habitats with the contents of the section on seagrass.

8.1.2 The Chairperson requested Mr. Sour to present the text related to seagrass and to highlight
any inconsistencies and inaccuracies requiring correction and amendment by the group. The group
considered the text in some detail and made a series of minor corrections to the information contained
in the introductory texts and tables. It was agreed by the meeting that the figure should not be
included since this had been taken from the draft SAP produced in December 1998 and did not reflect
the outcome of the national reviews and work of the group in characterising seagrass sites in the
South China Sea.

8.1.3 Some members requested clarification regarding the regional ranking of threats to seagrass
and the ambiguous text relating to this table. Dr. Pernetta provided clarification pointing out that what
had been done was to determine a regional measure of the importance of each threat by weighting
each countries rank value by the proportion of seagrass contained in that country. He noted that this
resulted in the rankings for Cambodia and Philippines dominating the final outcome. Dr. Suvaluck
asked what would happen if a weighting by area was not done and a simple average of the ranks
determined. Such a calculation was done and it was noted that this resulted in a higher ranking for
coastal construction, although overall there was little difference in the outcome between the two
methods. The text was amended as follows:
The Regional Working Group identified six threats to seagrass including: destructive
fishing such as push net, trawler; sedimentation from coastal development; waste
water, effluents; nutrients; coastal construction; and over-fishing. Focal points from
each country were asked to rank the relative importance of these six threats. To
determine the regional significance of each threat the rank for each threat was
weighted using the proportion of the area of seagrass in the country concerned
compared with the regional total. The resultant values were summed to produce the
regional weighted total, which is inversely related to the regional significance (small
values are more significant than larger values). The relative importance of the threats
from a regional perspective is summarised in Table 2

---

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3
Page 9
8.1.4 Concerning the tabulation of indicators of sustainable management, both Dr. Fortes and
Mr. Tri Edi felt that the indicators of environmental/ecological status were not appropriate and
suggested that density of seagrass shoots should be used in place of percentage cover. Dr. Pernetta
noted that the indicators should be kept as simple as possible and the problem with adopting shoot
density, as the sole indicator was that for many sites baseline data would be difficult to obtain. It was
agreed that both percentage cover and shoot density would be adopted as indicators of seagrass
state. It was decided that indicators of secondary production should include the size and abundance
of the sea urchin Tripneustes gratilla, the sea cucumber Stichopus chloronotus and Siganid fishes.

8.2
National Workshop to Consider the Revised SAP

8.2.1 Members were reminded by the Project Director that National Workshops to consider the
regional Strategic Action Programme (SAP) were planned to be convened by the Focal Ministries
during 2007 under the responsibility of the National Technical Focal Points. The Project Director
noted that the seagrass focal points should ensure that discussions of the NAPs were completed and
that the outcome of these discussions, were incorporated into the national discussions of the SAP. He
suggested that Focal Points should contact the National Technical Focal Point to stimulate planning
for the National workshops on the SAP, which should be completed in advance of the Project Steering
Committee meeting in December 2007.

8.2.2 Members were requested to brief the regional working group on plans for any workshops
covering both the National Action Plans and the Strategic Action Programme of which they were
aware. The group noted that various plans relating to workshops for the NAPs had been outlined
under agenda item 5.2, but no member was aware of plans to convene national workshops to
consider the Strategic Action Programme.

9.
CONSIDERATION OF THE TOTAL ECONOMIC VALUES FOR SEAGRASS ECOSYSTEM
DETERMINED BY THE REGIONAL TASK FORCE ON ECONOMIC VALUATION AND THE
OUTCOMES OF THE COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF ACTIONS DETAILED IN THE SAP

9.1
The Chairperson invited the Project Director, Dr. Pernetta, to introduce document
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/9 entitled "Total Economic Values of seagrass habitats and cost-
effectiveness of the actions proposed in the Strategic Action Programme". Dr. Pernetta noted that this
document contained the outcome of extensive work by the Regional Task Force on Economic
Valuation (RTF-E) during the last two meetings in January and March 2007. He noted that in the
January meeting considerable time had been spent on cleaning the empirical dataset and conducting
preliminary calculations of the mean and regional standard values.

9.2
Dr. Pernetta informed the meeting that following the determination of standard mean national
and regional values for seagrass goods and services, the total economic value of seagrass
ecosystems, had been calculated and a cost benefit analysis of the actions proposed in the regional
SAP conducted. He noted that in broad terms the total costs over five years were quite modest when
compared with the value of annual production from each habitat:

·
Mangroves 2.99 million US dollars compared with 5.1 billion US dollars of annual production.
·
Coral reefs 3.96 million US dollars compared with 1.1 billion US dollars of annual production.
·
Seagrass 1.58 million US dollars compared with 87.2 million US dollars of annual production.
·
Wetlands 5.99 million US dollars (14 million dollars of national costs excluded) compared with
1.2 billion dollars of annual production.

9.3
Members were requested to: review the values for the goods and services used by the RTF-E
in determining national and regional standard values and the resultant national and regional Total
Economic Values and advise on any obvious anomalies; and to consider and discuss the outcome of
the cost-benefit analysis and in particular review the estimated costs to ensure that they were both
realistic and reasonable in the light of the calculated economic benefits.

9.4
Members noted that values for various seagrass goods and services were lacking for many
countries resulting in low national and regional Total Economic Values. It was noted that the value
determined in the present study was 1,181 US dollars per hectare compared with the 22,400 US

---

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3
Page 10
dollars determined by Costanza et al (1997). The group felt that Costanza's value was perhaps
somewhat inflated, particularly when compared with his value for mangroves of 9,990 US dollars. The
group was of the opinion that mangrove values should be greater than those for seagrass, which was
the case in the present work.

9.5
Members noted that various economic values had been presented during the present
meeting, which should be incorporated into the regional dataset. It was agreed that members would
make available the full reports including the raw data to their members of the Regional Task Force for
processing and inclusion in the raw data set. The Project Director agreed that if sufficient additional
data were made available he would arrange for a revision of the TEV and CBA for seagrass prior to
finalisation of the SAP.

9.6
The working group considered the outcome of the cost benefit analysis as presented in Table
14 of document UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/9. It was noted that the value of the benefits derived
from the SAP interventions totalled 2,805,668 US$ compared with the 1,443,319 US$, which was a
less impressive outcome than that for mangroves where the benefits totalled 1.4 billion US dollars
compared with costs of 3 million US dollars.

9.7
The working group noted that there was no possibility of improving the Total Economic Value
during this meeting hence the only possibility for improving the Cost Benefit ratio lay in reducing the
costs. It was decided to review the individual activities in detail and to refine the cost estimates to
provide more realistic figures than those determined during the seventh meeting when the costs had
in fact not been adequately considered.

9.8
There followed a detailed consideration of the proposed actions and associated costs during
which they were defined more precisely and the basis for the costings clearly stated. The outcome of
this work is presented in Table 2 of Annex 5, whilst the amended Cost Benefit Analysis is presented in
Table 3 of the same annex.

10.
PREPARATION FOR THE THIRD REGIONAL SCIENTIFIC CONFERENCE AND MAYOR'S
ROUND TABLE

10.1
The Chairperson invited Mr. Sour to introduce this agenda item. Mr. Sour informed members
of the Regional Working Group on Seagrass that the sixth meeting of the PSC had agreed that the
third Regional Scientific Conference should be convened in Bangkok from 14th to 16th November
2007, and that the 3rd Mayor's Round Table (MRT) should be convened in conjunction with it.

10.2 Members were invited to discuss ideas regarding: the relationship between the Mayor's
Round Table and the Regional Scientific Conference; topics related to seagrass in the demonstration
sites that are worthy of presentation during the MRT; and topics related to seagrass in the South
China Sea representing outcomes of the project that could be presented during the 3rd Regional
Scientific Conference.

10.3
As requested, members discussed ideas regarding the relationship between the MRT and the
Regional Scientific Conference (RSC). Noting the experiences from the 2nd RSC, members suggested
that the MRT should precede the RSC, for practical reasons. In addition, the RWG-SG agreed to cull
from the outcomes of the subcomponent's activities during the intersessional period, the most
important messages the group wished to impart to the MRT. If it so desires, the RWG-SG may meet
over lunch or dinner during the period of the RSC.

10.4
There followed an extensive discussion during which the following topics were identified for
possible presentation during the Mayor's Round Table:

· successful cross sectoral management in Hepu Demonstration site (site manager/mayor);
· working with the communities: best practices in the Bolinao Seagrass Demonstration Site
(Ms. Tutu Almonte, Site Manager);
· seagrass and local governance: why BSDS should be sustained? (to be presented by
Mayor Alfonso Celeste); and,
· management activities in Phu Quoc demonstration site and initial lessons learnt
(Mr. Nguyen Xuan Niem, the site manager)

---

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3
Page 11
10.5 The following seagrass related topics were proposed for presentation during the third
Regional Scientific Conference:

· transboundary seagrass ecosystem management between Cambodia and Viet Nam
(Mr. Vibol)
· the improvement of awareness level of public and government about the seagrass
conservation through training and education programme (Professor Huang)
· economic values of the seagrass ecosystem in East Bintan (Mr. Tri Edi)
· the current scientific results useful in seagrass management in Bolinao (Dr. Fortes)
· experience of the development of the National Acton Plan for seagrass in Thailand
(Dr. Suvaluck)
· synthesis of the progress, problems and prospects of the seagrass demonstration sites
bordering the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand (Dr. Chittima)
· spatial plan for sustainable tourism activities in East Bintan Coastal Area (Dr. Hutomo)

11.
WORK PLAN AND ACTIVITIES OF THE REGIONAL WORKING GROUP ON SEAGRASS

11.1
Work Plan for 2007 ­ 2008

11.1.1 Based on the discussion and agreements reached under previous agenda items, the work
plan presented in document UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/10 "Draft work plan and timetable for the
Regional Working Group on Seagrass 2007 to 2008" was discussed, amended and approved as it
appears in Annex 6 of this report.

11.2
Maintenance of the Network and Project Benefits after June 2008

11.2.1 The Chairperson invited members to raise for discussion any plans that might be in hand to
continue the work of the project beyond June 2008 at both national and regional levels in order to
sustain any tangible benefits arising from participation in the project.

11.2.2 The working group noted that the activities discussed and agreed under agenda item 9 included
a number of follow-on activities designed to build upon the outcomes to date and expand upon the
benefits derived from implementing the South China Sea Project. It was further noted that the Bolinao
demonstration site had plans for sustaining some activities beyond the life of the present project.

11.2.3 The meeting agreed that in order to maintain the network and continue the work of the project
beyond June 2008 at both national and regional levels, members of RWG-SG would: maintain the
RWG-SG; make constant updates to the database; actively contribute to the group's semi-annual
publication; make constant visits to the existing website; and participate in the e-forum. These
activities are all included in the SAP.

12.
DATE AND PLACE OF THE NINTH MEETING OF THE REGIONAL WORKING GROUP ON
SEAGRASS

12.1
Dr. Hutomo, Vice-Chairperson invited members to consider whether or not a ninth meeting
should be convened during the first half of 2008, or whether the present meeting should be taken as
the final meeting for this phase of the project. He noted that in order to justify the convening of
another meeting in 2008 it would be necessary to discuss and agree upon the substantive items to be
considered during such a meeting. The group noted that any recommendation to the PSC would be
dependent upon the availability of funds in the project budget.

12.2
Members discussed at some length the possible items for inclusion on the agenda of a ninth
meeting and agreed that the following topics, inter alia should be included on the agenda:
· experience and lessons learned from the demonstration sites;
· SAP implementation plans;
· outcomes of national echo-seminars;
· outcomes of the environmental monitoring at the demonstration sites; and,
· sustainability of the demonstration sites and plans for replication at the national level.

---

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3
Page 12
12.3 Members noted that previous meetings of the RWG-SG have been held in: Bangkok,
Thailand, May 2002; Hue, Viet Nam, October 2002; Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia, March 2003;
Guangzhou, China, 29th November ­ 2nd December 2003; Bintan, Indonesia, August 2004; Bolinao,
Philippines 2005; Beihai, China 2006; and now in Sihanoukville, Cambodia. Members noted further
that the ninth meeting to be convened in 2008 would definitely be the last under the current project,
and that in accordance with the decision of the Project Steering Committee, it should be conducted at
a demonstration site.

12.4 Dr. Tien offered to host the next meeting of the group in Viet Nam, at the Phu Quoc
demonstration site, and the working group accepted this kind offer with appreciation. There followed a
discussion of potential dates and it was agreed that the meeting would be convened between 3rd and
6th of March 2008, inclusive.

13. ANY
OTHER
BUSINESS

13.1
The Chairperson invited members to raise any other matters that required discussion by the
regional working group under this agenda item.

13.2
Two matters were discussed and decisions taken under this agenda item: firstly, the need to
revise the cost estimates for the national echo-seminars, to make them more realistic; and secondly,
the name of the semi-annual publication of the RWG-SG. Members agreed to submit the revised
costs of the echo-seminars by the morning of 24th May.

13.3 Concerning the name for the regional publication, after considering 11 suggestions, the
majority (5 votes) voted in favour of "YALAMUN". The word is a combination of the first syl able (Ya)
of the Thai word for seagrass (Yatalay) and the word for seagrass in Bahasa Indonesia (Lamun).

13.4
No further items were raised by members under this agenda item.

14.
ADOPTION OF THE REPORT OF THE MEETING

14.
The Co-rapporteur, Dr. Fortes presented the draft report of the meeting, which was
considered, amended and adopted as it appears in this document.

15.
Dr. Chittima proposed and the meeting adopted the report.

15.
CLOSURE OF THE MEETING

15.1
The Chairperson invited members to make any final comments and/or remarks prior to calling
for a formal motion to close the meeting. The followed a brief discussion and agreement to complete
and sign the 3rd amendments to the MoUs before leaving Sihanoukville.

15.2
The Chair thanked members for their support and hard work and Mr. Kamaruddin proposed a
vote of thanks to Mr. Vibol for the excellent administrative arrangements and the enjoyable field visit
including the excellent seafood lunch. Dr. Fortes proposed thanks to the PCU for their administrative
support to the organisation of the meeting.

15.3
The Project Director thanked members for their hard work and the successful revision of the
actions for the SAP. He also expressed appreciation to Mr. Vibol for the excellent administrative
arrangements for the meeting and the field trip and the District Chairman for the excellent lunch.

15.4
Mr. Vibol formally closed the meeting at 1700 on Thursday 24th May 2007.

---

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3
Annex 1
Page 1

ANNEX 1
List of Participants
Focal Points
Cambodia
People's Republic of China


Mr. Ouk Vibol
Mr. Xiaoping Huang
Fisheries Administration
South China Sea Institute of Oceanology
Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries
Chinese Academy of Sciences
186 Norodom Boulevard
164 West Xingang Road
PO Box 582, Phnom Penh
Guangzhou 510301
Cambodia
Guangdong Province, China


Tel: (855) 12 836 376
Tel:
(86 20) 8902 3210
Fax: (855 23) 210 565
Fax: (86 20) 8445 1672
E-mail: aims1@online.com.kh
E-mail: xphuang@scsio.ac.cn

Indonesia
Malaysia

Mr. Tri Edi Kuriandewa
Mr. Kamarruddin bin Ibrahim
Puslit OSEANOGRAFI, LIPI
Department of Fisheries
Pasir Patih 1 Ancol Timur
Turtle and Marine Ecosystem Center (TUMEC)
Jakarta, Indonesia
23050 Rantau Abang, Dungun

Terengganu, Malaysia
Tel:
(62 21) 64713 850 Ext. 218;


(62 21) 645 7368
Tel:
(609) 845 8169; 845 3169 (direct)
Fax:
(62 21) 6471 1948
Fax: (609) 845 8017
Mobile: (62 88) 8812 5927
E-mail: kdin55@yahoo.com
E-mail: indo-seagrass@centrin.net.id;

kuriandewa@plasa.com

Philippines
Thailand


Dr. Miguel Fortes
Dr. Suvaluck Satumanatpan
Marine Science Institute CS
Faculty of Environment and Resource Studies
University of the Philippines
Mahidol University, Salaya Campus
Diliman, QC, 1101 Philippines
Nakorn Pathom 73170, Thailand


Tel:
(632) 922 3958/59
Tel:
(66 2) 441 5000 ext. 182
Fax:
(632) 924 7678
Mobile: (66) 081 700 7512
E-mail: fortesm@upmsi.ph;
Fax:
(66 2) 441 9509-10
migueldfortes@gmail.com
E-mail: ensnt@mahidol.ac.th


Viet Nam


Ass Prof. Dr. Nguyen Van Tien
Senior Expert, Chairman of Scientific Committee,
Former Director, Research on Marine Botany,
Vietnamese Academy of Science and Technology
Institute of Marine Environment and Resources
246 Da Nang Street
Hai Phong City, Viet Nam

Tel:
(84 31) 760 599, 761 523; 84 903 475 468
Fax:
(84 31) 761 521
E-mail: tiennv@imer.ac.vn

---

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3
Annex 1
Page 2

Regional Experts

Dr. Hutomo Malikusworo
Dr. Chittima Aryuthaka
Indonesian Institute of Science
Department of Marine Science
Pasir Putih 1, Ancol Timur
Faculty of Fisheries, Kasetsart University
Jakarta 14330
Bangkhen, Bangkok 10900, Thailand
Indonesia


Tel:
(66 2) 579 7610; 561 3469
Tel:
(62 21) 6471 3850
Fax:
(66 2) 561 4287
Fax: (62 21) 6471 1948
E-mail: ffiscta@ku.ac.th
E-mail: malikusworo_h@yahoo.com;
mali001@lipi.go.id


Project Co-ordinating Unit Member

Mr. Kim Sour, Associate Expert

UNEP/GEF Project Co-ordinating Unit
United Nations Environment Programme
2nd Floor, Block B, United Nations Building
Rajdamnern Nok Avenue
Bangkok 10200, Thailand

Tel:
(66 2) 288 2609
Fax:
(66 2) 288 1094
E-mail: kims@un.org

Project Co-ordinating Unit

Dr. John Pernetta, Project Director
Ms. Saranya Rojananuangnit, Team Assistant
UNEP/GEF Project Co-ordinating Unit
UNEP/GEF Project Co-ordinating Unit
United Nations Environment Programme
United Nations Environment Programme
United Nations Building, 2nd Floor, Block B
2nd Floor, Block B, United Nations Building
Rajdamnern Nok Avenue
Rajdamnern Nok Avenue
Bangkok 10200, Thailand
Bangkok 10200, Thailand


Tel: (662)
288
1886
Tel:
(66 2) 288 2608
Fax:
(662) 288 1094
Fax:
(66 2) 288 1094
E-mail: pernetta@un.org
E-mail: Rojananuangnit@un.org

---

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3
Annex 2
Page 1

ANNEX 2
List of Documents
Discussion documents
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/1 Agenda.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/2 Annotated
Agenda.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3
Report of the Meeting.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/4
Status of the Administrative Reports for 2006: Progress
Reports, Expenditure Reports and Audit Reports.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/5
Status of the Substantive Outputs from the Specialised
Executing Agencies for the Seagrass Sub-component of the
UNEP/GEF South China Sea Project.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/6
Training Course: Management Models and Strategies for
Coral Reefs and Seagrass.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/7-Kamp Report of the Progress in the Implementation; Evaluation;
and Completion of the Kampot Demonstration Site.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/7-Hepu
Report of the Progress in the Implementation; Evaluation;
and Completion of the Hepu Demonstration Site.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/7-Bint
Report of the Progress in the Proposal Finalisation and
Implementation of the East Bintan Demonstration Site.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/7-Boli
Report of the Progress in the Implementation; Evaluation;
and Completion of the Bolinao Demonstration Site.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/7-PQ
Report of the Progress in the Implementation; Evaluation;
and Completion of the Phu Quoc Demonstration Site.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/8
Revised Draft Strategic Action Programme (draft 1).
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/9
Total Economic Values of Seagrass habitats and cost-
effectiveness of the actions proposed in the Strategic Action
Programme.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/10
Draft Work Plan and Timetable for the Regional Working
Group on Seagrass 2007 to 2008.
Information documents
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/Inf.1 List
of
Participants.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/Inf.2
List of Documents.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/Inf.3 Programme.
The following documents are supplied in published form.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RTF-E.6/3
Sixth Meeting of the Regional Task Force on Economic
Valuation for the UNEP/GEF Project "Reversing
Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea
and Gulf of Thailand". Report of the Meeting. Batam,
Indonesia, 22 ­ 25 January 2007 UNEP/GEF/SCS/ RTF-
E.6/3.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RTF-E.7/3
Seventh Meeting of the Regional Task Force on Economic
Valuation for the UNEP/GEF Project "Reversing
Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea
and Gulf of Thailand". Report of the Meeting. Beihai, China
12 ­ 15 March 2007 UNEP/GEF/SCS/RTF-E.7/3.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/PSC.6/3 Sixth
Meeting of the Project Steering Committee for the
UNEP/GEF Project "Reversing Environmental Degradation
Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand". Report
of the Meeting. Siem Reap, Cambodia, 20 ­ 22 November
2006 UNEP/GEF/SCS/ PSC.6/3.

---

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3
Annex 2
Page 2

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.7/3
Seventh Meeting of the Regional Scientific and Technical
Committee for the UNEP/GEF Project "Reversing Environmental
Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand".
Report of the Meeting. Siem Reap, Cambodia, 14 ­ 17 November
2006 UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.7/3.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.8/3
Eighth Meeting of the Regional Working Group on the Fisheries
Component for the UNEP/GEF Project "Reversing Environmental
Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand".
Report of the Meeting. Belitung, Indonesia, 1 ­ 4 November 2006
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.8/3.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RTF-L.5/3
Fifth Meeting of the Regional Task Force on Legal Matters for the
UNEP/GEF Project "Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends
in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand". Report of the
Meeting. Batam, Indonesia, 18 ­ 21 September 2006 UNEP/GEF/
SCS/RTF-L.5/3.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-M.7/3
Seventh Meeting of the Regional Working Group on the
Mangroves Sub-component for the UNEP/GEF Project "Reversing
Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and
Gulf of Thailand". Report of the Meeting. Pontianak, Batu Ampar,
Indonesia, 4 ­ 8 September 2006 UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-M.7/3.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RTF-E.5/3
Fifth Meeting of the Regional Task Force on Economic Valuation
for the UNEP/GEF Project "Reversing Environmental Degradation
Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand". Report of the
Meeting. Kota Kinabaru, Malaysia, 21 ­ 24 August 2006
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RTF-E.5/3.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-LbP.7/3 Seventh Meeting of the Regional Working Group on the Land-
based Pollution Component for the UNEP/GEF Project "Reversing
Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and
Gulf of Thailand". Report of the Meeting. Sihanoukville, Cambodia,
7 ­ 10 August 2006 UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-LbP.7/3.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.7/3
Seventh Meeting of the Regional Working Group on the Seagrass
Sub-component for the UNEP/GEF Project "Reversing
Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and
Gulf of Thailand". Report of the Meeting. Beihai, China, 24 ­ 27
July 2006 UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.7/3.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.7/3
Seventh Meeting of the Regional Working Group on the Coral
Reefs Sub-component for the UNEP/GEF Project "Reversing
Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and
Gulf of Thailand". Report of the Meeting. Kudat, Malaysia, 10 ­ 13
July 2006 UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.7/3.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-W.7/3
Seventh Meeting of the Regional Working Group on the Wetland
Sub-component for the UNEP/GEF Project "Reversing
Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and
Gulf of Thailand". Report of the Meeting. Manila, Philippines, 19 ­
21 June 2006 UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-W.7/3.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.7/3
Seventh Meeting of the Regional Working Group on the Fisheries
Component for the UNEP/GEF Project "Reversing Environmental
Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand".
Report of the Meeting. Bangkok, Thailand, 16 ­ 18 May 2006
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.7/3.

---

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3
Annex 2
Page 3

Documents received during the meeting

Cambodia:
National Action Plan for Coral Reef and Seagrass Management in Cambodia 2006-
2015, 2 copies.

China:
Review of National Legislation of Seagrass in China, December 2002.

Review of Past and On-Going Projects on Seagrass in China, December 2002.

Present Threats to Key Seagrass Beds of China, January 2003.
The Causal Chain Analysis of Threats on Seagrass Beds in China, January 2003.
Review Economic Valuation Criteria and Its Application in China, March 2003.
Seagrass Metadata of China, March 2003.
Questionnaire on Data of Seagrass of China, March 2003.
Characterisation of Hepu Seagrass Bed in Guangxi of China (Draft), March 2003.
Characterisation of Xincun Seagrass Bed in Hainan of China (Draft), March 2003.
GIS Maps of Seagrass Beds of China, May 2003.
Demonstration Site Proposal of Hepu Seagrass Bed in China, October 2003.
Demonstration Site Proposal of Liusha Seagrass Bed in China, October 2003.
Demonstration Site Proposal of Lian Seagrass Bed in China, October 2003.
National Report of China (Draft 1), December 2003.

National Report of China (Draft 2), November 2004.

National Report of China (Draft 3), March 2005.

National Report of China (Draft 4), July 2005, Chinese Language.

National Action for Seagrass of China (Draft 1), April 2004.

National Action for Seagrass of China (Draft 2), July 2004.

National Action for Seagrass of China (Draft 3), March 2005.

National Action for Seagrass of China (Draft 4), November 2005.

National Action for Seagrass of China (Draft 5), January 2006.

National Action for Seagrass of China (Draft 6), November 2006.

Progress Report of Seagrass Sub-component for NTWG-2, Chinese Language.

Progress Report of Seagrass Sub-component for NTWG-7, Chinese Language.

Indonesia:
Copies of Financial Statements for the year ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 and
Independent Auditor's Report.

National Seagrass Action Plan for Indonesia, March 2007.


Philippines:
National Seagrass Conservation Strategy of the Philippines.

Agreement between Barangay Binabalian and Barangay Goyoden, Bolinao,
Pangasinan.
Brochure: BSDS, Bolinao Seagrass Demonstration Site, 8 copies.

Comic Book: Lusay Ay Buhay, Tarektek Ng Bolinao, 7 copies.

Poster: Para Sa Amin, Buhay At Lusay Ay Iisa, 1 copy.

Poster: Gusto Mo Bang Sinisira Ang, Tinitirhan Mo? 1 copy.

Poster: Pag-isipan Mo Muna Bago Sirain Yung Tirahan Nila, 1 copy.

Poster: Tahimik Na Namumuhay Sa Ilalim Ng Dagat, 1 copy.

---

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3
Annex 3
Page 1
ANNEX 3
Agenda
1.
OPENING OF THE MEETING
1.1 Welcome Address on behalf of UNEP
1.2 Opening Statement by the Representative of Sihanoukville Government
1.3 Introduction
of
Participants

2. ORGANISATION
OF
THE
MEETING
2.1 Election
of
Officers
2.2 Documentation and Administrative Arrangements

3.
ADOPTION OF THE MEETING AGENDA

4.
STATUS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS FOR 2006: PROGRESS REPORTS;
EXPENDITURE REPORTS; AND AUDIT REPORTS

5.
STATUS OF THE SUBSTANTIVE OUTPUTS
5.1 Publication of National Reports in National Languages and in English
5.2 Status of Finalisation, Adoption and Implementation of the National Action Plans
5.3 Update of the Regional GIS Database and Meta-database and Use of the Project
Website

6.
REVIEW OF THE SEAGRASS TRAINING COURSE
6.1 Review of outline of the Training Course Management Models and Strategies for Coral
Reef and Seagrass Ecosystems
6.2 Organisation of, and Support to the National Echo-seminars

7.
PROGRESS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION; EVALUATION; AND COMPLETION OF THE
DEMONSTRATION SITE ACTIVITIES
7.1 Hepu, China ­ Professor Xiaoping Huang
7.2 East Bintan, Indonesia ­ Mr. Tri Edi Kuriandewa
7.3 Bolinao, Philippines ­ Dr Miguel Fortes
7.4 Phu Quoc, Viet Nam ­ Dr. Nguyen Van Tien
7.5 Kampot, Cambodia ­ Mr. Ouk Vibol

8.
FINALISATION OF THE REGIONAL STRATEGIC ACTION PROGRAMME (SAP)
8.1 Finalisation of Inputs from the Regional Working Group on Seagrass to the Revised
SAP
8.2 National Workshop to Consider the Revised SAP

9.
CONSIDERATION OF THE TOTAL ECONOMIC VALUES FOR SEAGRASS ECOSYSTEMS
AND THE COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF ACTIONS DETAILED IN THE SAP AS
DETERMINED BY THE REGIONAL TASK FORCE ON ECONOMIC VALUATION

10.
PREPARATION FOR THE THIRD REGIONAL SCIENTIFIC CONFERENCE AND MAYOR'S
ROUND TABLE

11.
WORK PLAN AND ACTIVITIES OF THE REGIONAL WORKING GROUP ON SEAGRASS
11.1 Work Plan for 2007 - 2008
11.2 Maintenance of the Network and Project Benefits after June 2008

12.
DATE AND PLACE OF THE NINTH MEETING OF THE REGIONAL WORKING GROUP ON
SEAGRASS

13. ANY
OTHER
BUSINESS

14.
ADOPTION OF THE REPORT OF THE MEETING

15.
CLOSURE OF THE MEETING

---

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3
Annex 4
Page 1

ANNEX 4

Details of the proposed National Echo-seminar to follow the "UNEP-GEF-SCS
Regional Training Course on Management Models and Strategies for Coral Reefs and
Seagrass"

BACKGROUND

The Regional Scientific and Technical Committee recommended and the Project Steering Committee
agreed to offer a combined course covering the management of both coral reef and seagrass
habitats. The Marine Science Institute of the University of the Philippines (MSI) proposal has been
accepted by the RSTC with the suggestion that a greater number of regional experts be involved as
resource persons for the delivery of the course.

The training course is entitled "UNEP-GEF-SCS Training Course on Management Models and
Strategies for Coral Reef and Seagrass Ecosystems". Originally this had been planned to be
conducted from 9th ­ 21st April 2007, but the dates have been changed to 29th October ­ 10th
November 2007.

Trainees attending the regional training courses are expected to conduct "National Echo seminars"
over a 1 to 3 day period following the completion of the regional training course, and the Specialised
Executing Agencies and the Focal Points for the corresponding sub-component of the project are
expected to provide logistic support to those seminars.

PLANS FOR THE DELIVERY OF NATIONAL ECHO-SEMINARS

The regional working group discussed the timing, numbers of participants and location of the national
echo seminars and the information is presented below as Table 1. The necessary budgets will be
included in the amended budget for the third amendment to the Memoranda of Understanding.

Table 1
Details of planned national echo-seminars in each participating country.

NO
No.
Proposed
Country Date
Venue
Focus
DAYS
Participants
budget(US$)
Assessment, Monitoring & Community
Kampot (SG)
3 days
15
2,543+2,543 =
Cambodia End
Nov
Based Management, Remote sensing,
Sihanoukville (CR)
3 days
15
5,086
sustainable financing
Hepu (SG)
3 days
20
2,200+1,800 =
China End
Nov
Assessment & Monitoring
Sanya (SG)
3 days
15
4,000
Coastal resource management plan,
Jakarta (SG)
3 days
20
seagrass monitoring and assessment,
1980+1860 =
Indonesia End
Nov
Bintan (SG)
3 days
15
livelihood scanning and support,
3,840
sustainable financing
Seagrass assessment and monitoring,
Malaysia
End Nov
Johor (SG)
3 days
12
4,994
community-based management
Puerto Princesa,
Coral reef and seagrass management
(CR& SG)
3 days
20
and governance,
2,925+1,985 =
Philippines End
Nov Puerto Galera
3 days
20
Coral reef and seagrass management,
4,910
(CR& SG)
tourism and governance
Seagrass assessment, monitoring and
restoration, CRM planning and
Thailand
End Nov
Rayong (SG)
3 days
40
5,357
adoption, sustainable financing, and
cost benefit analysis
Seagrass community-based livelihood,
Viet Nam
End Nov
Phu Quoc (CR& SG) 3 days
25
4,000
sustainable financing

---

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3
Annex 5
Page 1

ANNEX 5

Revised Estimates of the Costs of Actions Proposed for Inclusion in the Regional
Strategic Action Programme and Outcomes of the Cost Benefit Analysis

BACKGROUND

The entire text of the first draft of the revised Strategic Action Programme as modified subsequent to
discussion during the Regional Scientific and Technical Committee, Project Steering Committee and
Regional Task Force on Economic Valuation meetings was presented to the Regional Working Group
for their consideration. The text was reviewed and a number of minor amendments and corrections
were proposed to the body of the text that were incorporated into the body of the Master Copy of the
SAP.

COSTS OF ACTIONS

The working group noted that the value of total annual production of goods and services by the four
habitats from areas bordering the South China Sea demonstrated unequivocally the importance of
mangroves in this region. The total annual value of mangrove production exceeds 5.1 billion US
dollars annually compared with around 1.2 billion for wetlands and coral reefs and a mere 86 million
US dol ars for seagrass habitats.

It is important to recognise that the values for goods and services both individual y and collectively are
extremely conservative as a consequence of the manner in which they have been calculated using
weighted means. Where data are lacking for a good or service from one country the consequence will
be a lowering of the weighted mean regional value. Given the absence of values for many goods and
services in each habitat the values are likely to be as low as 50% or less of the real value. For
comparison the values derived by Costanza et al. are presented along side those from the present
study in the following table.

Table 1
Comparison of the Total Economic Value of coastal habitats as determined by
Costanza et al. 1997 and during the present study.
US$ per hectare per annum
Area
ha
Total Value present study
Costanza Present
study
Mangroves 1,799,136
9,990
2,872.25
5.196
billion
Coral reefs
750,307
6,076
1,542.56 1.157 billion
Seagrass 73,769
22,400
1,181.59
0.872
billion
"Wetlands" 4,201,145
14,785
295.15
1.239
billion

The group recognised however that in the absence of data they were unable to work, during the
present meeting with the values but needed to consider possible reduction in costs as a means of
making the Strategic Action Programme less costly.

REVISION OF THE ACTIONS PROPOSED FOR INCLUSION IN THE REGIONAL STRATEGIC
ACTION PROGRAMME

Having examined in some detail the proposed actions agreed during the preceding meeting and those
which were contained in the current draft of the SAP the working group proceeded to revise the
recommended actions as presented in Table 2 below. Once revised the actions were costed using
2006 prices and the costs and benefits tabulated and the resultant cost benefit analysis is presented
in Table 3.

In summary the revised actions and associated benefits gained over five years through meeting the
SAP targets are as fol ows
Total Benefit:
2,805,668.35 US$
Total Costs:
652,677.93 US$
Total Net benefit: 2,152,990.42 US$
Benefit cost ratio: 4.30

---

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3
Annex 5
Page 2

Table 2

Regional activities for inclusion in the Strategic Action Programme and estimated costs.
Estimated
Costs by Year
Components Sub-components
Activities
Description
Costs
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
1. Building
1.1 Mechanisms for 1.
1.1 Exchange of personnel among
3 pers/country, 7 countries, 2 times, 30 days.
39,900
19,950
19,950
capacity and
knowledge and seagrass sites.
Costs: air fare: $500, Stipend: $15/per/day
awareness at all
information
1.1.2 Regional Training on seagrass Biennial Trainings: (4 pers/country, 7
210,000
70,000
35,000
70,000 35,000
levels to ensure
exchange
management models and
countries/course) + (National echo-seminars:
long-term
National Echo-seminars
7 countries, $5,000 x 2 seminars)
sustainable uses
1.1.3 Maintain the SCS Website and
In-kind contribution from the network





of seagrass
input new data and information
habitats and
1.1.4 Bi-annual seagrass "YALAMUN" Translation into 7 languages from in-kind





resources
publication. For example the
contribution. English text to be prepared by a
outputs from 2.1.4
coordinating entity
1.1.5 Biennial Regional Conference
2 conferences, 100 pers./conference, 3
186,000
93,000

93,000
on seagrass management
days/conference
1.2 Materials for
1.2.2 National echo-seminars to
1 seminar, US$5000/country, 7 countries
35,000
35,000



use at all levels incorporate seagrass into
in promoting
primary and secondly school
knowledge and Curricular
awareness of 1.2.3 Compilation, selection,
In-kind contribution from the national





sustainable
production and dissemination of government
management
general awareness materials of
practices
seagrass through national media
2. Enhancing
2.1 Develop and 2.1.1 Further enhance the regional
Updating the GIS database to the regional
12,000
2,400
2,400
2,400
2,400
2,400
management
enhance
seagrass GIS database (e.g.
database by SEAs as in-kind contribution.
skills through
guidelines and finer resolutions, using
Maintaining the regional GIS database by a
development
other tools as standardized methods,
coordinating entity: 20% of staff of SEA
and
information
Technology
START RC (US$200/month, 12 months, 5
dissemination of
resources and
years)
regionally
facilitate their 2.1.2 More assessment of baseline
National activities as in-kind contribution from





applicable tools
regional
information on seagrass from
the national governments
dissemination unstudied areas to find the
and adoption
seagrass distribution
for seagrass
2.1.3 Expand and up-date the
Updating the meta database to the regional
12,000
2,400
2,400
2,400
2,400
2,400
management
regional seagrass meta-
database by SEAs as in-kind contribution.
Database
Maintaining the regional meta database by a
coordinating entity: 20% of staff of SEA
START RC (US$200/month, 12 months, 5
years)
2.1.4 Regional synthesis of
A 3-day workshop for participants from
13,020

13,020

experiences and lessons learnt national echo-seminar and demo-site, 2
at UNEP/GEF/SCS
per/country, 7 countries
demonstration and other sites;
and replicate models useful in
other areas
2.1.5 Development of criteria and
It will be discussed during regular meetings of
10,000

10,000
award system for successful
the RWG-SG. Award after 5 years: Total
seagrass management
three prizes: US$10,000

---

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3
Annex 5
Page 3

Table 2 cont.
Regional activities for inclusion in the Strategic Action Programme and estimated costs.
Estimated
Costs by Year
Components Sub-components
Activities
Description
Costs
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
3. Policy, legal and 3.1 Integration of 3.1.1 Develop guidelines to integrate These guidelines will be discussed during the
22,320
22,320


institutional
research
research results into
regular the RWG-SG meetings. A workshop
arrangement and results into
management and policy making with participation of the RWG-SG, policy
regional
Management
makers, invited scientists and legal experts: 3
coordination
and policy
days, 7 countries, 3 pers/country, 3 invited
making
speakers
3.2
3.2.1

International
Annual Meeting

s of the Regional 1 meeting/year, 5 years, 1 per/country, 7
54,250
10,850
10,850
10,850 10,850
10,850
and regional Working Group on Seagrass
countries, 5 days
cooperation, (RWG-SG)
and
3.2.2 Promote transboundary
Five 3-day workshops for the development of
130,000
26,000
26,000
26,000 26,000
26,000
coordination
management of seagrass for
management plans. 1.Cambodia-Viet Nam
sustainable fisheries and the
($6,000*5=30,000), 2.Philippine-Malaysia-
protection of endangered
Indonesia ($10,000*5=50,000), 3.Viet Nam-
species (dugongs and turtles)
China (10,000*5=50,000). 10 pers/workshop
Total
724,490 239,650 118,920 124,670 96,600 144,650

Table 3
Costs and Benefits of the actions proposed in the regional Strategic Action Programme.
YEARS
2005
2007
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total
Cummulative Target Areas to be Managed (ha) 2008 onwards

12,928.00
18,151.20
23,374.40
28,597.60
33,820.80
39,044.00

Cummulate benefit in terms of area saved

182.81 365.62 548.44 731.25 914.06

Value of Benefits at 2005 prices

216,008.83 432,017.66 648,026.49 864,035.32
1,080,044.16

Discount factor for NPV 2005 (i=4%)


0.89
0.85
0.82
0.79
0.76

Benefits
2005
values

192,031.06 369,290.51 532,630.54 682,859.67 820,744.79 2,597,556.57
Compound factor for NPV 2007 (i=4%)


1.08
1.08
1.08
1.08
1.08

Benefits
2007
values

207,700.80 398,833.75 575,240.98 737,488.44 886,404.38 2,805,668.35
Costs at 2006 prices

239,650.00
118,920.00
124,670.00
96,600.00
144,650.00

Discount factor (NPV for 2006) i=4%


0.92
0.89
0.85
0.82
0.79

Costs 2006 value


221,569.90
105,719.45
106,568.44
79,398.16
114,319.00
627,574.94
Compound factor (NPV for 2007) I=4%

1.04
1.04
1.04
1.04
1.04

Costs 2007 values


230,432.69 109,948.22 110,831.18 82,574.08 118,891.76 652,677.93
Net Benefits


-22,731.89 288,885.52 464,409.81 654,914.36 767,512.62 2,152,990.42

---

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3
Annex 6
Page 1

ANNEX 6

Work Plan and Timetable for the Regional Working Group on Seagrass 2007 To 2008

Table 1
Work Plan and Time Table for Seagrass Sub-component to December 31st 2008.

2006 2007 2008
Quarter
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
Month J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D
National Committee meetings
x
x
x
x
x
x
X
x




National Technical Working Group

x

x

x

x




RWG-SG
meetings
X X X
Provide information to RWG-SG and RSTC












Maintain national meta-database












Completion of Outstanding Tasks of the Original MoU
Publication of National Reports in local languages


Mal



Mal





Regional Publication of National Reports in English




X




Regional Distribution of English Language reports




X



Maintaining and updating GIS data and information











Maintaining and updating regional meta-database











Implementation of Demonstration Sites
Continue the Implementation of demonstration sites












SEAs to provide written report of outputs of demonstration sites







X

Upload reports/outputs of Kampot demosiste to the website






X
X



Upload reports/outputs of Hepu demosiste to the website






X
X



Upload reports/outputs of Bolinao demosiste to the website






X
X



Upload reports/outputs of Phu Quoc demosiste to the website





X
X



Finalisation, Adoption and Implementation of National Action Plans
Finalisation of National Action Plans





X




Phi




X
Adoption of National Action Plans



Cam
China
Mal
(Tha?)
Indo
Publication of NAPs






X




National public meetings/workshops for awareness of the NAP


X


X



Finalisation of Strategic Action Programme (SAP)
First draft of revised SAP for seagrass



X







Provision of data on economic value of seagrass



X

Input from members to the PCU for the 2nd draft SAP










Finalisation of the draft SAP for Seagrass





X






Implementation of the Regional Training Programme
Signing MoU with the selected institution




X






Finalisation of the syllabus and training materials



X

X






Nomination of trainees



X
X
Conduct of the regional training course







X




Conduct of national "echo" seminar






X



Preparation for RSC-3 and Mayor's Roundtable
Sep










SEAs send presentations to the PCU
30
The PCU send notice information to SEAs





x

---

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.8/3
Annex 6
Page 2

Table 2
Schedule of Meetings for 2008. (RWG = Regional Working Group; -M = Mangroves; -CR = Coral reefs; -SG = Seagrass; -W = Wetlands; -F= Fisheries;
LbP = Land-based Pollution; RTF-E = Regional Task Force on Economic Valuation; RTF-L = Regional Task Force on Legal Matters) (H = United Nations Holidays),
(RSTC = Regional Scientific and Technical Committee; RSTC-SC = RSTC Sub-Committee; PSC = Project Steering Committee.


S
S M T W T F S
S M T W T F S
S M T W T F S
S M T W T F S
S M T W T F S
S

January
1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10
11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31




































February
1
2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29

































March
1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31



RWG-SG-9
















RTF-E-8





April
1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10
11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30



RWG-M-9


H


H













May
1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31




































June
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30



































July
1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10
11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31




































August
1
2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31













H

















September
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10
11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30



































October
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10
11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31



































November
1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30


































December
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10
11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31







H



















H

---