UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
COVER PAGE
1. Identifiers
Project Number:
[Implementing Agency Project Number not yet assigned]
Project Title:
Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand
& Viet Nam: Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in
the South China Sea1 and Gulf of Thailand2
Implementing Agency:
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
Executing Agencies:
Secretariat for the Action Plan for the Seas of East Asia
(EAS/RCU); Ministries of Environment in each country.
Requesting Countries:
Regional: Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines,
Thailand & Viet Nam
Eligibility:
The countries are eligible under paragraph 9(b) of the GEF
Instrument. The Strategic Action Programme is consistent with the
relevant provisions of regional and global Conventions relating to
International Waters to which the countries are signatories and/or
contracting parties.
GEF Focal Areas:
International Waters with relevance to Biological Diversity
GEF Programming Framework: Waterbody-based Operational Program # 8
2. Summary:
Major outcomes will include an approved Strategic Action Programme including, a targeted and
costed programme of action and a recommended framework for improved regional co-operation
in the management of the environment of the South China Sea; a series of national and regional
management plans for specific habitats and issues; 9 demonstration management activities at
sites of regional and global significance; a regional management plan for maintenance of
transboundary3 fish stocks in the Gulf of Thailand; pilot activities relating to alternative remedial
actions to address priority transboundary pollutants and adopted water quality objectives and
standards. Activities include national level analyses and reviews and management of
demonstration activities and regional harmonisation and co-ordination of national level actions.
3. Costs and Financing (Million US $)
GEF:
Project
:
US$ 16.414
PDF - B
:
US$ 0.335
Subtotal GEF
:
US$
16.749
Co-financing: PDF-B (all sources)
:
US$ 0.252

1 The term "South China Sea" is used in its geographic sense and does not imply recognition of any territorial claims
within the area.
2 No activities shall be undertaken under this project in disputed areas of the South China Sea, nor shall issues of
sovereignty be addressed directly or indirectly through project activities.
3 In the context of GEF, the term "transboundary" refers to the causes of environmental degradation that operate at a
distance from the site of impact. For example, the globalisation of trade and world price of shrimp are important
causes of loss of mangroves in the South China Sea and the Gulf of Thailand.

---

UNEP (in cash & kind)4
:
US$ 0.630
Governments (in cash & kind)5
:
US$ 8.895
Other (estimated6)
:
US$ 6.622
Subtotal Co-financing
:
US$
15.769
Total Project Cost
:
US$
31.683
4. Associated Financing (Million US $)7
DANIDA-IOC
:
DKr 2.270
IOC-WESTPAC
:
US$
1.887
HKUST
:
HK$ 18.000
SWOL
:
US$
2.000
5. Operational Focal Point Endorsement(s)
Mok Mareth, Honourable Minister, Ministry of Environment, Kingdom of Cambodia, Original
received 15 March 1999; 2nd endorsement 17 August 2000.
Chen Huan, Deputy Division Chief, Department of International Co-operation, Ministry of
Finance, Beijing, China. endorsement sought 4th March 1999
Sudarsono, Executive Secretary, State Ministry of the Environment, Jakarta, Indonesia 16 March
1999: 2nd endorsement Effendi A.Sumardja, Assistant to the Minister, State
Ministry of the Environment, Jakarta, Indonesia. 29/8/2000.
K. Nagulendran, pp Secretary General, Ministry of Science, Technology & Environment,
Malaysia. Original endorsement received 25 March 1999
Ramon J.P. Paje, Undersecretary for Environment & Programs Development, Department of
Environment & Natural Resources, Manila, Philippines, 23 March 1999.
Chartree Chueyprasit, Secretary General, Office of Environmental Policy & Planning, Bangkok,
Thailand 19 March 1999: 2nd endorsement Saksit Tridech, Secretary
General, Office of Environmental Policy and Planning, Bangkok, Thailand,
28 August 2000.
Nguyen Ngoo Sinh, Director general, Viet Nam National Environment Agency, Hanoi, Viet
Nam. 23 March 1999.
6. IA Contact:
Mr Ahmed Djoghlaf, Executive Co-ordinator, UNEP/GEF Co-ordination
Office, UNEP, Nairobi, Tel: 254-2-624166; Fax: 254-2-624041; Email:
Ahmed.Djoghlaf@unep.org

4 Cash contribution is for the convening of COBSEA (210,000 US $) meetings & is derived from the EAS Regional
Trust Fund. The in-kind contribution is the estimated staff time for EAS/RCU professional and support staff to
project co-ordination.
5 This figure represents an estimate of the costs of national participation in the various project components and
activities.
6 This figure represents an in principle commitment to co-financing by the various collaborating entities, subject to
detailed analysis during the appraisal phase.
7 The present entries represent agreements in principle to co-ordinate the activities of these projects with those
proposed in this document. It is anticipated that during the appraisal phase linkages will be established with other
ongoing projects and that arrangements will be made to co-ordinate actions, hence this list is expected to be
substantially increased by the time of final clearance.

---

LIST OF ACRONYMS
ASEAN
Association of South East Asian Nations
EA
Executing Agency (for a GEF Project)
EAS/RCU
Secretariat (Regional Co-ordinating Unit) for the Action Plan for the Seas of
East Asia
CBD
The United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity
COBSEA
Coordinating Body for the Seas of East Asia
FAO
Food & Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (Regional Office for
Asia and the Pacific)
GDP
Gross Domestic Product
GEF
Global Environment Facility
GPA
Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment
from Land Based Activities.
HKUST
Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
IA
Implementing Agency (of the GEF)
IMO
International Maritime Organization
IOC/WESTPAC Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (Regional Secretariat for the
Western Pacific)
LOICZ
Land Ocean Interactions in the Coastal Zone (Core Project of the IGBP)
MARPOL
International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships.
PDF-B
Project Preparation and Development Facility Grant Block-B
PEMSEA
Partnerships in Environmental Management for the Seas of East Asia
SAP
Strategic Action Programme
SARCS
Southeast Asian Regional Committee for START
START
System for Analysis, Research and Training (for global change)
SWOL
SARCS, WOTRO, LOICZ
TDA
Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis
UNDP
United Nations Development Programme
UNCLOS
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
UNEP
United Nations Environment Programme
UNFCC
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
WOTRO
Netherlands Foundation for Tropical Research

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
PROJECT8 DESCRIPTION
BACKGROUND & CONTEXT - BASELINE COURSE OF ACTION.
1.
The South China Sea represents an area of globally significant biological diversity. The
Indo-west Pacific marine biogeographic province has long been recognised as the global centre
of marine shallow-water, tropical biodiversity. Forty five species of mangrove from the global
total of fifty seven; fifty of seventy coral genera; twenty of fifty species of seagrass; and, seven
of nine giant clam species are found in the nearshore areas of the South China Sea. Compared to
the Atlantic, the tropical Indo-west Pacific is highly diverse. Only five species of mangrove and
some 35 coral species are found in the Atlantic compared with fifty one mangrove and over
seven hundred coral species in the Indo-west Pacific. Over 400 species of corals are recorded
from the Philippines compared with 200 species from the Red Sea, 117 from South East India
and fifty-seven from the Persian Gulf.
2.
This high biological diversity is not merely threatened by continuation of current
unsustainable patterns of use, but has also been seriously degraded in the recent past. Recent
estimates suggest that approximately 2 million hectares of mangrove forest or 12% of the world
total are located in the countries bordering the South China Sea. This represents only 31% of the
estimated total found in these countries at the start of this century. Estimated rates of loss in each
country range from around 0.5 to 3.5% of total area per annum and continuation of these present
trends could result in total loss of this habitat in the region by around 2030. Eighty two percent
of the coral reefs surveyed under collaborative ASEAN projects in the South China Sea display
evidence of degradation while other estimates suggest that 50% of Philippines and 85% of
Indonesian reefs can be considered as being at high risk. The high species diversity of the
shallow water habitats, combined with the variation in geomorphic and geological setting and
formation type, contribute to the global significance of these habitats in this region.
3.
In addition to its significance as a global centre of shallow water marine biological
diversity, the South China Sea supports a significant world fishery of importance to the food
security, and as a source of export income, for the countries bordering this sea. Capture fisheries
from the South China Sea contribute 10% of the world's landed catch at around five million tons
per year and five of the eight top shrimp producers in the world are border states of the South
China Sea (Indonesia, first; Viet Nam, second; China, third; Thailand, sixth; and, the Philippines,
eighth.). The countries of the region produce 23% of the world tuna catch and almost three-
quarters of the world's canned tuna. The share of world production of aquaculture products
including shrimp rose from 46% in 1984, to 66% in 1994. The proportion of shrimp produced
through extensive culture is high, contributing significantly to the loss of mangroves and other
coastal habitats bordering the South China Sea.
4.
The fisheries sector is significant in the context of domestic food security for the
participating countries. Fish consumption is highest in the Philippines and least in Cambodia.
Demersal fisheries within the region are fully exploited with evidence showing that the landings
of many species are currently declining. The decline in fish availability in the subsistence sector

8 This project document shall not be used as a reference in support of any sovereignty position by any party or
country.
1

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
has led to the adoption of destructive fishing practices such as blast fishing. Based on present
consumption patterns and population growth rates, Cambodia, the Philippines and Viet Nam will
have to produce significantly more fish by 2005 just to meet domestic demand. Pressure on the
coastal resources is therefore likely to increase significantly in the immediate future. Despite
nutritional requirements and current population growth rates, the countries surrounding the South
China Sea are generally net exporters of fishery products. Since the need to generate foreign
exchange to buy capital inputs for industrialisation is a higher priority than food security, this
trade pattern is likely to continue, unless policy shifts occur that result in food security becoming
a higher priority in the national agendas of participating countries.
5.
The programming context of this project is the GEF Operational Programme #8 which
states: "the GEF will play a catalytic role in assisting a group of countries to leverage co-
financing....... for necessary elements of a comprehensive approach for sustainably managing the
international waters environment" [para 8.2]. In addition this operational programme further
states that: "Projects in this Operational program focus mainly on seriously threatened water-
bodies and the most imminent transboundary threats to their ecosystems. [para 8.3]" The
present project proposal meets these requirements and will assist the countries of the region in
meeting their obligations under various global conventions relating to biological diversity and
the marine environment. In addition, the specific activities proposed under this project are
complementary and additional to those supported by the Environment Fund of UNEP as part of
its regular mandate and programme within the framework of the Regional Seas Programme.
6.
Recognising that actions to date have failed to halt degradation of the environment of the
South China Sea, the countries of the region sought the assistance of UNEP and the Global
Environment Facility (GEF). The XIIth intergovernmental meeting of the Coordinating Body for
the Seas of East Asia (COBSEA), in December 1996 endorsed a request for grant assistance
from the GEF. The GEF made available a project preparation and development facility grant
(PDF-B) to enable countries to prepare the necessary analyses and reviews. In accordance with
the GEF Operational Strategy a Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis and Framework Strategic
Action Programme were prepared.
7.
National committees were formed in each participating country to prepare a
comprehensive, country-based analysis of water-related environmental problems and concerns.
The first drafts of the national reports9 were submitted and evaluated prior to a second meeting of
national co-ordinators in June, 1998 which, prepared a comparative weighting of all identified
major issues. On the basis of the national reports a Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis (TDA)
was prepared which provides the scientific and technical basis for the choice of priority actions
proposed in this project and which served as the basis for development of a framework Strategic
Action Programme (SAP). The TDA identifies the regional priorities among water-related
problems and concerns, their socio-economic and sectorial root causes, and the extent to which
the problems are transboundary in either origin or effect. The process of developing the
framework SAP has involved a comprehensive and exhaustive analysis of existing national and
international agreements, intergovernmental and regional declarations, past and ongoing projects,
actions and programmes relevant to the environment of the South China Sea.

9 The National Reports, TDA and SAP are available from the UNEP Co-ordination Unit in Bangkok ­ Annex E
2

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
8.
The National reports, the Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis, and the Framework
Strategic Action Programme were all submitted to the XIIIth intergovernmental meeting of
COBSEA. This meeting endorsed the framework SAP that contains an outline of this proposed
GEF project, and requested UNEP to formulate a GEF project brief for submission to the GEF
(this document) to address the priority actions identified in the SAP. A key element of this
project is actions that will lead to the further elaboration and development of the present
Framework Strategic Action Programme. It is the intention of participating governments that this
process of elaboration be undertaken over the next three years with a view to their endorsing and
adopting a final draft during an intergovernmental meeting to be held in December 2003.
9.
The TDA suggests that a major cause of coastal environmental degradation is the present
density and growth of coastal populations. A total of 270 million people live in the coastal sub-
regions of the seven countries covered by this project. The population is concentrated in 93 cities
with over 100,000 inhabitants and the weighted mean population growth rate in the coastal zone
is 2.17%, indicative of doubling of populations in 32 years. In Cambodia, Indonesia and
Malaysia, growth rates in the coastal sub-regions are 1.5 to 2.0 times the national growth rates.
Population densities are highest for the coastal sub-regions of China and the Philippines at 471
and 472, people km-2; Malaysia and Cambodia are least dense at 31 and 49, persons km-2. In Viet
Nam, higher densities of between 500 and 1,000 people km-2 are found along the northern part of
the Gulf of Tonkin. Tourism, increasing fisheries development, and oil exploration and
exploitation, are among the major economic driving forces behind this dramatic increase in
coastal populations.
10.
The participating countries are at various stages of industrialisation. Cambodia, with the
lowest national GDP of US $ 0.12 million earns 45% of this from agriculture, and 20% from
industry. In contrast, Indonesia relies on the industrial sector for 57% of its GDP. On the basis of
national data, for per capita GDP the countries can be ranked as follows: Malaysia > Thailand >
China > Philippines > Indonesia > Viet Nam > Cambodia. The rapid economic development that
has occurred in this region over the last decade has taken place largely at the expense of the
environment. A significant barrier to planning for more environmentally sustainable modes of
development has been the absence of adequate economic evaluation of habitats and the goods
and services they provide, resulting in development decisions being made on the basis of short-
term economic gains.
11.
Numerous actions are taking place at the national and regional levels to address the
environmental problems that have resulted from the rapid pace of development and
industrialisation, which has occurred over the last decade. Thailand for example, has an
extensive national mangrove reforestation programme, Philippines has several localised
programmes of coastal zone management, including examples of community based approaches
to management, and all countries have activities and programmes related to the conservation of
significant biological diversity including wetlands. Many of the actions at national level are
undertaken outside the framework of co-ordinated programmes resulting in significant
duplication and overlap.
12.
Within the wider East Asian Seas region the GEF/UNDP/IMO regional Programme on
Building Partnerships in Environmental Management for the Seas of East Asia (PEMSEA) is
directly relevant to the objectives of this project, although the approaches, modalities of
execution and geographic coverage of the two projects are different. The present proposal is
3

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
complementary since it focuses on regional scale interventions designed to halt or reduce the
present rates of environmental degradation in respect of habitat loss or degradation, over-
exploitation of fisheries and regionally significant transboundary pollution. By closely co-
ordinating the two GEF funded projects, mutual value-added benefits will be derived.
13.
Unresolved territorial disputes are a source of sensitivity in the region. Over the last
several years the countries have demonstrated a willingness to co-operate in matters relating to
environmental management, and there is an increasing recognition that the benefits resulting
from co-operative environmental management actions are not dependent on the resolution of
such sensitive issues. Recognising the sensitivities of the area however, it has been agreed that
no activities shall be undertaken under this project in disputed areas of the South China Sea, nor
shall issues of sovereignty be addressed directly or indirectly through project activities.
14.
The lack of a regionally co-ordinated approach to remedial actions significantly reduces
their effectiveness, and recognising this the countries bordering the South China Sea have
initiated a number of joint programmes involving two or more countries within the region. These
include inter alia, the major oceanographic and fisheries studies of the Gulf of Thailand, the East
Asian Seas Action Plan of UNEP, the Regional work of the FAO, and the deliberations of the
South China Sea Informal Working Group.
15.
In the absence of a GEF intervention it is probable that the present types of intervention,
which have been demonstrated over the last twenty years as being ineffective in halting the pace
of environmental degradation, will continue. Without a concerted regional approach to
environmental management it is unlikely that the present rates of habitat degradation will be
slowed. The likely consequence of such a scenario is the loss of globally significant biological
diversity over the next century.
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES (ALTERNATIVE)
16.
The actions proposed in the framework Strategic Action Programme are wide ranging in
both context and proposed areas for action. Successful implementation of the Programme will
depend upon co-ordination of actions by diverse organisations, agencies, non-governmental
organisations, private sector, government entities and stakeholder groups at both the national and
regional levels. Such regional co-ordination of actions will be undertaken by UNEP and entails
significant transaction costs but can potentially generate significant benefits in reducing
duplication of effort and improving the effectiveness of individual uncoordinated actions.
17.
The overall goals of this project are: to create an environment at the regional level, in
which collaboration and partnership in addressing environmental problems of the South China
Sea, between all stakeholders, and at all levels is fostered and encouraged; and to enhance the
capacity of the participating governments to integrate environmental considerations into national
development planning.
18.
The medium term objective of the project is to elaborate and agree at an
intergovernmental level, the Strategic Action Programme encompassing specific targeted and
costed actions for the longer-term, to address the priority issues and concerns. More specifically
the proposed activities (Table 1) are designed to assist countries in meeting the environmental
targets specified in the framework SAP that was developed over period 1996-1998 (Annex D).
4

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
19.
Some of the specific environmental targets set within the framework SAP extend beyond
the projected life of the present project. These targets are summarised in Annex D whilst the
logical framework matrix presented in Annex B outlines the milestones and indicators that can
be used to measure progress towards achieving these targets over the life of the project.
PROJECT ACTIVITIES/COMPONENTS AND EXPECTED RESULTS
20.
The project is divided into four major components, namely:
1) Habitat Degradation and Loss
2) Over Exploitation of Fisheries in the Gulf of Thailand
3) Land-based Pollution
4) Project Co-ordination and Management
21.
These components reflect the priority ranking determined at a regional level (Annex D)
in which habitats and biodiversity related concerns and over-exploitation of marine resources
ranked higher than either pollution or freshwater related concerns. Within the comparative
ranking of importance of the habitats in the region, mangroves and coral reefs ranked
significantly higher than seagrasses and estuaries/wetlands. Over-exploitation of marine
resources ranked almost as high as coral reef degradation whilst from among the pollution
related issues land-based pollution and in particular sewage were considered the most important
pollution issue in the region. Overall, pollution was considered less important than either, habitat
degradation and loss, or over-exploitation of marine resources.
22.
Actions at the national level, proposed within Component 1 relating to habitat
degradation and loss are detailed under four sub-components addressing the four priority habitats
in the region. Activities within each sub-component include: establishment or re-vitalisation of
National Committees or technical working groups, to review national data on biodiversity;
management; restoration and development activities impacting each habitat; research and
publications; economic evaluation; institutions and legislation; and development of compatible,
inter-linked national systems for regional data management. These preparatory actions will
provide the background against which to develop or update national management plans,
including required legislation, in order to maintain nationally important habitat areas. National,
public meetings will be convened for presentation and review of the plans, prior to their adoption
by Governments.
23.
At the regional level, task teams will be formed, and meetings convened to: develop
guidelines for national management plans to maintain regionally significant habitat areas of
transboundary significance; draft and finalise, for adoption by governments, the criteria for the
selection of priority transboundary habitat areas; apply the criteria to identify and prioritise areas
for future management, protection/restoration; select 3 regional priority sites within each habitat
class for initiation of demonstration projects; develop and adopt regional priority actions for
inclusion in the revised SAP designed to meet the agreed targets of the framework SAP.
Regional guidelines for conservation of each of the four habitats of Component 1 will be arrived
at between participating countries. Sub-component 1.5 will involve consideration by a regional
meeting of senior advisors of the recommendations of each of the regional task teams to ensure
5

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
overall conformity between the sites of recommendations and to formulate overall
recommendations for inclusion in the Strategic Action Programme. The outputs from these
activities will be reviewed and adopted at high level intergovernmental meetings which will also
adopt a regional portfolio of priority management projects and approve the selection of the sites
for initiation of the demonstration projects.
24.
Coral reef activities will not be executed on oceanic coral systems but will focus on non-
oceanic reef systems outside disputed areas. It is agreed that, in the initial phase, coral reef sites
of the project will be selected from those Southeast Asian countries participating in the project.
The final sites will be recommended by the regional expert group, reviewed and accepted by the
participating countries, and subject to the approval of the Project Steering Committee. The
present project will not duplicate the activities pursued by other similar projects, including GEF
projects. UNEP, serving as the Secretariat of the project, will invite all participating countries of
the project, to participate in the activities, including meetings, workshops, seminars, etc. related
to the coral reef activities designing, planning and implementation as well as capacity building
efforts, e.g. training.
25.
Component 2 focuses on transboundary fisheries issues in the Gulf of Thailand, but does
not exclude national level demonstration activities in the Philippines or Indonesia. All activities
will be subject to the approval of the Project Steering Committee. Activities are grouped into
four sub-components the first of which is designed to secure agreement on the nature of joint
actions required to address identified problems in the Gulf of Thailand. A task team will be
formed to: develop sub-regional, and national management plans for the spawning and nursery
areas of regional and transboundary significance in the Gulf of Thailand. The task team will be
responsible for development of criteria to determine the national, sub-regional and transboundary
significance of spawning and nursery areas; and for the application of these criteria to determine
priorities for management action within the Gulf of Thailand. These activities will result in the
establishment of a system of refugia to maintain important transboundary fish stocks in the Gulf
of Thailand based on marine protected areas identified as critical habitats for fish stock
conservation and protection
26.
This component includes required actions at national level by the countries bordering the
Gulf of Thailand to: protect endangered species; evaluate a prototype blast fishing detection
system; develop and implement programmes to provide information at the community level, on
fish stock conservation and sustainable fishery practices among small and artisanal fishing
communities; and to promote the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries through
national and regional workshops. Countries participating in this project from outside the Gulf of
Thailand are welcome to participate in the activities.
27.
Component 3 addresses the major problem of land-based pollution through an initial
review of national standards and controls, and an examination of actions required to: harmonise
such standards at a regional level; review and assess existing knowledge of regional water
quality, determine information gaps, evaluate carrying/assimilation capacity of sub-regions and
sensitive ecosystems and transboundary movements of contaminants within the South China Sea;
produce guidelines/action programmes for implementation of the GPA at the national and
regional level; and prepare guidelines for the development of national management plans,
6

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
including capacity building; legislation, and other appropriate components to achieve the agreed
water quality objectives; review national capacity to test, monitor, control and enforce water
quality and effluent standards and to develop and finalise national and regional management
plans to reach specified objectives within defined time frames that will be incorporated into the
Strategic Action Programme for the South China Sea; and to initiate capacity building activities
and demonstration projects addressing specific pollutants of global, regional and transboundary
significance.
28.
Once agreement has been reached on regional water quality objectives and standards,
criteria will be developed and adopted for evaluating the regional and transboundary importance
of pollution "hot spots" identified in the Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis (severity of
pollution, feasibility/ease of mitigation, transboundary effect). The criteria will be applied to all
nationally identified hot spots in order to agree on a regional priority listing for investment. A
preliminary evaluation of the costs and benefits of alternative mitigation measures for selected
priority hot spots will be undertaken together with pre-feasibility studies for appropriate
mitigation measures for priority pollution sources. A South China Sea strategic approach to
mitigating priority regional hot spots (including priority investment portfolio, cofinancing
arrangements, national and regional actions) will be developed and agreed for inclusion in the
Strategic Action Programme for the South China Sea.
29.
Component 4, Project Co-ordination and Management is concerned with regional co-
ordination of the project and related activities, and management of the project implementation.
Initial actions include: appointment of project staff; nomination by the COBSEA Focal Points of
Government representatives to the Project Steering Committee and convening of the first
meeting to agree the framework master plan for project management and execution; appointment
of National Focal Points to Chair the National Inter-ministry Steering Committees and initial
country visits by the regional co-ordination staff to meet with the National Steering Committees
and prepare national workplans and budgets. Four regional scientific and technical conferences
are planned during the course of the project that will be convened in close association with the
meetings of the COBSEA to review results and recommendations of the national and regional
working groups and to establish and re-reinforce the linkages between the sectorial working
groups. In addition particular attention will be paid to establishing strong linkages with the
World Bank/GEF Mekong River Project and the GEF/UNDP/IMO PEMSEA project.
30.
The Project Steering Committee, as the supreme decision-making body of the project,
will be composed solely of representatives of the participating countries of the project. The
Committee shall be responsible for reviewing and approving, on an annual basis, project
activities, including the location of demonstration sites to be funded by the GEF project. UNEP
will act as Secretariat of the Committee. During the execution of the project, decisions of the
Project Steering Committee will be made through consultation and on the basis of consensus by
all participating countries of the project.
7

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
Table 1
Workplan & Timetable - Overall duration of the project 69 months including the appraisal phase.
Component10
Appr.
GEF Project Implementation11
Phase
Sub-component
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
1. Habitat Degradation & Loss
1.1 Mangroves
1.1.1 National Mangrove Committees; data reviews.(N)
1.1.2 Development & adoption of national management plans
(including legislation) (N)
1.1.3 Regional expert meetings; criteria; priority areas & actions; (R)
E
E
E
1.1.4 Project Steering Group & Intergovernmental meetings (R)
1.1.5 Implementation of 3 demonstration projects (N & R).
1.2 Non-oceanic Coral Reefs
1.2.1 national non oceanic coral reef working groups; data reviews (N)
1.2.2a Prepare & adopt national legislation and management plans (N).
1.2.3 Regional task team; regional data man.; criteria; priority areas and
E
E
E
actions (R) .
1.2.4 Project Steering Group & Intergovernmental meetings (R)
1.2.5 Implementation of 3 demonstration projects12 (N & R).
1.3 Seagrasses
1.3.1 National seagrass working groups; data reviews (N)
1.3.2 Prepare & adopt national management plans (N).
1.3.3 Regional task team; criteria; priority areas and actions (R).
E
E
E
1.3.4 Project Steering Group & Inter-governmental meetings (R).
1.3.5 Implementation of 3 demonstration projects (N & R).
1.4 Wetlands
1.4.1 National wetlands working groups (N)
1.4.2 Review, & implement management regimes & legislation (N)
1.4.3 Regional expert task team (R); regional review; criteria,
E
E
E
guidelines; priority areas and actions, portfolio (R)
1.4.4 Project Steering Group & Intergovernmental meetings (R).
1.5 Elaboration of habitat component of SAP

10 N = National level activity; R = Regional level activity.
11 E = Regional expert meeting; inception phase (periods of intense project related activities); operational phase (periods of reduced intensity of
activities relating to project execution).
12 see para 24.
8

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
Table 1 continued Workplan & Timetable - Overall duration of the project 69 months including the appraisal phase.
Component
Appr.
GEF Project Implementation
Phase
Sub-component
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2. Over Exploitation of fisheries in the Gulf of Thailand
2.1 Regional determination of priorities for action
E
E
E
E
E
2.1.1 Regional Task Force; regional fisheries overview (R)
2.1.2 Criteria for stocks and areas & priority actions (R)
2.2 Develop regional and national management plans
2.3 Evaluation of a prototype blast fishing detection system
2.4 Information and public awareness
2.4.1 Provide info. to artisanal fishers in the priority areas;
2.4.2 Workshops on Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries
E
E
E
E
3. Land-Based Pollution
3.1 Regional Water Quality standards (2005)
E
E
E
E
E
E
3.1.1 working groups; review data (N & R)
3.1.2 Prepare & adopt regional water quality objectives &
standards
3.1.3 National and Regional management plans (N & R)
3.1.4 Capacity building & demonstration activities (N & R)
3.2 Determination of Regional Priority Hot Spots (2005)
3.2.1 Criteria; priority actions and areas
3.2.2 Evaluation of costs & benefits & pre-feasibility studies
3.2.3 Adopt a strategic approach to priority transboundary hot
spots for inclusion in the SAP for the SCS
4. Project Co-ordination and Management
4.1 Establishment of co-operative framework
4.2 Convening of regional expert meetings for elaboration of the
E
E
E
E
SAP.
9

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
31.
A regional expert working group will be convened to: review the current obligations of
countries under Global Conventions including inter alia the UNFCC, the CBD, the UNCLOS,
and MARPOL; review the similarities and differences between national legislation; consider
ways in which such legislation might be harmonised to achieve the common objectives of the
countries as expressed in the Strategic Action Programme; prepare recommendations concerning
the optimum mode of countries meeting their obligations under the global conventions and thus
protecting the environment of the South China Sea. It is anticipated that the recommendations of
this group will be considered by a high level intergovernmental meeting for inclusion as
activities in the revised Strategic Action Programme.
RISKS AND SUSTAINABILITY
32.
The Logframe matrix presented in Annex B details the project related risks and
assumptions however, two external risks may affect the operation of this project:
a) A number of unresolved territorial disputes could potentially disrupt the smooth
operation of this project. Over the last several years the countries have demonstrated a
willingness to co-operate in matters relating to the environment of the South China
Sea, through: bilateral programmes and active participation in regional programmes
including the East Asian Seas Action Plan of UNEP, the regional work of the FAO,
and of the IOC-WESTPAC. There is increasing recognition that the benefits resulting
from co-operative actions in managing the environment of the South China Sea are
not dependent on a resolution of the unresolved issues. The project explicitly
addresses this risk through agreement that no activities will be undertaken in
geographic areas under dispute and that issues relating to sovereignty will not be
addressed either directly or indirectly during project activities, hence the risks of
potential disruption to the project seem likely to be small.

b) The recent economic crisis in the region may: adversely affect the ability of the
countries to contribute significantly to the co-financing of the project; significantly
impact the budget of the project should the currencies of the countries in the region
recover significantly during the life of the project. The impacts of the economic crisis
in the region have been taken into account in the calculation of the baseline
contributions of the countries to this project. In the event that currencies recover all,
or some of the 30-40 % devaluation that has occurred over the last two years,
adjustments to the activities in the latter half of the project will be made or additional
co-financing sought. A partnership conference with potential donors is planned prior
to the initiation of demonstration projects and it is at this time that adjustments to the
overall project budget may be made depending upon the extent of recovery of
currency values.
33.
A substantial proportion of the assured co-financing by governments is derived from the
re-allocation of existing staff and recurrent budgets of the involved ministries and government
departments to project activities. It is anticipated that project activities will strengthen the
influence of these ministries at a national level and hence encourage substantial increases in the
recurrent budgets of the departments concerned in the future. The countries already contribute
10

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
financially to regionally co-ordinated actions and such contributions are anticipated to increase
as a consequence of this project.
34.
Regarding the sustainability of activities and components beyond the life of the project, it
should be noted that a number of the proposed activities during the first three years of the project
are preparatory in nature with a defined life span. The need for such actions reflects the
inadequacy of the present data and information available to assess regional priorities in a totally
objective manner. In elaborating the data and information in parallel with refining the SAP,
mechanisms will be put in place that require minimal recurrent inputs at the national level to
ensure their continued operation beyond the life of the project. It is anticipated that the regional
framework for co-operation will be strengthened through undertaking this project, such that the
recurrent costs of subsequent regional co-ordination will be met from within the region.
35.
Of greater importance from the perspective of sustainability is a consideration of the
demonstration activities and their impacts region wide. Approximately 9 demonstration sites are
to be selected during the first two years of project initiation. An important consideration in the
selection of these sites, other than their global and regional, significance will be the willingness
of Governments to maintain the actions and activities beyond the life of the project. To some
extent this will be assured through selection of initial sites that are considered to be of both
national and regional significance, and are already the subject of management intervention at a
national level - i.e. a "win-win" criterion will be applied during selection.
36.
It should be recognised however, that 9 demonstration sites will not guarantee that the
SAP targets are met. Considerable additional inputs will be required to ensure that the lessons
learned are transferred from these nine sites to others in the region that will require government
commitment of manpower and financial resources. Recognising the economic crisis that the
countries of the region have suffered, this project specifically seeks to convene two partnership
conferences to assist the governments in seeking bilateral and multi-lateral financing for such
activities.
STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION AND IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS
37.
The primary stakeholders in this project are the Ministries of Environment, of Agriculture
(Fisheries) and Forestry of the participating countries. Through establishment of inter-ministry
dialogue it is anticipated that wide involvement of other ministries and government departments
will be assured, resulting in high level government acceptance of the outcomes of the preparatory
activities and hence approval of the Strategic Action Programme. Governments will retain
oversight through the meetings of the Project Steering Committee and the periodic meetings of
the intergovernmental Co-ordinating Body for the Seas of East Asia (COBSEA) which will also
serve as a forum for regional approval and endorsement of the anticipated outputs, including the
Strategic Action Programme.
38.
A number of activities involve community based stakeholders in the fishery sector
although precisely which ones cannot be stated until such time as the demonstration sites have
been selected. The process of selection will of necessity involve consultations with local
community groups since their active participation will be essential to the success of these
11

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
activities. A number of scientific and environmental NGO's at national and regional levels have
been involved in the PDF-B phase of the project and participation of National NGO groups will
be continued during the execution of the project.
39.
Recognising the sensitivity of the South China Sea which includes areas of unresolved
territorial dispute, and the desire of some of the governments involved not to "internationalise"
issues surrounding the South China Sea, no international organisations (neither inter-
governmental nor, non-governmental) other than UNEP will be involved in project design and
execution. This decision of the participating countries has significant implications in terms of the
transaction costs at a regional level (see Annex A). Both individual experts and national
institutions that are members of such organisations may be engaged in project activities in their
individual capacity under the direction of UNEP.
40.
Regional co-ordination of actions entails significant transaction costs but can potentially
generate even greater benefits in reducing duplication of effort and improving the effectiveness of
individual uncoordinated actions. It is the intention of the participating countries that all actions be
undertaken in a spirit of collaboration and partnership, to enhance synergy between on-going
initiatives at national and regional levels, and to eliminate duplicative and conflicting actions.
41.
As noted above, oversight on behalf of the Governments will be the responsibility of the
Project Steering Committee, which will convene meetings in conjunction with those of
COBSEA. The Project Steering Committee's primary responsibility will be to ensure synergy
and integration in the planning and execution of the project sub-components. At the national
level the national co-ordinators will be responsible for convening regular meetings of the
national inter-ministry committees which should include within their membership, the chairs of
the various national technical and expert committees created in support of each component
and/or sub-component. Regional technical expert groups will be convened to prepare reviews
and recommendations and their membership will be drawn from the national committees and
working groups and other regional experts. In the case of Component 1, the number of regional
expert groups (4) will necessitate the creation of a regional "aquatic biodiversity advisory group"
comprised of senior experts from the region to advise the Project Steering Committee on matters
relating to the execution of the mangroves, non-oceanic coral reefs, seagrass and wetlands
components.
42.
With the approval of the Project Steering Committee, co-ordination with the work of the
Mekong River, World Bank/GEF project will be assured through convening of joint expert group
meetings, and through participation of experts from each project in meetings of the other, as
appropriate. Similar arrangements will be made with the GEF/UNDP/IMO, PEMSEA Project,
together with joint planning of workshops and groups of expert meetings to ensure
complementarity and provide mutual support to the activities undertaken by each project. Similar
arrangements may be negotiated during the appraisal phase with other major non-GEF funded
projects and programmes in the region.
INCREMENTAL COSTS AND PROJECT FINANCING
43.
Table 2 presents an incremental cost table based on the component costs presented in
Table 3 and the more detailed analysis contained in Annex A. As noted in that Annex, benefits
12

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
under this project accrue at the global, regional and national levels. Direct environmental
benefits that accrue as a consequence of project activities will be small since much of the project
is concerned with establishing the regional framework for future concerted and co-ordinated
action. Considerable environmental benefits are anticipated to arise through enhancement of the
capacity of participating governments to manage their environment in a regionally harmonised
manner.
Table 2 Baseline and Incremental Costs and global and domestic environmental benefits.
Baseline Alternate Increment
GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS
8.722
25.471
16.749
PDF-B Phase
0.252
0.587
0.335
Component 1 - Habitat degradation & loss
Sub-Component 1.1 - Mangrove management
1.788
4.521
2.733
Sub-Component 1.2 ­ Non ­Oceanic Coral reef management
1.750
4.337
2.587
Sub-Component 1.3 - Seagrass management
1.784
4.313
2.529
Sub-Component 1.4 - Wetland management
0.230
1.205
0.975
Component 2 -Over-exploitation of fisheries in the Gulf of Thailand
1.548
3.198
1.650
Component 3 -Land-Based Pollution
0.571
2.331
1.760
Component 4 -Project Co-ordination and Management
0.799
4.379
3.580
Executing Agency Overheads
0
0.600
0.600
DOMESTIC ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS
6.812
6.812
0
PDF-B Phase
0
0
0
Component 1 - Habitat degradation & loss
Sub-Component 1.1 - Mangrove management
2.171
2.171
0
Sub-Component 1.2 ­ Non-oceanic Coral reef management
2.136
2.136
0
Sub-Component 1.3 - Seagrass management
2.106
2.106
0
Sub-Component 1.4 - Wetland management
0.252
0.252
0
Component 2 Over-exploitation of fisheries in the Gulf of Thailand
0.147
0.147
0
Component 3 - Land-Based Pollution
0
0
0
Component 4 - Project Co-ordination and Management
0
0
0
Monitoring & Evaluation Costs
0
0
0
44.
Adopting a regional approach to concerted action carries with it transaction costs
associated with networking national institutions and organisations, and the national governments.
Whilst not all of these costs are strictly incremental since national benefits derive from sharing of
regional experiences, it is certainly the case that without a GEF intervention such costs will not
be met since they result in little direct national benefit. The countries of the region are clearly
committed to a regional approach as evidenced by their commitment to the PDF-B process and
their adoption of the framework SAP and its associated targets. The costs of actions that result in
direct national benefit are those associated with the demonstration activities where the countries
concerned will undoubtedly derive national benefit from the interventions. This has been
accounted for in the incremental cost table, however precise calculation of the proportion of
benefits accruing at each level is not possible until such time (year 3) as the precise locations for
the demonstration activities are selected (Annex A).
45.
Table 3 presents the project budget and component financing. The total cost of the project
(including the PDF-B phase) is 31.7 million dollars of which 9.1 million is the anticipated costs
13

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
to the government in cash and in kind of the present project. Of this sum 5.8 million dollars is
expected in cash inputs to the demonstration activities in years 4 and 5 of the project. The bulk of
the remaining government co-financing is in kind during the preparatory years leading up to
execution of these demonstration activities. Significant co-financing is assured in principle from
a number of sources, subject to the approval of the core funding by the GEF.
46.
UNEP will establish a specific Trust Fund for receipt of donor contributions to the co-
financing of project activities. Donors as such will not impose any conditions on specific use of
the Trust Fund, nor will they get involved directly, or indirectly, in project design, appraisal,
negotiation and implementation.
Table 3 Project budget summary and component financing in million US $
Co-financing
Grand
Project Activities
GEF
Governments Other Sources
Total
1. Habitat Degradation & Loss
1.1 Mangroves
2.733
2.374
1.585
6.692
1.2 Non-oceanic Coral Reefs
2.587
2.326
1.585
6.473
1.3 Seagrass
2.529
2.305
1.585
6.419
1.4 Wetlands
0.975
0.400
0.082
1.457
2. Over-exploitation of fisheries in the Gulf
1.650
0.735
0.990
3.345
of Thailand
3. Land-based Pollution
1.760
0.461
0.110
2.331
4. Project Co-ordination and Management
3.580
0.294
0.685
4.379
EA Overheads
0.600
0.600
PROJECT TOTAL
16.414
8.895
6.622
31.096
PDF-B
0.335
0.176
0.076
0.587
GRAND TOTAL
16.749
9.071
6.698
31.683
MONITORING EVALUATION AND DISSEMINATION
47.
Monitoring of the progress in executing the components and activities will be undertaken
in accordance with UNEP's internal guidelines for project monitoring and evaluation. In addition
the GEF Co-ordination Office will, in consultation with the Executing Agency develop process
indicators during the appraisal phase of the project that will serve as evaluation benchmarks
during project execution. The Regional Task Forces will be responsible for developing stress
reduction indicators and environmental status indicators as integral components of activities
within the individual components of the project.
48.
The Project Steering Committee will monitor progress on an annual basis and will advise
the project manager and executing agency on the overall progress and any necessary adjustments
to the subsequent year's workplan and timetable that may be necessary as a consequence of
unplanned contingencies. The Project Steering Committee, which will serve as the primary
oversight body on behalf of the participating governments, will report, through the Project
Manager, on an annual basis to the intergovernmental meetings of COBSEA.
14

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
49.
A terminal desk evaluation will be undertaken by UNEP as the lead Implementing
Agency in accordance with internal agency procedures. In addition, the GEF Co-ordination
Office of UNEP will manage an independent evaluation process. This will involve a mid-term
evaluation to be completed prior to the COBSEA meeting in December 2003 and a terminal
evaluation to be completed within three months of the completion of the project activities. A post
hoc evaluation will be undertaken two years following closure of project activities to ascertain
the longer-term impacts of the project, on regional collaboration in the management of the
environment of the South China Sea.
50.
Dissemination of results will take place via the regional conferences planned periodically
throughout the project, via periodic meetings between project staff and the government
ministries and via the public media where appropriate.
LIST OF ANNEXES
A.
INCREMENTAL COST ANNEX (4 PAGES)
B.
LOGFRAME MATRIX (3 PAGES)
C.
STAP ROSTER TECHNICAL REVIEW (2 PAGES)
C.1
IMPLEMENTING AGENCY RESPONSE TO STAP/COUNCIL/IMPLEMENTING AGENCY
COMMENTS (1 PAGE)
D.
ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS (6 PAGES)
E
LIST OF PUBLICATIONS PREPARED UNDER THE PDF BLOCK B GRANT (1 PAGE)
15

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
ANNEX A
INCREMENTAL COSTS AND BENEFITS OF THE PROJECT:
"REVERSING ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION TRENDS IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA AND THE
GULF OF THAILAND"
BACKGROUND
The GEF Incremental Costs analysis requires a consideration of the baseline and additional costs
associated with achieving `domestic' and global environmental benefits (Table 2). The regional
scope of this project presents methodological difficulties in assessing these costs, which are
normally calculated in a purely national context. In the present case the benefits arising from this
project may be seen as accruing at the global, regional and national scales.
GLOBAL BENEFITS
Assessing the global benefits of a GEF project necessitates in the first instance a consideration of
the comparative environmental importance, from a global perspective, of the region or area
covered by the project, together with an understanding of the extent to which the project reduces
environmental loss or degradation. This reduction in environmental degradation represents the
total environmental benefits of the project at all scales. Partitioning the benefits at global,
regional and national scales poses problems in the context of incremental cost calculations since
the benefits cannot be valued in purely monetary terms. In the context of international waters
therefore, interventions addressing transboundary environmental issues and concerns are
considered wholly incremental.
The global importance of the South China Sea is unquestionable, since it has long been
recognised as the centre of the Indo-West Pacific Biogeographic Province which is itself
recognised as the global centre of shallow water marine biodiversity. In addition, the South
China Sea provides 10% of the world's fish catch and the countries supply 66% (in 1994) of
world aquaculture production. These resources are currently under stress with most finfish
resources being exploited at or above the levels of sustainability. The growth in aquaculture
production, from 46% in 1984 to 66% in 1994 has taken place at the expense of coastal habitats
of global significance such as mangroves, whilst intense fishing pressure and the use of
destructive techniques are altering the stability and productivity of marine ecosystems and
habitats. Conserving such habitats provides global environmental benefits in terms of protecting
the high biological diversity found in this region.
Quantifying the environmental benefits in dollar terms is difficult, however the framework
Strategic Action Programme developed during the PDF-B phase makes such an attempt, based
on an analysis of the consequences of a `business-as-usual' scenario in which it is assumed, for
example, that the current rate of habitat loss will be maintained. It is estimated that if the targets
of the SAP are met then the economic value of the mangroves saved by intervention will be 0.9
billion US $, by 2010. Without intervention all mangrove is likely to be lost from the margins of
the South China Sea by 2025.
A-1

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
The figure of 0.9 billion dollars however does not reflect the economic value of the global
environmental benefits, rather the transboundary, and national economic benefits. Three major
difficulties were encountered in valuing the environmental benefits, firstly individual species
conserved cannot be assigned a monetary value; the determination of economic values of
ecological functions of natural systems is contentious and in many instances derived values
cannot be transferred; and the data available are inadequate. For example current estimates of the
extent of mangroves on the margins of the South China Sea vary by as much as 30% reflecting
inadequate survey data and differences at the national level, in definition of this habitat.
REGIONAL & NATIONAL (DOMESTIC) BENEFITS
National Benefits from this activity are of two types: those that relate to the improvement in the
condition of the environment under national jurisdiction; and those that relate to improvement in
the national capacity to manage and control the adverse environmental impacts of economic
activities.
Regional benefits are also of two distinct types: those relating to the mitigation of transboundary
environmental impacts, such as loss of fish spawning and nursery habitats that serve as a source
of propagules for fisheries elsewhere in the region or as habitat for endangered species; and those
resulting from adoption of an harmonised regional approach to action.
This duality of benefits at both the national and regional level is reflected in the activities
proposed under the SAP that focus on development of regionally agreed frameworks for action
to address the priority regional and transboundary environmental issues and concerns, and the
implementation of demonstration projects in selected sites throughout the region. The activities
under each habitat sub-component will result in an agreed priority listing of areas for
management intervention. In total 9 habitat related demonstration activities will be initiated,
together with a few selected demonstration activities of alternative courses of action to mitigate
selected land-based sources of pollution. The total costs for all demonstration activities is 16
million dollars or 48% of the total project costs. Of this total 6.1 million or 38% is derived from
the GEF based on an estimation of the direct regional and transboundary environmental value of
the 9 interventions. The `demonstration' value of these activities has not been evaluated at this
time since they can only be fully estimated once the activities have been completed and their self
replication without GEF intervention demonstrated.
The value of a regional approach to harmonisation of actions is demonstrated in part by the
following example from the case of pollution. All countries have some form of water quality,
and discharge standards, often reflecting in part the comparative importance of pollution as a
problem within the national context. Where a country of low importance from the perspective of
the total pollutant loading of the South China Sea imposes stricter standards than a major polluter
they place themselves at an economic disadvantage whilst contributing little to the maintenance
of the health of the South China Sea marine environment.
A-2

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
For some countries marine pollution is not a major problem, for others it is, and from the
perspective of the South China Sea as a whole the TDA would suggest that transboundary
pollution issues are of less importance than habitat loss and over-fishing. The marine discharge
from countries such as the Philippines, Indonesia and peninsular Malaysia, occurs along
coastlines with little or no continental shelf and high flushing rates. In contrast, discharges to
areas such as the Gulf of Tonkin and the Gulf of Thailand, which are semi-enclosed have a
significant transboundary component and pollution impacts are measurable in these areas at this
time. It is not possible to state categorically whether the total pollutant loading in the South
China Sea as a whole is having an environmental impact at the basin scale. Past experience in the
case of the Black Sea and Mediterranean suggests that, such basin scale effects may well occur
in the future, hence the actions proposed to address marine pollution are predicated on the need
to establish harmonised preventative approaches to discharges that will provide future protection
of the basin, in line with the internationally accepted `precautionary principle'.
BASELINE ACTIONS
All participating countries have initiated actions at the national level to address environmental
problems of national importance and have collaborated in, and contributed to, various regional
endeavours including the work of the FAO, UNEP and the IOC at a regional level. Over the last
five years the number of collaborative programmes involving two or more countries within the
region has increased significantly, demonstrating the recognition by participating countries of the
need for a more concerted approach to environmental management within the region.
At a national level all countries have sought, over the last decade to strengthen their national
capacity for sound and sustainable management of the marine environment. Following the past
emphasis on assessment of problems, significant experience has been built up at a national level.
In some instances however, countries have been unable to devote sufficient resources internally
to developing such capacity hence the stage of development varies widely from country to
country. Assessing the national baseline for all 7 countries is therefore a task requiring more
extensive analysis of current investment patterns, than has been possible during the PDF-B
phase.
Valuing such past, baseline activities at the national level, is a difficult if not impossible task,
however, contributions to specific regional activities provide an indicator of commitment to
regionally co-ordinated action. Whilst not considered part of the baseline for this project, both
the World Bank/GEF project on the Mekong River, and the GEF/UNDP/IMO PEMSEA project
on the East Asian Seas, receive substantial baseline support from the countries involved in the
present project demonstrating the nature of countries commitment to concerted and co-ordinated
action. In the case of the countries participating in COBSEA, contributions to the costs of
regional co-ordination, discounting activities and actions, total around a quarter of a million
dollars annually. Part of the project appraisal phase will involve a more detailed analysis of the
national level actions that can be directly integrated into the proposed project hence the level of
baseline funding by the countries concerned can be expected to be increased in the final project
document.
A-3

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
Important on-going regional initiatives such as the work of SWOL, and IOC/WESTPAC on the
South China Sea, to which the countries all contribute directly and indirectly, can be considered
as baseline for the project. These are listed in this proposal as associated financing since the
objectives of these activities are coincident in the objective of strengthening regional co-
operation in the management of the environment of the South China Sea.
INCREMENTAL ACTIONS
The present project adds significantly to the `regional baseline' enabling the countries to
accelerate the time-line for finalisation of a costed and targeted programme of action, the
Strategic Action Programme. Completion of the SAP is unlikely to occur in the absence of a
GEF intervention, since the level of funding currently available for regional co-ordinated action
is insufficient to deal with immediate environmental issues and crises, let alone longer term
planning and management.
The question arises however, as to whether the costs of the regional activities proposed in this
project (Components 1, 2 & 3 in part and 4 in full) represent additional baseline or, truly
incremental costs. Since these regional components build on existing national and regional
actions, both past and ongoing they may be considered complementary and therefore from a GEF
perspective entirely incremental.
Components 1, 2 and 3 include actions at the national level and it is for these components that
the largest national contributions in terms of co-financing are expected since these actions are
anticipated to bring significant national benefits. In the case of selection of demonstration sites
only those identified as being of transboundary significance will be considered to be eligible to
receive the GEF funding allocation under this project.
The development of national action plans under each component for the implementation of the
SAP when finalised, will involve significant co-financing from participating countries in terms
of the commitment of inter-ministry teams to their development, and the required detailed
analysis of current government investment and spending patterns. The development of such
plans is seen as a legitimate incremental cost in that they must be developed in such a manner as
to conform to the regional requirements of the Strategic Action Programme.
A-4

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
ANNEX B
LOGICAL FRAMEWORK MATRIX
PROJECT PLANNING MATRIX
SUMMARY
OBJECTIVELY VERIFIABLE
MEANS OF VERIFICATION
CRITICAL ASSUMPTIONS AND RISKS
INDICATORS
Overall Objectives
Improved regional co-ordination of Finalised Strategic Action Programme Adoption by an Intergovernmental Elaborated SAP will be accepted by the participating Governments. This
the management of the South China (SAP)
meeting of COBSEA (Mtg. Rpt.).
assumption seems likely to be met since agreement was reached on the
Sea marine and coastal environment
framework during the XIIIth meeting of COBSEA.
Improved national management of the Development and Adoption of up to 7 Adoption of NAPs by National That governments will develop and adopt NAPs. This assumption is likely to
marine and coastal habitats
National Action Plans in support of the Governments and integration into be met since the approved framework SAP contains specified actions for
regional SAP
sustainable development planning.
development of such plans.
Improved integration of fisheries and Agreement on joint priorities for regional Adoption by Governments of goals and That governments support more integrated approaches at national level to
biodiversity management in the Gulf action between the government objectives relating to fisheries and management of fisheries and environmental issues in the Gulf of Thailand.
of Thailand
representatives attending COBSEA.
environment (Mtg. Rpts.).
This assumption presents a higher risk than those outlined above due to
inherent sectorial approaches at the national level. The inter-ministry
committees will play a critical role in reducing this risk.
Outcomes
Adoption of improved mechanisms Finalisation of agreements on Adoption by a high level That unresolved territorial claims may distract from the primary target of
for regional co-operation in the
mechanisms for improving regional co- intergovernmental meeting on achieving improved regional co-operation. The extent of this risk cannot be
management of the environment of operation at an intergovernmental level.
agreements for co-operation. Increased fully evaluated however it is considered to be low to medium and subject to
the South China Sea
Increased support for regional co- government contributions to regional events outside the control of the project.
operative mechanisms.
trust funds.
Jointly agreed actions relating to
Development of regional management
Adoption by appropriate That joint agreement can be reached between environment and fisheries
fisheries and environment in the Gulf plans to establish a system of refugia to intergovernmental fora of a regional ministries at the national level. This assumption presents a higher risk than
of Thailand
maintain important transboundary fish
management plan (Mtg Rpts of
the others given the sectorial approach to fisheries and environment at
stocks.
EAS/RCU)
national government level.
Adoption of the SAP at a regional Finalisation of the SAP through the work
Adoption of the SAP by a meeting of
That the SAP can be finalised in a manner acceptable to the Governments.
level
of regional task forces of experts
COBSEA (Mtg. Rpt.)
This assumption seems likely to be met since the framework for the SAP has
Publication of the SAP by the EAS/RCU
already been approved by governments.
Acceptance of the TDA and SAP at a Inclusion of transboundary and regional Adoption of NAP's containing such That governments will include regional considerations in their assessment of
National level
considerations in the National Action
elements (Nationally Published NAPs)
National priorities for action. This assumption seems likely to be met given
Plans
existing national commitments to regional action under the East Asian Seas
Action Plan.
Implementation of components of the Development & adoption of regional Endorsement by appropriate meetings of Governments will agree and adopt the priority listing of pollution hot spots at
SAP
guidelines and standards for various COBSEA (Mtg. Rpt.)
national and regional level. This assumption will likely be met since the
sources of pollution. Development of
TDA has identified the 36 regional hot spots through the national reports
criteria for selection and adoption of Endorsement of the criteria by regional prepared as part of the TDA preparation process.
priority areas for: habitat management; expert meetings and adoption of the
protection as
priority listing at national and regional
Governments will agree and adopt the priority listing of habitat areas for
refugia for fish stocks; Hot
Spots of regional & transboundary level (Mtg Rpts.)
improved management at national and regional level. This assumption
significance.
presents a slightly higher risk in that discussion of specific areas for
protection and sustainable management has not yet commenced.
B-1

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
LOGICAL FRAMEWORK MATRIX CONTINUED
Regional database for planning and Development of comparable national Publication of meta-data catalogues and Limitations of capacity at a national level pose a significant risk in some
management
data and information sets by each
inclusion of plans for data management countries. The project is designed to maximise inter-country exchange of
participating country
as a component of national management
expertise and to support the work at national level.
plans
Results
7 sets of national management plans Preparation and publication of 7 sets of Adoption of the management plans by
That management plans can be drafted that are acceptable to national
for 4 specific habitats
national management plans.
national governments (Mtg. Rpts. governments. This assumption is likely to be met since the development of
Publication by the EAS/RCU)
such guidelines plans was agreed as a component of the SAP
7 national databases for 4 specific
Establishment of operational capacity for Adoption of the data management
That insufficient support will be provided by governments. This risk is low
habitats
data management
function by department of environment
since in a number of cases such capacity already exists
Adopted portfolio of priority habitat
Preparation of a draft portfolio by task
Presentation to and adoption by a That agreement can be reached between governments on the regional
projects within the region
teams and expert groups
meeting of COBSEA
priorities. This risk seems low since the framework SAP calls for
development and adoption of such regional priorities
4 national and one regional Preparation and publication of 4 national Adoption of the regional plan by That a regional plan can be drafted that is acceptable to national
management plans to establish a
and 1 regional management plan
appropriate expert group and governments. This assumption is likely to be met since the development of
system of refugia to maintain
intergovernmental meetings of such a regional plan was agreed as a component of the SAP]
important transboundary fish stocks
environment and fisheries ministries
(Mtg. Rpts. plus publication by the
EAS/RCU)
Educational and Public awareness Preparation and publication of materials Use of the materials in workshops with
That such materials can be disseminated in the multiplicity of languages
materials on sustainable fisheries in local languages
local communities
involved. This assumption is dependent upon governments active
practices and fish stock conservation
participation and past practice suggests that this presents a minimal risk.
in the Gulf of Thailand.
Evaluation of a blast fishing detection
Published report of field test results of Presentation of the results to a meeting of That Fisheries officers will be reluctant to participate in field testing. This is
devise
the effectiveness of a prototype as a
COBSEA
a low risk since blast fishing is a regional problem, banned in all countries.
deterrent
Agreed regional priority listing of Preparation of criteria, analysis and Adoption of the priority listing of hot- That agreed criteria can be developed and the resulting priorities accepted at
transboundary pollution hot spots
listing of priorities from among the 36 spots at a regional expert and subsequent a regional level. This assumption is likely to be met since the initial listing
identified hotspots. Completion by
COBSEA (Mtg. Rpts).
has been presented to COBSEA in the TDA.
countries of national evaluations of water Adoption at national level of water
quality objectives and standards. Priority quality objectives and standards.
That countries will agree to adopt water quality objectives and standards.
portfolio of projects for investment
Presentation of preliminary evaluation of
This seems likely to be met since this is a target of the framework SAP
studies or remedial action and costs and benefits of alternative actions adopted by COBSEA.
preliminary cost benefit analyses.
to a partnership conference.
Regionally adopted water quality
Review of water quality data for the SCS Adoption at the regional level of water
That countries can agree on common water quality standards for the South
objectives, water quality and effluent sensitivity analysis of critical habitats quality objectives and standards (Mtg China Sea. The extent of the risk of non-agreement cannot be evaluated
standards
and regional overview of transboundary Rpts & publications)
although agreement does exist to initiate such a process in the framework
movement of pollutants
SAP.
Meta-database of national legislation
Preparation of national reviews and Publication of a metadatabase
That translations of appropriate legislation can be compiled according to the
relating to the environment of the presentation to relevant expert working
workplan and timetable. The extent of this risk depends in part on the volume
South China Sea
group meetings
of legislation involved but seems low.
B-2

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
LOGICAL FRAMEWORK MATRIX CONTINUED
Regional review of countries
Preparation of a draft review and Publication of the review
None
obligations under global conventions
presentation to a relevant expert meeting
Components/Activities
Establishment of National working National data and info. management
Presentation of national reports to That governments will be slow to respond and that reviews and plans are not
groups and preparation of 4 habitat
plans
regional Task Force meetings
produced according to the workplan and timetable. Based on experiences in
specific data and information reviews; National reports
the PDF-B phase the timetable has been prepared to allow adequate time.
national reviews of restoration
Draft national management plans
activities; and national management
plans
Establishment of regional task forces Preparation of draft national guidelines Publication of regional outputs;
None
and preparation of regional regional plans and convening of expert
Mtg Rpts & publications
management plans
and COBSEA meetings.
Determination of criteria, preparation
Preparation of drafts and convening of
Publication of regional outputs;
That countries will agree to select priority demonstration sites is an
of priority actions and investment
regional expert and subsequent COBSEA Mtg Rpts & publications
assumption likely to be met since this is an action approved in the framework
portfolios
meetings according to the agreed
SAP.
workplan
Implementation of 9 demonstration
9 Management plans for selected priority Adoption of the priority listing and As above
activities
transboundary sites
endorsement of the management plans
for selected sites
Prioritisation of regional and Development of criteria & impact
Publication of criteria and listing of As above
transboundary pollution Hot spots for analysis
selected priorities
management intervention
Selection of priority hotspots &
determination of management actions
Fisheries and Environment: Detailed Analysis of issues relating to
Publication of Analysis and priority areas As above
identification of areas for protection
transboundary stocks and joint resolution
for action
and management for maintenance of of priority areas for action
stocks of transboundary importance in
the Gulf of Thailand
Sustainability and implementation of Development of economic evaluations; Adoption of a regional approach to An assumption is that national governments will take action at a national
the SAP
priority investment portfolios
economic evaluation of environmental
level to implement the recommendations. The risk associated with this
goods and services and priority
assumption cannot be evaluated since this will depend on other national
investment portfolios.
development and investment priorities. However through careful integration
of the regional priorities into national action plans it is hoped that this
assumption will be met.
Establishment of the Management
Hiring of staff
Issuance of contracts
That staff can hired within three months of completion of the internal project
Framework
Meetings of the Project Steering Publication of Meeting reports
document.
Committee
Mtg reports and donor investment
Donors Consultations
Drafting of National Action Plans for Preparation of drafts according to an
Adoption of National Action Plans by
It is assumed that governments will be willing to adopt such national plans
the 4 critical habitats
agreed timetable.
governments
an assumption which is likely to be met since this is an action specified in
the framework SAP
B-3

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
ANNEX C
STAP ROSTER EXPERT REVIEW OF THE GEF PROJECT PROPOSAL:
REVERSING DEGRADATION TRENDS IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA
Professor Su Jilan
(Second Institute of Oceanography, SOA, Hangzhou, China)
BASIS FOR THE PROPOSAL
The South China Sea, as a part of the marine biodiversity rich Indo-West Pacific, is an
area of global significance in shallow water biological diversity, which in turn supports an
important world fishery. At the same time the countries along its periphery are among the fast
growing areas of the world, both economically and populationwise, with increasing pollutant
discharges. Unlimited fishing for demersal fish has resulted in the decline of the landings of
many species and in the use of fishing practices destructive to the reefs. Intensive shrimp-farm
activities have resulted in rapid loss of mangroves and wetlands. All these have exerted strong
pressure on the marine environment and threatened the high biological diversity of the south
China Sea.
There are also a number of unresolved territorial disputes in this region which have
hindered a basin-wide coordinated approach to deal with these issues effectively. However there
is also an increasing recognition among the countries in this region that cooperation in managing
the marine environment is urgently needed and can proceed before the settlement of these
disputes.
GOALS AND EXPECTED OUTCOMES
This project proposal aims to build at the regional level an environment of collaboration
and partnership, in which stakeholders at all levels can join hands to address environmental
problems of the South China Sea. An important outcome of this project proposal is a strategic
Action Programme (SAP) to be agreed on at an intergovernmental level. The framework SAP
has been developed over the last two years and will further elaborated in this project. It shall
encompassing targeted and costed action programmes, as well as recommended legal framework
for improved regional cooperation in managing environmental concerns.
The actions proposed in SAP are wide ranging in both context and areas. The project is
divided into four major components, namely, Habitat Degradation and Loss, Over Exploitation
of Fisheries, Land-Based Pollution, and Regional cooperation. In the first three components there
will be both national and regional activities, resulting in management plans for specific issues.
Demonstration projects for these three components will be implemented at priority
transboundary sites.
COMMENTS
Along with the rapid economic growth both the governments and the public in this region
have become acutely aware of issues related to marine environment problems and sustainable
C-1

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
development. Many national projects have been undertaken to address these concerns.
Furthermore, with the help of both intergovernmental organizations and NGOs, bilateral and
non-basinwide regional collaborative projects for related issues have also been embarked. A
good example is the IOC/WESTPAC Cooperative Study in the Gulf of Thailand which I myself
was involved in its initial stage. This study was initially promoted in 1993 at the Second Session
of the IOC/WESTPAC but was not readily embraced by all parties concerned. Subsequent efforts
by local scientists, with related projects supported by SEAFDEC, SEAPOL and SIDA/SAREC,
moved the study steadily along. The study was adopted by IOC/WESTPAC in 1996 and is being
implemented by active participation of the four countries bordering the Gulf.
The above-mentioned example illustrates the existence of important on-going national
and regional initiatives. It also illustrates the awareness by the countries of the need for
collaboration in addressing marine environment issues. At the same time, as the preparatory
works for this project proposal have found out, not all countries have collected data and
information in a comparative manner, both in the amount of data and in the techniques and
protocols of data collection. Therefore, the project proposal comes in at the right time. By
building on and expanding from existing projects the proposal will bring together a number of
stakeholders towards a common goal of addressing the basin-wide environmental concerns for
sustainable development. A consortium of entities, both inter- and non-governmental, will be
involved in its execution and thus ensuring quality outputs. The collaborative actions initiated by
this proposal should be able to be sustained once the stakeholders realize the significant benefit
from such incremental actions.
The only minor suggestions that I have on possible modification of the project proposal
concern the clarification of a few of its definitions and statements. I believe the proposal is
focusing on basin-wide environmental issues of the South China Sea, rather than limits itself to
environmental issues of the South China Sea basin. In other words, regions such as the Gulf of
Thailand and Tonkin Gulf are included in this proposal's consideration. Otherwise, for example,
large parts of both the mangroves and wetlands around the South China Sea would be excluded
from the proposal. It would also be difficult to deal with transboundary fish stocks, most of
which spend part of their life history in shallow water habitats. If this understanding is correct,
then the statement in Annex I about most countries' marine discharge occurring along coastlines
with either or no continental shelf is not accurate. In this connection I am also not sure that
pollution is of less importance as stated in Section 3, since excessive nutrient discharge from
both the agriculture and aquaculture are universal problems in estuaries and shallow waters
nearshore.
Finally, the SAP to be elaborated in this proposal is certainly quite comprehensive and
effective. However, other than the transboundary fish stocks and the protection of coral reefs in
the disputed waters, this does not mean that basin-wide efforts are far more effective, although
certainly more desirable, than sub-regional cooperation in pollution control or in the prevention
of habitat loss with respect to destruction of mangroves and wetlands, as seemingly implied in
Section 3.
C-2

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
ANNEX C1
IMPLEMENTING AGENCY RESPONSE TO STAP/COUNCIL/IMPLEMENTING AGENCY COMMENTS
COUNCIL & IMPLEMENTING AGENCY COMMENTS:
Council comments are anticipated following the submission of the document to the May 1999
meeting of the Council. By the time of the bilateral and GEF Operations Committee meeting of
30th March 1999 no comments had been received from either UNDP or the World Bank. A few
suggestions for amendment made by the GEF Secretariat have been incorporated in the present
document.
STAP Reviewers Comments:
Overall the STAP Roster Expert's comments are strongly supportive of this project in terms of
both the rationale and objectives, providing added examples in support of the need for this
project.
UNEP agrees with the comments of the reviewer with respect to the nature of the area covered
by the project as being basin-wide environmental issues and has clarified the statements
accordingly. UNEP further accepts the statements made by the reviewer regarding the
importance of pollution in estuaries and shallow waters nearshore and has amended the text to
accord with this view. In this context however it should be noted that much of the pollution
impacts occur in near field (national) waters and consequently the project focuses on the
identification of pollution `hot spots' of regional and transboundary significance.
C-3

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
ANNEX D
ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS:
CAUSES OF DEGRADATION OF THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT
OF THE SOUTH CHINA SEA
BACKGROUND:
The Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis for the South China Sea, was developed on the basis of
National Reports prepared by inter-ministry committees and working groups in each country.
The individual country reports were prepared from a national perspective and detail the national
water-related environmental concerns and issues, together with an analysis of their causes and
priorities for action at a national level. These priorities reflect a wide diversity of sectorial
reviews and plans in each country and the reports in turn reflect this diversity of perspectives.
The Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis, whilst it reflects the national perspectives as outlined in
the national reports, also attempts to provide a more regional and transboundary perspective by
placing the countries of the South China Sea region in a global context, and by focusing on those
issues of concern that were clearly of a transboundary nature, or of such widespread concern
around the margins of the South China Sea that they constitute a regionally important source of
environmental degradation.
DIFFICULTIES EXPERIENCED IN CONDUCTING THE ANALYSIS
A number of generic problems arose during the course of this analysis. Firstly it was found that
not all countries had collected data and information in a comparable manner. Not only did the
data reflect different monitoring protocols and analytical techniques but also in some instances
no data had apparently been collected for some parameters at a national level, and in others it had
been aggregated in a form that made it unsuitable for analysis. This was not unexpected since
population data for example, are generally aggregated at a national level on the basis of
administrative region or entity rather than on proximity to the coastline.
Some more fundamental problems arose when it was discovered for example that regional
estimates of the extent of major habitats varied by as much as 30%. The comparative importance
between habitats, of rates of loss, is difficult to determine where the estimates of area of the
habitats vary to this extent. The final estimates used in establishing targets for the SAP are
therefore a `best estimate' by a group of experts from the region.
ROOT CAUSES OF ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA REGION
The analyses contained in the national reports and TDA identify a series of root causes of which
the most important were identified as being:
· the rapid growth in coastal populations, up to twice the national average in some cases;
· the rapid economic growth experienced over the last decade;
· the pace of industrialisation; and,
· the influence of the globalisation of trade.
D-1

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000

Accepting that, the first of these causes is beyond the scope of a project of limited financing and
short duration, and that, the remaining three are likely to increase rather than decrease due to
other political and social pressures, the focus of attention in the analysis lies at a level above
these ultimate causes. Thus for example, the major cause of mangrove loss in the region appears
to be clearance for extensive shrimp farming that is driven by the world price of shrimp which
encourages countries to increase production for export income. This constitutes a short-term
economic incentive at both the level of the individual producer and of the country itself, which
ignores the longer term economic impacts that result from loss of mangrove ecological functions
and productivity. The analyses could demonstrate no examples where environmental
`externalities' had been taken into consideration in decisions relating to development. In a
number of instances it was noted however that development of extensive shrimp farms had
occurred without any form of government intervention, regulation or control.


This example, serves to illustrate the nature of associated or secondary causes such as, the failure
to understand the environmental or economic consequences of mangrove clearance, combined
with an inability at the national level to `value' such impacts in a manner that would support
more rationale planning and management of mangrove area development.


MAJOR CONCERNS AND PRINCIPAL ISSUES:


It is important to recognise that not all issues and concerns are of equal importance to all
countries of the region hence the regional and transboundary focus of the TDA, which highlights
four major areas of concern namely:

· Habitat Loss and Degradation;
· Over-exploitation of living marine resources;
· Pollution
· Freshwater concerns.


Habitat loss and degradation


The principal habitats of concern in the South China Sea were identified as being mangroves,
coral reefs, seagrass beds and estuaries/wetlands all of which are of global significance both in
terms of the biological diversity they support and their extent within the region. The driving
forces for change and the immediate causes of loss and degradation in these habitats are quite
different and are summarised below in order of importance.


Mangroves: Major causes of loss and degradation were identified as being: clearance for shrimp
farming; clearance for wood chip and pulp; urban development and human settlement; and for
domestic use in construction and for fuel.


Coral reefs: Major causes of degradation include: over-exploitation by the subsistence fisheries
sector; use of destructive fishing practices; increased sedimentation; and pollution associated
with coastal urban centres and coastal development including for international tourism.
Associated issues include the exploitation of reef fish for the international aquarium trade and
export of corals.
D-2

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000

Seagrasses: Major causes of degradation include: over-exploitation by the fisheries sector; land
reclamation and coastal development; and increased sedimentation. A number of specific issues
associated with this habitat were also identified including exploitation of sea horses for
traditional medicine (all countries except Cambodia) and direct exploitation for animal feed, an
issue confined to Viet Nam.


Estuaries and wetlands: Major problems associated with degradation of estuaries result from
pollution since many estuarine areas are also centres of population. In contrast the primary cause
of loss and degradation of coastal wetlands appears to be their conversion to alternative uses
within the subsistence sector and over-exploitation of their associated living resources.


The transboundary consequences of habitat loss and degradation are numerous but the two most
important include:

· loss of globally significant biological diversity; and,
· loss of spawning and nursery areas for fish and shellfish stocks and endangered and
threatened species.
The transboundary driving forces include international tourism, and the world demand for
marine products resulting in short-term economic incentives to convert coastal habitats for
aquaculture.
OVER-EXPLOITATION OF LIVING MARINE RESOURCES
The ultimate causes of over-fishing are of course the demand, which exceeds the supply, both in
the large scale commercial and subsistence sectors often resulting in conflict between these
sectors. The use of inappropriate or destructive techniques and patterns of fishing exacerbates the
problem but in the subsistence sector a high proportion of fishing communities are driven to
over-exploitation in the absence of alternative livelihoods. Issues associated with over-fishing
include losses due to by-catch particularly in the shrimp trawl sector, post harvest losses and
degradation of the coastal environment, contributing to declining stock sizes for many demersal
species.
Despite nutritional requirements and current population growth rates, the countries surrounding
the South China Sea are generally net exporters of fishery products. Since the need to generate
foreign exchange to buy capital inputs for industrialisation is a higher priority than food security,
this trade pattern is likely to continue, unless policy shifts occur that result in food security
becoming a higher priority in the national agendas of participating countries.
The transboundary consequences include conflict over access to the resources; impacts of the
dominant fishing fleets on smaller national fishing fleets and conflicts between the subsistence
and commercial sectors; loss and decline in biological diversity
POLLUTION
The ultimate causes of pollution include increases in coastal population density; increased food
D-3

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
production in the agricultural sector; and increasing industrialisation. The proximate causes
include inadequate waste-water treatment whilst intermediate causes include inadequate
standards and lack of capacity to monitor, regulate and control pollution discharge. A major
contributing factor is the lack of financial resources to invest in actions addressing the causes at
all levels. In analysing national information it was apparent that sources of waste ranked as
follows: domestic; agricultural; industrial; poor land-use practices resulting in enhanced
sedimentation; urban solid waste; hydrocarbons and ship-based sources; atmospheric inputs. It
should be noted that data regarding the extent of these problems and their magnitude is of
variable quality and generally inadequate for an objective, quantitative, ranking of importance.
A significant, though restricted transboundary issue related to pollution includes the trade in
waste for disposal and/or recycling in the countries of the region with substantial tonnage of
waste being imported to the countries of the region from developed nations.
A total of 35 pollution hot spots and 26 sensitive areas were identified from data contained in the
national reports however the quality of the data precluded the development of a priority ranking
from the regional and transboundary perspective. In the latter case a major constraint was the
absence of adequate data regarding the fate, or impacts of present discharges in the marine
environment.
It seems likely on the basis of existing information that transboundary pollution related issues
occur only in the case of those countries (primarily China and Viet Nam) that share a common
continental shelf and those surrounding the Gulf of Thailand. For all other regions of the South
China Sea pollution problems are likely to be of purely national concern since pollutants and
contaminants are discharged along generally open coastlines with little or no continental shelf.
There exists no evidence at the present time to indicate that pollution is currently a basin wide
problem in terms of the total load, although past experience in the Black, Mediterranean, North
and Baltic Seas, suggests that basin scale problems may occur in the future if discharges continue
unabated. There is clearly a need to assess the capacity of the South China Sea with respect to
pollutant loading (particularly, nutrients) in order to develop an appropriate precautionary
approach to discharges in the area. Present pollutant and contaminant discharges may have
transboundary consequences in some of the identified "hot spots" and sensitive areas in terms of
increasing the rate of habitat degradation in those habitats identified by the TDA as being of
transboundary, global significance.
The data, information and evidence assembled during the preparation of the national reports and
TDA were reviewed by experts from the region who ranked the importance of the concerns and
issues as tabulated below.
D-4

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
Table 1 Ranking of water related environmental concerns and principal issues
in the South China Sea.
Major Concerns
Score Rank Principal Issues
Score Rank
Habitat loss & degradation 18.5
1
Mangroves
21
1
Coral Reef
20
2
Seagrasses
17
6
Wetlands & Estuaries
16
7
Over exploitation
17.5
2
Marine
19
3
Freshwater
16
7
Pollution
14
3
Sewage
19
3
Freshwater Contamination 17.5
5
Agricultural loading
15
9
Industrial Waste
15
9
Sedimentation
14
11
Solid Waste
13
12
Hydrocarbons
12
13
Ship-based sources
12
13
Atmospheric
8.5
16
Freshwater concerns
9
4
9
15
D-5

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED TARGETS TAKEN FROM THE DRAFT FRAMEWORK STRATEGIC ACTION PROGRAMME Dates
in bold fall within the time frame for the completion of the GEF project
SAP COMPONENT
DATE
TARGET
SUB-COMPONENT
1.
HABITAT DEGRADATION AND LOSS
1.1 Mangrove
2010
maintain 90% of the present (1998) area
1.2 Non-oceanic
2010
maintain the area of coral reef with more than 50% live cover at the present (1998) level
Coral Reefs
1.3 Seagrasses
2010
maintain at least 80% of the present (1998) area of seagrass in good condition
1.4 Wetlands
2005
adopt management plans for all wetlands, excluding mangroves, with emphasis on wetlands in the coastal zone of the region.
2.
OVER EXPLOITATION OF FISHERIES IN THE GULF OF THAILAND
2005
determine regional catch levels of key economically important species according to levels that are economically welfare
maximising, while still preserving the resource base
2005
establish a regional system of marine protected areas for fishery stock conservation and protection of endangered species
2005
prepare and implement at selected sites, a management system in the Gulf of Thailand that will sustain the exploited resources
3.
LAND-BASED POLLUTION
2003
adopt regional water quality objectives, water quality standards, effluent standards for use in the region; prepare appropriate
recommendations for mitigation measures for municipal, industrial and agricultural (including aqua-culture) activities
2003
develop guidelines for monitoring for coastal waters, taking into account already published guidelines
2003
determine principal pollutants in the region, estimate the carrying/assimilative capacity of relevant ecosystems for relevant
pollutants - BOD, Nutrients, metals, sediments etc
2003
establish a regional contingency plan for SCS to handle incidents of oil and chemical or hazardous waste spillage
2004
develop a regional SCS Plan of Action for LBAs to meet regional water quality objectives
2005
identify 10 Priority Discharge Sites for action and develop appropriate mitigation activities
2005
develop regional funding mechanisms for mitigation activities
2006
initiate mitigation activities on the Priority Discharge Sites;
2008
review recommended water quality standards in national legislation
4.
REGIONAL CO-OPERATION
2001
further develop the SAP by holding national expert and intergovernmental consultation
2002
convene a high level meeting of government officials and experts to formulate regional guidelines for co-operation for the
protection and sustainable management of the marine and coastal environment of the South China Sea
2005
complete draft guidelines on regional co-operation for the protection and sustainable management of the marine and coastal
environment of the South China Sea
D-6

---

UNEP-GEF/SCS [PBrev11.doc] September 14th 2000
ANNEX E
LIST OF PUBLICATIONS PREPARED UNDER THE PDF BLOCK-B GRANT ENTITLED:
PREPARATION OF A TRANSBOUNDARY DIAGNOSTIC ANALYSIS AND PRELIMINARY
FRAMEWORK OF A STRATEGIC ACTION PROGRAMME FOR THE SOUTH CHINA SEA.
1.
Report of the First Meeting of National Co-ordinators for the Formulation of a
Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis and preliminary Framework of a Strategic Action
Programme for the South China Sea, Bangkok, Thailand, 31 March ­ 4 April 1997
[UNEP(WATER)/EAS/SOUTH CHINA SEA/NCM.1/3]
2.
Report of the Second Meeting of National Co-ordinators for the Formulation of a
Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis and preliminary Framework of a Strategic Action
Programme for the South China Sea, Bangkok, Thailand, 23-29 June 1998
[UNEP(WATER)/EAS/SOUTH CHINA SEA/NCM.2/3]
3.
Report of the Third Meeting of National Co-ordinators for the Formulation of a
Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis and preliminary Framework of a Strategic Action
Programme for the South China Sea, Bangkok, Thailand, 15-17 November 1998
[UNEP(WATER)/EAS/SOUTH CHINA SEA/NCM.3/3]
4.
Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis for the South China Sea, version 4 [UNEP
EAS/RCU Technical Report Serious No. 14 UNEP, Bangkok, Thailand]
5.
Strategic Action Programme for the South China Sea, version 3 [UNEP South China
Sea/SAP Version. 3]
6.
National Report for the Formulation of a Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis for the
South China Sea ­ Cambodia
7.
National Report for the Formulation of a Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis for the
South China Sea ­ China
8.
National Report for the Formulation of a Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis for the
South China Sea ­ Indonesia
9.
National Report for the Formulation of a Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis for the
South China Sea ­ Malaysia
10.
National Report for the Formulation of a Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis for the
South China Sea ­ Philippines
11.
National Report for the Formulation of a Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis for the
South China Sea ­ Thailand
12.
National Report for the Formulation of a Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis for the
South China Sea ­ Viet Nam
13.
Report on Thirteenth Meeting of the Coordinating Body on the Seas of East Asia
(COBSEA) on the East Asian Seas Action Plan, Bangkok, Thailand, 18-19 November
1998 [UNEP(OCA)/EAS IG.9/3]
14.
Report on Fourteenth Meeting of the Coordinating Body on the Seas of East Asia
(COBSEA) on the East Asian Seas Action Plan, Bangkok, Thailand, 23-25 November
1999 [UNEP(OCA)/EAS IG.10/3]
15.
Report of the Meeting of National Experts for the UNEP GEF Project in the South China
Sea. Pattaya, Thailand, 7-9 September 2000 [UNEP(DEC)/EAS/SCS-exp/3]
16.
Report on Fifteenth Meeting of the Coordinating Body on the Seas of East Asia
(COBSEA) on the East Asian Seas Action Plan. Special Session for the UNEP GEF
Project in the South China Sea. Pattaya, Thailand, 11-12 September 2000
[UNEP(DEC)/EAS IG.11/3]
E-1

---