ACHIEVEMENTS AND LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE ...

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

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9

Date: 11th August 2008 Original: English

Ninth Meeting of the Regional Scientific and Technical Committee for the UNEP/GEF Project: “Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand” Hue, Viet Nam, 20th – 22nd August 2008

ACHIEVEMENTS AND LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE DEMONSTRATION SITES AND PILOT ACTIVITIES

THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN PRESENTED TO THE REGIONAL SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL COMMITTEE FOR THEIR CONSIDERATION WITH A VIEW TO ADVISING THE PROJECT STEERING COMMITTEE ON AN APPROPRIATE

COURSE, OR COURSES OF ACTION

THE PROJECT STEERING COMMITTEE IS REQUESTED TO CONSIDER THE CONTENTS

OF THIS DOCUMENT, TOGETHER WITH ANY ADVICE FORWARDED BY THE RSTC.

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Page 1

BACKGROUND The network of habitat demonstration sites established within the framework of the UNEP/GEF project entitled “Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand” acts as a regional learning network for the South China Sea. Each of the sites are of regional and global significance, and aimed to: implement and experiment with new management models and methods; produce knowledge, experiences, and good practices; and act as a node in the regional network of sites. The documentation and efficient sharing of information regarding the achievements and lessons learned of each of the sites is necessary to ensure the wider application of successes in the South China Sea and in other tropical coastal and marine areas. Achievements Three technical publications reviewing the status and achievements of the UNEP/GEF South China Sea Project’s suite of habitat demonstration sites were published during the final quarter of 2007. These were based on the outcomes of the mid-term evaluations of the demonstration sites and were used as supporting documents to presentations on the achievements and lessons learned at the demonstration sites delivered during the Third Mayors’ Round-Table (MRT) and Third Regional Scientific Conference (RSC) from 26th - 30th November 2007. These meetings identified activities common to all demonstration sites and pilot activities, including: the creation of inter-sectorial management boards; preparation of management plans and business plans; economic valuation of resources; enhancement of public awareness; and close liaison with and involvement of local communities and stakeholders in interventions. The Third MRT also discussed the key achievements of the demonstration sites and pilot activities. These were listed to include: establishment and operation of a regional network to ensure information and experience exchange in the region; establishment of an effective mechanism for local coordination of planning and management of environment and resources; capacity building for long-term management of coastal resources and the environment; provision of sound scientific information and data as a baseline for habitat and resource management; planning for long term, multi-sectorial coordination and management for the multiple use of resources; promotion of knowledge and awareness for consensus and support to sustainable management practices; support for supplementary or alternative livelihoods for local communities; encouragement of transboundary management of resources and environment between Kampot – Phu Quoc and Trat – Peam Krasop demonstration sites; rehabilitation and initial improvement of habitat state; promotion of linkages between fisheries and habitat management; and pilot activities to reduce waste discharge to the marine environment. Lessons Learned The lessons learned and examples of best practice in habitat management presented during the Third MRT were synthesised by the PCU and subsequently presented by the Mayor of Bolinao, Mr. Alfonso del Fierro Celeste to the Third RSC. The following experiences and successes of the habitat demonstration sites were presented to members of the project network as important lessons learned and worthy of replication at other sites in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand:

• Regional network of demonstration sites operated efficiently; • Involvement of related stakeholders in development of fisheries refugia sites (Phu Quoc); • Cross-sectoral management for coordination of multiple use of habitats (Hepu); • Involvement of the private sector in habitat management (Fangchenggang); • Local government and community participation in law enforcement at Bolinao (“Bantay Daggat”); • Improved waste disposal practices by coastal communities at Batam; • Integration of traditional wisdom into coral reef management planning at Belitung; • Supplementary and alternative livelihoods as a tool for improvement of habitat and resources

management at Batu Ampar (e.g. charcoal from coconut shell, farming of soft-shell crabs); and • Establishment of sustainable tourism practices at Mu Koh Chang (e.g. provision and use of sound

scientific information in planning; enhancement of consensus and awareness on need for management, and development of appropriate mechanisms for enforcement; and stimulating tourism sector involvement coral reef management).

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Page 2 TERMINAL EVALUATIONS OF THE HABITAT DEMONSTRATION SITES AND PILOT ACTIVITIES The mid-term evaluations of the habitat demonstration sites and pollution pilot projects indicated some weaknesses that should be addressed, including: delays in approvals of management plans at a number of the demonstration projects; inadequacies and/or delays of practical actions to improve enforcement, rehabilitation and ecological monitoring at a few sites; inadequate ecosystem and resource management, and community involvement in monitoring strategies at some sites; and delays in expenditures. The eighth meeting of the Regional Scientific and Technical Committee considered in detail the outstanding tasks for completion during the second half 2007 and first of half 2008 at the demonstration sites and pilot activities. It was agreed during that meeting that the National Technical Focal Points should make periodic contact with focal points to ensure the timely completion of activities. Progress at each of the sites was reviewed and discussed by the meetings of the Regional Working Groups for Mangroves, Coral Reefs, and Seagrass during the first half of 2008. In order to enable the evaluation of the extent to which the stated objectives and outcomes have been achieved at each demonstration; the overall performance of each demonstration site project; and to determine the likelihood that the sites objectives will be sustainable following implementation of the activities, the work plans and schedules for each demonstration site included a terminal evaluation for which funds were available in each site’s operational budget. It was planned that the terminal evaluations would be conducted by a suitable external expert hired under a consultancy contracts by a given demonstration site. The final Terms of Reference for Evaluators (Annex 1) were communicated to habitat demonstration site managers in early May, and it was suggested that final evaluation reports should be submitted to the PCU within 15 working days following completion of the evaluation. To date a total of 5 reports have been received from the 12 demonstration projects receiving financial support via the GEF project grant. Information regarding the receipt of terminal evaluation reports is summarised in Table 1. The draft reports received to date are included Annexes 2 to 7 of this document for consideration by the RSTC. Table 1 Status of Mid-Term and Terminal Evaluations for the Habitat Demonstration Sites and

Pilot Activities Funded via the GEF Project Grant.

Terminal Evaluation Names/Country Signing

Date Component/

Sub-components Date of Mid-

Term Evaluation Received? Annex

Fangchengang, China 21/4/2005 Mangroves 3/2007 Yes 2

Trat Province, Thailand 16/6/2005 Mangroves and Transboundary 2/2007 No -

Batur Ampar, Indonesia 04/9/2006 Mangroves 7/2007 Yes 3 Koh Chang, Thailand 01/7/2005 Coral Reefs 2/2007 Yes 4 Belitung, Indonesia 25/5/2006 Coral Reefs 5/2007 No - Masinloc, Philippines 24/8/2005 Coral Reefs 6/2007 Yes 5

Phu Quoc, Viet Nam 26/7/2005 Seagrass/Coral and Transboundary 1/2007 Yes 6

Hepu, China 16/4/2005 Seagrass 2/2007 No - Bolinao, Philippines 28/9/2005 Seagrass 6/2007 Yes 7

Kampot, Cambodia 19/4/2006 Seagrass & Transboundary 5/2007 No -

Peam Krasop, Cambodia 16/3/2006

Wetlands/Mangrove& Transboundary

8/2007 No -

Batam, Indonesia 10/12/2005 Land-based Pollution 5/2007 No -

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Page 3

DEVELOPMENT OF LESSONS LEARNED The eighth meeting of the Regional Scientific and Technical Committee and the seventh meeting of the Project Steering Committee discussed possible mechanisms for disseminating information regarding successful experiences and lessons learned at the demonstration sites. It was agreed that the PCU would develop a template for preparation of good practice and lessons learned notes, and that National Technical Focal Points and Focal Points would prepared documents for submission to the PCU. To date a total of eight draft lessons learned papers have been received by the PCU, including:

1. Private sector involvement in mangrove management at the Fangchenggang mangrove site. 2. Operation of a network of small scale sanctuaries at the Masinloc coral reef site. 3. Integrating fisheries and habitat management at the Phu Quoc coral reef and seagrass site. 4. Public education and awareness for sustainable use of mangroves at the Trat mangrove site. 5. Integrating traditional wisdom on coral reef management planning at the Belitung coral reef site. 6. Developing sustainable coral reef based tourism at the Mu Koh Chang coral reef site. 7. Joint management of transboundary waters at the Kampot and Phu Quoc demonstration sites. 8. Habitat rehabilitation at the Thi Nai Lagoon self-funded demonstration project. The draft lessons learned documents have been compiled and included in this document as Annex 8 for consideration by the Regional Scientific and Technical Committee.

The RSTC is invited to: • take note of the content of the terminal evaluation reports and to recommend

to the PSC how the recommendations, if any, might be implemented in the future;

• to note the experience notes that have been received to date; and • to make recommendations regarding what actions can be practically taken to

ensure continuity and application of lessons learned following closure of the project.

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 1 Page 1

ANNEX 1

Final Evaluation of the XXX Demonstration Site of the UNEP GEF Project entitled:

“Reversing Environment Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand” DRAFT TERM OF REFERENCE FOR FINAL EVALUATORS 1. PURPOSE OF THE EVALUATION To evaluate the extent to which the stated objectives and outcomes have been achieved; the overall performance of the demonstration site project; and determine the likelihood that the objectives will be sustainable following implementation of the activities. 2. SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION The scope of the final evaluation will cover all activities undertaken in the operational plan of the demonstration site project. The evaluators will compare planned outputs of the project to actual outputs and assess the actual results to determine their contribution to the attainment of the project objectives. The evaluation will diagnose problems encountered and comment upon the effectiveness of any corrections and adjustments implemented. It will evaluate the efficiency of project management, including the delivery of outputs and activities in terms of quality, quantity, timeliness and cost efficiency. The evaluation will also determine the likely outcomes and impact of the project in relation to the objectives of the UNEP/GEF South China Sea Project, specifically with regard to replicability both nationally and within the region. 3. TERMS OF REFERENCE Under the overall guidance of the Project Director of the UNEP/GEF South China Sea Project, the evaluator shall undertake a final evaluation of the project during the period XXX The evaluation will comprise the following elements.

1. A summary evaluation of activities the project has undertaken to date.

2. An assessment of the scope, quality and significance of the project outputs produced to date in relation to expected results.

3. Identification and, to the extent possible, quantification of any associated initiatives (i.e., additional contributory or ancillary activities) undertaken by governments beyond those specified in the operational plan.

4. An evaluation of the timetable of activities and the allocation of financial resources to project activities and a determination of their consistency with the operational plan. Where activities and/or outputs have been delayed the cause of the delay should be identified, and where appropriate remedial actions proposed.

5. Identification of any programmatic and financial variance and/or adjustments made during implementing the project and an assessment of their conformity with decisions of the Management Board and their appropriateness in terms of the objectives of the project.

6. An evaluation of project coordination, management and administration provided by the Management Board. This evaluation should include specific reference to:

a) Organizational/institutional arrangements for collaboration among the various related stakeholders involved in project arrangements and execution;

b) The mechanisms established under the project, their effectiveness and their consistency with the plans and provisions of the operational plan;

c) The effectiveness of project management in terms of assignment and execution of project activities, and flexibility of management in terms of responsiveness to the need for changes in financial allocations, timing of activities, or mode of operation;


d) The effectiveness of the monitoring mechanisms currently employed by the Management Board in monitoring on a day to day basis, progress in project execution;

e) Administrative, operational and/or technical problems and constraints that influenced the effective implementation of the project and present recommendations for any necessary operational changes; and

f) Financial management of the project, including the balance between expenditures on administrative charges in relation to those on the achievement of substantive outputs.

7. An assessment of the extent to which external scientific and technical information and knowledge have influenced the execution of the project activities.

8. An analysis of the extent to which project implementation mechanisms developed and approved by the Management Board have been implemented.

9. An evaluation of the status in mobilizing co-financing to support project activities and ensure financial sustainability.

10. Specification of any deficiencies in project performance, administration and management that warrant correction with associated recommendations.

11. A prognosis of the degree to which the overall objectives and expected outcomes of the project are likely to be met.

12. Recommendations regarding any necessary corrections and adjustments to the overall project work plan and timetable for the purposes of enhancing the achievement of project objectives and outcomes.

4. RESPONSIBILITIES AND CONDUCT OF THE EVALUATION

4.1 One consultant shall be engaged to undertake the evaluation over the period XXXX.

4.2 At the commencement of the evaluation process, the consultant shall, in close consultation with the Project Director, and Site Manager, agree upon a detailed work plan and timetable for the conduct of the evaluation.

4.3 The Demonstration Site Management Board undertakes to provide office space and internet access to the consultant during the period spent by them in the project office.

5. THE FINAL EVALUATION REPORT SHALL COMPRISE

1. A concise summary not exceeding two pages, including findings and recommendations

2. A detailed evaluation report with sections corresponding to items 1 - 12 of article 3 of these Terms of reference. The detailed report without annexes should not exceed 12 pages.

3. A set of annexes prepared by the consultant, either individually or jointly, on specific topics deemed appropriate by the consultants. The annexes should correspond to, and amplify the contents of the sections of the main report.

The report together with the annexes, shall be written in English and shall be presented in electronic form in MS Word format. 6. RATING PROJECT SUCCESS

6.1 Where possible, the evaluation will rate the success of the project in a semi-quantitative manner with respect to the following indicators: • Timeliness: the extent to which the activities have been completed or conducted

according to the agreed work plan and timetable; • Achievements: the extent to which the outputs and outcomes specified in the

operational plan have been produced or met (the evaluator should highlight any unplanned additional outputs or outcomes which have been achieved but were not originally planned); and

• Impacts: the extent to which the project overall has influenced, individual, institutional and/or governmental, attitudes and perceptions.


6.2 This rating shall be semi-quantitative and shall be conducted on a scale of 1 to 5 with one (1)

being the highest (most successful) and five (5) the lowest rating. The evaluators shall specify in the report the nature of the scale used. E.g. 1 = 90-100%; 2 = 70-90%; 3 = 50-70%; 4 = 40-50%; 5 = <40%.

7. OUTPUTS OF THE EVALUATION The outputs of the evaluation will be a final, evaluation report to the UNEP GEF Project Coordinating Unit (PCU). Drafts of all sections of the report together with the associated annexes will reach the PCU (specifically, the addressee listed below) within 15 working days following completion of the evaluation, unless otherwise agreed in writing. An electronic version of the final evaluation report will reach the PCU within 30 working days following completion of the evaluation and will be addressed to: Dr. John Pernetta, Project Director, UNEP/GEF Project Co-ordinating Unit, United Nations Environment Programme, United Nations Building, 2nd Floor Block B, Rajadamnern Avenue, Bangkok 10200, Thailand Tel: (66 2) 288 1886 Fax: (66 2) 288 1094 E-mail: [email protected] 8. DEFAULT PROVISIONS In the event of the consultant defaulting on his/her personal services contract entered into pursuant to these terms of reference, the PCU may, in consultation with the Focal Point, terminate the contract in writing and pay only a proportion of the fee appropriate to the outputs delivered.


ANNEX 2

Draft Terminal Evaluation Report for the Fanchenggang Mangrove Habitat Demonstration in China

FINAL EVALUATION OF THE FANGCHENGGANG MANGROVE DEMONSTRATION SITE OF THE UNEP GEF Project entitled:

“Reversing Environment Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand” By

Dr. and Professor Han Weidong Guangdong Ocean University, Zhanjiang, Guangdong 524088, PRC.

Email: [email protected] Date:July 20, 2008

Abstract: The outputs of The Fangchenggang Mangrove Demonstration Site (Demo-site) of the UNEP GEF Project evaluated by Dr. Han Weidong as the independent third party during the period of June 20� July 20,2008 showed that the planned and operational activities were carried out timely and efficiently, except for 3 activities which were postponed due to the factors out of the control of the project. The outputs of the most project activities were approved great success upon the interviews with site stakeholders. There are 4 outstanding achievements as the final results for the project, which include:

(1) The Project Management Board was set up with members comprised by the Deputy Mayor and other mangrove issue related department leaders of Fangchenggang City Government as well as the project focal point and manager, and it has provided great support for the site planning and management problem solving for the timely implementation of the project;

(2) A total 31,000,000 Yuan RMB was invested to upgrade the domo-site facilities and personnel capacity building as the Chinese governmental companion fund which became the main financial support for the project.

(3) The registrated NGO –The Mangrove Demo-Site Friendship Association of Fangchenggang was set up with members from local enterprises, communities and volunteers to guarantee the public involvement of mangrove conservation;

(4) Upgrade the demo site to a site of Wetland of Importance;

(5) Introduce sustainable integrated mangrove conservation programs into the demo-site for implementation in near future. The project has greatly promoted the sustainable development of the demo-site, and become a successful model for the mangrove conservation to meet the objectives of the UNEP/GEF South China Sea Project and has high replicability both in Beibu Bay and other mangrove coasts in China nationally and in South China Sea internationally.

Key words: Final evaluation, The Fangchenggang Mangrove Demonstration Site of the UNEP GEF Project, The Project Management Board, the Chinese governmental companion fund, NGO, a site of Wetland of Importance

mailto:[email protected]

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 2 Page 2 1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Job briefing

Upon the invitation of the project director Dr. Fan Hangqing and the project manager Mr. Liu Jiufa of the Fangchenggang Mangrove demonstration site project (FMDSP), during the period of 28 June -18 July 2008, Dr. Han Weidong participated the activities of the field observation on outputs of the project activities and indoor interviews with people involved with the project to provide this final evaluation of the project. The activities were supported by the project and carried out under the guidance of the project director and the project manager.

1.2 Purpose of the evaluation

To evaluate the extent to which the stated objectives and outcomes of FMDSP have been achieved; the overall performance of FMDSP; and determine the likelihood that the objectives will be sustainable following implementation of the activities of FMDSP.

1.3 Scope of the evaluation

The scope of the final evaluation covered all outputs or influence of activities undertaken in the operational plan of the mangrove demonstration site project. The planned outputs of the project to actual outputs were compared and the actual results were assessed to determine their contribution to the attainment of the project objectives.

The evaluation diagnosed problems encountered and comment upon the effectiveness of any corrections and adjustments implemented. It evaluated the efficiency of project management, including the delivery of outputs and activities in terms of quality, quantity, timeliness and cost efficiency. The evaluation also determined the likely outcomes and impact of the project in relation to the objectives of the UNEP/GEF South China Sea Project, specifically with regard to replicability both nationally and within the region.

2. SUMMARY OF EVALUATION OF ACTIVITIES THE PROJECT HAS UNDERTAKEN TO DATE

The project has identified the threats of degradation of mangrove ecosystem of the demo-site and successfully reversed the degradation trend, encouraged the participation of stakeholders, developed a cross sector management mechanism through setting up The Project Management Board and one NGO, and promoting The Beilun Estuary Nature Reserve (BENR) to a site of wetland of importance in March 2008, and attracted sufficient financial and technical supports. There are 4 outstanding achievements among the final project results, which include: (1) The Project Management Board was set up with members comprised by the Mayor and other mangrove issue related department leaders of Fangchenggang City Government as well as the project director and manager, and it has provided great support for the site planning and management problem solving for the timely implementation of the project; (2) A total 31,000,000 Yuan RMB has been invested to upgrade the domo-site facility and personnel ability building as the Chinese governmental compliment fund which became the main financial support for the site sustainable management. (3) The registrated NGO –The Mangrove Demo Site Friendship Association of Fangchenggang (MFA) was set up with members from local community and volunteers to guarantee the public involvement of mangrove conservation; (4) Promoted the site to a site of Wetland of Importance in Feburary, 2008; (5) The project has been introducing national sustainable integrated mangrove conservation programs into the demo-site for implementation in near future. The project has greatly promoted the sustainable development of the site, and become a successful model for the mangrove conservation to meet the objectives of the UNEP/GEF South China Sea Project and has high replicability both in Beibu Bay and other mangrove coasts in China nationally and in South China Sea internationally.

3. ASSESSMENT OF THE SCOPE, QUALITY AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PROJECT OUTPUTS PRODUCED TO DATE IN RELATION TO EXPECTED RESULTS

3.1 The scope

Fangchenggang mangrove demo-site lies at the South China’s Province of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region. Bordering Viet Nam to its west. In 2003, the mangrove demo-site had “1414.5 ha area of mangrove, with the species of Bruguiera gymnorrhiza, Kandelia candel, Aegiceras corniculatum, and Avicennia marina as the dominant species. 9 formations and 17 communities of mangrove are found in the area. 240 species of macrobenthos in 175 genera of 10 phyla occur in the


potential mangrove demonstration zone, including 37 species of polychaete in 32 genera, 104 species of mollusk in 41 genera, 19 species of benthic fishes in 17 genera, and 13 species of other marine creatures in 11 genera. In addition, 187 species of birds in 42 families of 14 orders are also found in this area, suggesting that this site is an important habitat for birds” as described in the demonstration site proposal. During the period of the project (2005-2008),the native mangrove afforestation added 150 hm2 to the demo-site, and the human damage to the mangrove has been halted through project public aware education on the mangrove eco-values and campaigns hold to protect the mangrove resources. The demo-site habitats for wildlife have been optimalized by the project. The capacity building for the demo-site has been greatly promoted in relation to expected results. 3.2 The quality and the significance Under guidance of Dr. Fan Hangqing, the focal point of the project, the project has involved the participation of government departments of Fangchenggang City, BENR which is under The Oceanic Administration of Fangchenggang City Government, Xindi Co., Ltd of Fangchenggang City and other enterprises, local communities and volunteers as well as tourists. The management board mechanism of the demo-site has greatly enhanced the management for mangrove conservation and has replicable significance in regional nature reserve management nationally and internationally. Under the influence of the project, Mr. Su Bo, the present director of BENR obtained honors as “The most touching advanced person for ocean conservation in 2007” in Sept. 2007 and “Guangxi May 4th Youth Award” in May 2007, and Mr. Liu Jinfa, the project manager, was promoted to a higher leadership position as the duty secretariat of The Oceanic Administration of Guangxi. Local communities were active in assisting the implementing the project, 14 persons from the 19 mangrove area villages have been hired as guardians for the mangrove resources, while a local primarily school chairmen was awarded the international honor “green angel” for his outstanding work in support the project education awareness activities. MFA is the first registrated NGO in China up to the present. It is a creative achievement of the project implementation. The planned eco-farming (or eco-aqunculture) activity for obtaining an alternative livelihood technology in wise use of mangrove ecosystem for local communities was claimed to carried out by Xindi Co., Ltd of Fangchenggang City, but was failed to initiate the activity, while the executing agency of the project Guangxi Mangrove Research Center took over the duty and set up a new eco-farming demonstration site in BENR in March 2008. Dr. He Binyuan from the project executing agency said that the mangrove in-site eco-farming was successful when he showed the ongoing eco-farming site to me and the eco-farming animals, 30 individuals of Bostrichthys sinensis and 10 individuals of Scylla serrata were harvested for measurement on July 8th 2008. The technique report is waiting for finalizing. The successful eco-farming demonstration is highly significant for wise use of mangrove resource and is replicable in other mangrove coasts in South China Sea. 4. THE ASSOCIATED INITIATIVES UNDERTAKEN BY GOVERNMENTS. Since 2005, in order to assist the project implementation, beyond those specified in the project operational plan, The Chinese Central Government has initiated the Beilun Estuary Rehabilitation Plan and has being allocated a total fund 28,000,000 Yuan RMB to Fangchenggang City Government, while the first allocated fund 11,000,000 Yuan RMB transferred to the account of Fangchenggang City Government would promote the site with high quality outcomes in capacity building in mangrove conservation, including infra-structure construction of BENR; Fangchenggang City Government as the administrative agency of BENR has allocated 1,500,000 Yuan RMB to build a visitor’s center/office building of BENR, and another 1,500,000 Yuan RMB to upgrade the management level of BENR. Additionally, A national special investigation fund (National Project 908) was allocated to the executing agency of the project for habitat survey in the demo site-Beilun Estuary to monitor the environmental changes. 5. EVALUATION OF THE TIMETABLE OF ACTIVITIES AND THE ALLOCATION OF FINANCIAL

RESOURCES TO PROJECT ACTIVITIES AND A DETERMINATION OF THEIR CONSISTENCY WITH THE OPERATIONAL PLAN.

The outcomes and achievements and problems of the project activities undertaken to date were listed in Annex 1. The activities and the allocation of financial resources to project activities were met mostly in consistency with the operational plan except for the following activities:


(1) At the beginning stage of the project, the postpone of the project activities was happened due to the delay payment of the project fund to the executing agency. Suggest that the process of funding should be enhanced with the UNEP GEF projects once approved.

(2) Study tour (budget 3215 and 3216) is still in waiting for the list from PCU. Suggest that the study tour of the project be organized for 2� 3 individuals per team rather then in large group more then 5 persons in a team.

(3) Field Eco-farming experience and demonstration was failed without satisfied outcomes by Xindi Co.Ltd.of Fangchenggang (budget 2231). Enterprises should be carefully considered to take the duty in carrying out detailed hi-tech demonstration oriented to nature conservation in further UNEP GEF project.

(4) Formal publication of 2000 copies of Res. Environ.& Manag. of FCG city (by SEA) (budget 5211) is still in press, and could be published in the end of 2008.

(5) A specific publication of FCG MFA activities (300 copies) (Improvement of Capacity) (budget 5218) is still in press, and could be published at the end of July 2008.

6. IDENTIFICATION OF ANY PROGRAMMATIC AND FINANCIAL VARIANCE AND/OR

ADJUSTMENTS MADE DURING IMPLEMENTING THE PROJECT AND AN ASSESSMENT OF THEIR CONFORMITY WITH DECISIONS OF THE MANAGEMENT BOARD AND THEIR APPROPRIATENESS IN TERMS OF THE OBJECTIVES OF THE PROJECT. (1) Based on a half year period audition for the project accounting, the project funds were

adjusted according to the progress of the project, especially for the first half year the expenses of activities actually were cut due to the delay payment of project fund and as the result only about 60% the activities of the first semi-half were carried out and the left activities and the attached budget were carried out in the second semi-half.

(2) The programmatic and financial variance and/or adjustments made during implementing the project were conformity with decisions of the Management Board and their appropriateness in terms of the objectives of the project since the total fund of each activity didn’t decreased and in fact some activities had gotten more funding from GEF.

7. AN EVALUATION OF PROJECT COORDINATION, MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

PROVIDED BY THE MANAGEMENT BOARD. (1) The focal point coordination in implementing the project has been successful since the

organizational/institutional arrangements for collaboration among the various related stakeholders involved in project arrangements and execution have so far no conflict happened;

(2) The mechanisms established under the project for the project management is effectiveness and have been in consistency with the plans and provisions of the operational plan;

(3) The effectiveness of project management in terms of assignment and execution of project activities, and flexibility of management in terms of responsiveness to the need for changes in financial allocations, timing of activities, or mode of operation are so far without any argument among the sectors involving the implementing of the project.

(4) The effectiveness of the monitoring mechanisms currently employed by the Management Board in monitoring on a day to day basis, progress in project execution is insufficient, as I visited BENR during 8 - 10th July 2008 and observed that the staff of BENR is under disorder status and daily records of the implementing were missing.

(5) The input of project administrative staff is insufficient, the master plan and boundary issue of BENR is still waiting for resolved although the former is available in draft. The law enforcement for the mangrove conservation of the demo site needs more involvement of lawmakers. The awareness education for mangrove conservation to local villagers is still needed in order to stop ongoing digging in mangrove areas. Biodiversity monitoring mostly has not been carried out as expected and should be made up in near future, especially seasonal biodiversity monitoring for fish, shellfish, crabs, insects and birds.

(6) Financial management of the project has adhered to the objectives, including the balance between expenditures on administrative charges in relation to those on the achievement of substantive outputs.


8. AN ASSESSMENT OF THE EXTENT TO WHICH EXTERNAL SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL

INFORMATION AND KNOWLEDGE HAVE INFLUENCED THE EXECUTION OF THE PROJECT ACTIVITIES. (1) Biodiversity survey and monitoring activities were carried out by sub-contracts, which

involved expertise from Guangxi, Guangdong, and Fujiang, Beijing and so on. (2) The project manager and the focal point invited local officers and professionals and local

community experts in solving the problems and sharing external scientific and technical information and knowledge from other mangrove sites of the world.

9. AN ANALYSIS OF THE EXTENT TO WHICH PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION MECHANISMS

DEVELOPED AND APPROVED BY THE MANAGEMENT BOARD HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED. (1) The project implementation mechanisms developed and approved by the Management Board

have been implemented through the involvement of all stakeholders. (2) The mechanisms are sustainable under the leadership of the governmental administration-

The Management Board and with the aid of one registrated NGO-MFA. 10. AN EVALUATION OF THE STATUS IN MOBILIZING CO-FINANCING TO SUPPORT

PROJECT ACTIVITIES AND ENSURE FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY. (1) The sector-level of BENR was set up for the sustainable administration of the Demo-site. (2) The master plan is going to be evaluated for infrastructure of the Demo-site. (3) The national funding is coming for detailed jobs and volunteers are helping the conservation

of the Demo-site. 11. SPECIFICATION OF ANY DEFICIENCIES IN PROJECT PERFORMANCE, ADMINISTRATION

AND MANAGEMENT THAT WARRANT CORRECTION WITH ASSOCIATED RECOMMENDATIONS. (1) At the beginning stage of the project, the postpone of the project activities was happened due

to the delay payment of the project fund to the executing agency. Suggest that the process of funding should be enhanced with the GEF projects.

(2) Study tour (budget 3215 &3216) is still in waiting for the list from PCU. Suggest that the study tour be organized for 2� 3 individuals rather then in large group more then 5 person.

(3) Field Eco-farming experience and demonstration was failed without actual outcomes by Xindi Co. Lit. of Fangchenggang (budget 2231). Enterprises should be carefully considered to take the duty in carrying out detailed hi-tech demonstration oriented to nature conservation in further GEF project.

(4) The professional arrangements didn’t satisfy the implementing of the project in the field, such as the present director of BENR Mr. Su Bo has no educational background in nature management or nature sciences but he was in charge on the planning of BENR rather then a planning expert to take the duty. If the management level is upgraded to department level (county mayor level) for the BENR, it is key for a personnel with forestry or related science educational background to be in charge of BENR.

12. A PROGNOSIS OF THE DEGREE TO WHICH THE OVERALL OBJECTIVES AND EXPECTED

OUTCOMES OF THE PROJECT. The goals and purpose of the project is to conserve the trans-boundary mangroves in Fangchenggang City and the biodiversity, reduce stresses on mangroves through strict control on shrimp farming and traditional fishing in mangroves, raise public awareness on that mangroves are special resources which can benefit local economy development in a sustainable way, provide a safe habitat for migratory birds and fishes with international significance. According to the field and indoor interview investigation results, the overall objectives and expected outcomes of the project are most likely 90% (with overall rating 2) of the expected to be met.

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 2 Page 6 13. RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING ANY NECESSARY CORRECTIONS AND

ADJUSTMENTS TO THE OVERALL PROJECT WORK PLAN AND TIMETABLE FOR THE PURPOSES OF ENHANCING THE ACHIEVEMENT OF PROJECT OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES. (1) Eco-farming demonstration is undertaken by the executing agency to correct the failure of

project budget 2231. Suggest reinforce this practice and demonstration. (2) The in-site notice panels and educational tags along with other gardening infrastructure

should be reinforced in the Demo-site. (3) Boundary identification input of BENR could have been included the project work plan. It is

urgent to confirm the boundary for BENR and sub-protection areas be clarified under laws and regulations.

(4) Biodiversity survey could have been carried out towards end of the project, and it can be made up in the near future, especially the shellfish and bird biodiversity monitoring.

(5) BENR needs technical supports on information collection, biodiversity survey, training and planning, as well as financial supports on roads, educational boards, equipments, law enforcement and transportation. The master plan for BENR should be revised by a GEF planning expert in detail before it is to be present to the local government for implementation.


Appendix 1

Appendix 1 The outcomes and achievements and problems of the project activities undertaken to date.

Budget Code Activities Status (rating 1-5) Achievements Problems

2000 SUB-CONTRACT COMPONENT 2200 Sub-contract w/ non profit organisation

2201 Ident and analysis of potential revenue streams

Finished (3)

� Economic Applicable Report of Xindi Mangrove Eco-Park� Wait for assessment

2202 Zoning, Planning and design of urban mangrove eco-park

Finished (3)

� Xindi Mangrove Eco-Park Planning� Wait for approval

2203 BEMNR general management planning Finished (3)

� The general planning of BENR� Wait for approval

2204 Zoning & Planning to protect mangrove coastal bird habitats

Finished (3)

Bird protecting facility was built at Wudou station supported by national fund.

2205 Zoning & Planning to protect Heritiera littoralis wild population

Finished (3)

� The planning for conservation and rehabilitation of Heritiera littoralis�

2206 Page design, data collection & page renew

Finished (2) Website at GMC Wait to be improved

2207 Collection and processing of GIS database

Finished (2) Presented to PCU

2208 establishing 1:10000 local GIS system Finished (3) Has been set up Need more inf. input

2209 Application of GIS to evaluate changes in mangrove ecosystem

Finished (3)

� �BENR mangrove dynamics paper by Forest Survey and Planning Institute.

In press

2210 Review existing laws and regulations Finished (2) on the agenda for

law revising

2211 Preparation of draft recommendations on harmonization of the legislation

Finished (2)

A meeting hold to revise the BENR conservation regulations under guidance of the Law and Regulation Office of Guangxi.

2212 Preparation of the posters & displays for the education center

Finished (2)

The Education Base of BENR was set up and open to public.

2213 Reforestation planning Finished (2)

Xindi Co. Lt. planted 60hm2 mangrove.

Due to frozen affect of early 2008, only 20hm2 left.

2214 Monitoring and evaluation of newly planted mangroves (3years)

Finished (2)

� Report of Monitoring and evaluation of newly planted mangroves� by GMC

2215 Collection of Rhizophora and Bruguiera hypocotyls (30,0000 seedlings)

Finished (3) Short in field

2216 Pest control and transportation Finished (3) By Xindi Co. Lt.

2217 Mangrove forest plantation Finished (2) By Xindi Co. Lt. Frozen mostly

2218 Patching up plantation (ca 40% of the first year)

Finished (2) By Xindi Co. Lt.

2219 Monitoring on major bird population & migration(3years)

Finished (2)

MS degree theses of 2 graduates of Animal Science College, Guangxi University

2220 Experience & demons of reproducing seedlings of coastal rare plants

Finished (2) By GMC

2221 construction of coastal plant nursery Finished (2)

Wudou Mangrove Nursery by GMC, 20,000seedlings produced

2222 Collection of seeds of Heritiera littoralis Finished (2) 5000 seeds by BENR Insufficient, 5000

seeds more needed

2223 Construction of nursery for Heritiera littoralis

Finished (3) 3 by BENR

2224 Reproduce seedlings and tending of Heritiera littoralis (3yrs)

Finished (2) By BENR

2225 Design of the education center Finished (1) By BENR

2226 Collecting & Creating biological specimens of mangrove ecosystem

Finished (2)

110 bentho and 50 coastal plant specimen for display by GMC

plant specimen wait to hand in


Appendix 1cont. The outcomes and achievements and problems of the project activities undertaken to date.


2227 Produce commendatory of CDROM,DVD,Brochures ect.

Finished (1)

2228 Invest of building center Finished (1)

Government funding 1500,000Yuan RMB for BENR Shijiao Station Building, 710.23M2

2229 Collection of photographs and edit for DVD

Finished (1) Presented to PCU

2230 Data treatment/edit/software assembling (CDROM)

Finished (1)

CDROM for public awareness education

2231 Field Eco-farming experience and demonstration

Not Finished

(5)

Trialed but failed as only the site without the eco-farming species in site observed by experts. A report on Feb. 22,2008.

Redo by GMC

2232 Adjust and prepare a better eco-farming site (Eco-farming)

Finished (2)

Eco-farming Demonstration Site in BENR by GMC and 30 individuals of Bostrichthys sinensis and 10 individuals of Scylla serrata were harvested on July 8th 2008 in the eco-farming demo site.

Ongoing

2233 Re-design to improve the eco-farming based on science principles and the existed experiences (Eco-farming)

Finished (1)

Input of 6 PhD scholars and other 2 aqunculture

experts, by GMC

2234 Practice, monitoring and report drafting (Eco-farming)

Finished (2)

New Eco-farming Demo-site in BENR set up in March. 2008� and it is running successful up to the present. The report for mudcrab and mudfish eco-farming is in draft.

In wait for report

2235 BNR-Expansion of MFA to more than 100 members and establishing their archives (Improvement of Capacity)

Finished (1)

The Mangrove Demo Site Friendship Association set up in 2005and registered in April 2008� with more then 100 members.

2236

Guangxi Marine Environment and Coastal Wetland Research Center (GMECWRC) – Formation of participatory plan of the association in Beilun estuary mangrove wetland conservation and restoration (Improvement of Capacity)

Ongoing (3) Only draft report To be revised

2237

GMECWRC-Drafting script, shooting and releasing video at TV for FCG MFA activities with the cooperation of TV station (Improvement of Capacity)

Finished (1)

7 times of news report on Guangxi TV

2238

GMECWRC-Production and delivery of 250 sets of mangrove logo T-shirt and cap to aware social concerns (Improvement of Capacity)

Finished (1)

350 sets of T-shirts and hats distributed to the 120 members of the mangrove association and 30 officials and students of FCG City,40 workers and students of GMC

2299 Total 2999 Component total 3000 TRAINING COMPONENT 3200 Group training

3201 Group training on Project management (3 times)

Finished (2)

3 times training on GEF mgt, GEF accounting, and report finalizing.

3202 Training on planting mangrove trees Finished (2)

Together with afforestation activity by Xindi Co. Lt.

3203 School visits and lectures (30 times)

Finished (2) Report by BENR To be revised

3204 Seminars of local communities & urban residents (3 times)



Appendix 1 cont. The outcomes and achievements and problems of the project activities undertaken to date.


3205 Field trips of Mangrove friendly association


3206 Planning and training for breeding seedlings of Heritiera littoralis

Finished (2)

Part of the these for master’ degree by Zeng Cong

3207

Conservation, Management & Wise Utilization Forum of China Mangroves and Associated Resources (ca 80p/3 days)

Finished (1)

Together with � The Chinese mangrove wetland forum�

3208 Training for local community on nursery of costal rare plants

Finished (2)

The contact persons of Wudou and some mangrove guards

3209 Local NGO activities 6 times Finished (2) By Xindi Co. Lt.

3210 Provincial NGO 1 times Finished (2) By Xindi Co. Lt.

3211 Training senior research and management staff (30 persons,3 times)

Finished (1) Finished by GMC

3212 Graduate students study in demo-site 6 person-years

Finished (1)

Finished MS these, more than 5.

3213 Training of local community and guards for eco-farming

Finished (3)

2 persons trained By Xindi Co. Lt.

3214 Field training of two or three local people to guard and operate the eco-farming (Eco-farming)

Finished (2) 2 persons trained By GMC

3215 Cost of field trip and local traffic (study tour)

Not Finished Wait PCU

3216 Regional exchange through study tour of FCG (Study tour)

Not Finished Wait PCU

3217

Group training of MFA members (ca 40 persons) to join the monitoring of FCG mangrove conservation (Improvement of Capacity)

Finished (2) Finished in July 2008.

3218

Group training of MFA members (ca 20 persons) on field observing mangrove pests and monitoring (Improvement of Capacity)

Finished (1) Finished in May 2008

3219

Group training of MFA members (ca 30 persons) on restoration of mangrove and coastal plants (Improvement of Capacity)

Finished (1) Finished in June 2008

3220

Workshop on exchange in experiences and co-operation between FCG MFA, other NGOs and organisations in Guangxi coastal areas (ca 30 persons) (Improvement of Capacity)

Finished (1) Finished in April 2008

3300 Meeting/Conference

3316 Meetings of Stakeholders Finished (1) Setting up a registrated NGO

3317 Management Board Meetings (12) Finished (1)

Meeting reports in Newsletters

3318 Meetings to collect & review associated laws and regulars

Finished (1)

3319 Press Conference (6 times) Finished (1)

3320 Market operation for nursery tech. Finished (2)

3321 workshops on conservation of bird habitats and public hots

Finished (1)

3322 Meetings of Mangrove friendly association

Finished (2)

3323 Organizing and co-ordinating meetings (Eco-farming)

Finished

3324 Organizing and co-ordinating meetings (Study tour)

Finished

3325 Dialog between representatives of FCG MFA and BENR on their concerns (ca 25 persons) (Improvement of Capacity)

Finished (2)

3326 Organizing and coordinating meetings Finished


(Improvement of Capacity) (2)



3399 Total 3999 Component total 4000 EQUIPMENT & PREMISES COMPONENT 4199 Total 4200 Non Expendable equipment

4201 Purchase of computers and equipments (GIS)

4202 purchase camera and tele-lens Finished

4203 Office non-expendable equip (Task Manager) Finished

4204 Office non-expendable equip (Focal Point) Finished

4300 Premises

4301 rent and maintenance office (Task Manager) Finished

4302 rent and maintenance office (Focal Point) Finished

4303 Rent of place for nursery Finished 4304 Rent of test place for eco-farming Finished 4399 Total 4999 Component total 5000 MISCELLANEOUS OMPONENT

5100 Operation and maintenance of equipment

5101 GIS equipment maintenance &repair Finished

5102 Maintenance of office equip (Focal Point) Finished

5199 Total 5200 Reporting Costs

5201 Report on economic valuation Finished (1)

� Report on economic valuation�

5202 Publication of the reports Finished (1)

5203 Publication of 4 posters Finished (1)

5204 Collection of necessary photos for education center

Finished (1)

5205 Report for nursery techniques Finished (2)

5206 Publication of brochures (3) Finished (2)

3 brochures printed and distributed

5207 Production of DVD (500 disks) Finished (1)

500 DVD printed and distributed

5208 Edit, publication and release of newsletter

Finished (1)

14issues printed and distributed

5209 Reports of NGO activities Finished (2)

5210 Print lecture materials for training of governmental officers

Finished (2)

2 versions of Printed lecture materials

5211 Formal publication of 2000 copies of Res. Environ.& Manag. of FCG city (by SEA)

Not Finished

In press for publish at the end of 2008.

5212 Production of the notice boards(12) Finished (1) 12 notice boards in site

5213 Translation (Eco-farming) Finished 5215 Translation (Study tour) Finished 5217 Translation (Improvement of Capacity) Finished

5218 A specific publication of FCG MFA activities (300 copies) (Improvement of Capacity)

Not Finished

In press for publish at the end of July 2008

5299 Total 5300 Sundry

5301 Web service Finished (2)

5302 Communication (Focal Point) ongoing 5303 Communication (Task Manager) ongoing


5304 freight and installation of notice boards to villages

Finished (1)



5305 Translation (Task Manager) Finished 5306 Translation (Focal Point) Finished

5307 Communication of Mangrove friendly association

Finished (1)

5308 Communication (Eco-farming) ongoing

5309 Postage/freight taking the eco-farming materials and facilities to the field (Eco-farming)

ongoing Wait final report

5310 Communication (Study tour) ongoing

5311 Communication (Improvement of Capacity)

Finished

5312 Postage/freight (Improvement of Capacity)

Finished

5399 Total 5500 Evaluation Finished reports 5501 Monitoring & Evaluation Finished report 5502 Mid-term & terminal evaluation Finished reports 5503 Audit expenses (3years) Finished reports 5999 Component total

Proposal for Improvement of Eco-Farming in FCG DS Finished

Proposal for Regional Exchange through Study Tour of FCG DS Finished

Proposal for Improvement of Capacity of FCG Finished

Total (2)


ANNEX 3

Draft Terminal Evaluation Report for the Batu Ampar Mangrove Habitat Demonstration in Indonesia

INTRODUCTION

Purpose of the evaluation: To evaluate the extent to which the stated objectives and outcomes have been achieved; the overall performance of the demonstration site project; and determine the likelihood that the objectives will be sustainable following implementation of the activities. (See Appendix 1) Overall Objectives of the Batu Ampar Mangrove Demonstration Site are to: A) Establish an Institutional framework for sustainable mangrove management in Batu Ampar. B) Develop baseline environmental and socio-economic databases and a decision support system. C) Develop a business plan in support of the implementation of the overall management plan. D) Conduct training, education and public awareness activities, and E) Facilitate the development and approval of local regulations regarding mangrove management.

I. A SUMMARY EVALUATION OF ACTIVITIES THE PROJECT HAS UNDERTAKEN TO DATE

1. Batu Ampar Mangrove Demonstration Site as one of the Demonstration Site for South China Sea /SCS Project have been involved by all related Stakeholders at both the Local and Central Government in the execution of activities of Sustainable Mangrove Management and on Local Community –based Management. Further in this case, since the plans of both Department of Forestry and Local Government stated that the Batu Ampar mangrove area will become a Sub Center of Mangrove Information Center/MIC in Indonesia, the Management regime that has been conducted by IMReD activities and supported by all related Stakeholders have been following the design to ensure that the Environmental condition of Batu Ampar mangroves remains as in its present state and that the use of the area is on a sustainable basis as currently seen during the Demonstration Site Visit.

2. The National Technical Focal Point after having visited the Batu Ampar Mangrove Demonstration Site, after the Mid-term Self –assessment Evaluation /Review and after the NAP/SAP Meeting which is taken place in Jakarta at 30 June 2008, is in the agreement that: Batu Ampar mangrove forest is currently still in a natural/virgin state, consisting of primary forest, also secondary forest which comprised the production forest where the Local Community and Private Companies have used mangrove forest as charcoal raw material for more than 100 years. Therefore it has been agreed that, the NAP/SAP of Mangrove Demonstration Site should contain the Mangrove Regime of Management based on the Environmentally-Sound Management and Sustainable Development principles or IBSAP.

3. The long-term goals of the Batu Ampar Demonstration site are to sustain the functions and benefits of the mangrove ecosystem as the life support system for the local community and to sustain the globally and regionally significant biodiversity of the area. The establishment of a participatory management system involving all stakeholders in the form of a Multi-sector and Multi-Stakeholder Management Board in Pontianak which is coordinated by the Environmental Impact Management Agency / Bapedal and involving a.o. the Fisheries and Marine Affairs Office, the Local Planning Board of West Kalimantan Province, the Agriculture Office, Tanjung Pura University, Private Sectors (PT.BIOS, PT. Kandelia and Panter Cooperative), NGO’s and the Local Community of Batu Ampar, Nipah Panjang and Teluk Nibung Villages in supporting the implementation of IMRED activities not only to reduce the rate of Mangrove Degradation but also in the Rehabilitation of Mangrove ecosystem by Nypa conversion to Rhizophora sp. vegetation and Vitex sp. for future consumption of Charcoal raw materials. Further in this case, also the beneficial improvement to the Local Community from the Mangrove ecosystem have been reached such as: mangrove charcoal, shell coconut charcoal, red/brown sugar, banana jam, furnace, fishpond, fish net, crab catch, soft shell crab, jermal/fish-trap, belat, trawl/fish-trap and coffee. The alternative businesses which are feasible enough to be developed are: Banana Jam, Brown/Red Sugar, Coconut Sugar and Coconut shell Charcoal.

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 3 Page 2 4. To maintain the function of the Mangrove ecosystem in Batu Ampar as a life support system for

the local community and as a regionally significant centre of biological diversity, the necessity to establish a comprehensive knowledge base entity in the form of the Mangrove Information Centre/MIC which is located in the auspices of the Environmental Impact Management Agency / Bapedalda (in close cooperation with Tanjung Pura University) have been undertaken, as the basis for sustainable mangrove management. Further in this case, the improvement of the capacity of human resources and management institutions have been reached by having Training Courses and other related educations for School children, Academic Students and Environmental Public Awareness Campaigns for Government Officials as well as the Public in general.

5. Consequently, the establishment of the Mangrove Information Centre /MIC is located in the auspices of the Environmental Impact Management Agency / Bapedalda in Pontianak, where at the same time is coordinating the task of the Mangrove Management Board/MMB in the Control and Supervision of this Agency to Batu Ampar Mangrove Ecosystem, has lead and created the justification of overcoming several threats as faced by Batu Ampar Mangrove Ecosystem to its sustainability, such as: conversion of mangrove, illegal logging and mangrove timber exploitation by community and private sector, as well as: the lack of human resource capacity at the community level to manage the resource in a sustainable manner, weak mangrove management institutions, and the lack of coordination between stakeholders.

Still to over come the problems the Forestry Office of West Kalimantan has already allocated a Financial Support for the year 2009 -2010 in the Development of Alternative Community Income generation.

6. It is found that, IMRED implementation of activities not only concluded a wide variety of flora and fauna in the country, but also are of regionally and globally significant biological diversity, as seen in the Publication of rich Flora and Fauna of Batu Ampar, where there are 23 true Mangrove species, 8 associate Mangrove species and 19 species found in the eco-tone, including Kandelia candel(endemic species), Rhizophora spp, Brugueira spp, and Nypa fruticans are the dominant tree species over most of the mangrove forest; the identification of Fauna that includes mammals, reptiles, birds and a wide diversity of aquatic fauna (fish, crustacean, gastropods, bivalves, polychaetes, phytoplankton and zooplankton); will obviously justify and support the conditions of the UNEP/GEF South China Project to reverse the degradation trend in the South China Sea, being one of the highest priority mangrove sites from the perspective of regionally and globally significant biological diversity; and also responding to Indonesia’s Biodiversity Action Plan (IBSAP) i.e. conservation and sustainable use.

7. It is also found that, the Sustainable Management and Development of the Mangrove area in Batu Ampar Demo-site, as in accordance to the IMReD implementation of totally 105 UNEP GEF Funded sub activities, is proving that in general: the magnificent results achieved is in accordance with the program conducted on –site, while other additional achievements will be showing the seriousness and great interest of IMRED in close cooperation with all Stakeholders concerning the UNEP/GEF Project entitled the “Reversing the Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand”, even-though shortcomings and mistakes are always being part of Human Life.

8. Having been witness to what IMRED has achieved over the phases of UNEP/GEF funding support, the Evaluator strongly recommends continued external support for the Batu Ampar Mangrove Demonstration Site Project, or at least replication to other locations in the country, based on the following observations and arguments:

* The Batu Ampar Mangrove Demo-site is too critical in the local community and as a regionally significant centre of biological diversity and its marine and coastal waters far too vital to the aquatic environment, for it not to be able to access an appropriate share of Indonesia funding support at this time.

* UNEP/GEF support for SCS has been relatively modest, yet has been extremely productive, making it a very important one of the most efficient and effective uses of UNEP/GEF resources.

* A considerable amount of time is required for effective relationships, both among countries as well as within a single country in the SCS Project, in support to the Batu Ampar Demonstration Site, and more time is needed to consolidate the gains made towards the goals of the Environmental Sound – Management and Sustainable Development Principles as required by Indonesia’s Biodiversity Action Plan (IBSAP) on a self-sustaining path.


* The differentials of capacities within the region and in the country makes continued external

support more essential, especially in the efforts toward the conservation and sustainable use of Batu Ampar Mangrove Demonstration Site.

* IMRED lengthy and curiosity experiences gained from the Batu Ampar Mangrove Demonstration Site during its implementation of activities at recent years made it possible to have other external support for the enhancement of Batu Ampar Mangrove Demonstration Site or from the other side in facing other Demonstration Sites to be replicated in the country.

* An offer in the form of a UNEP/GEF Small Grant Program/SGP (Indonesian Committee) has agreed in fixing a new Proposal (Planning Grant) to strengthening the Institutional Capacity as related to Mangrove Forest Management by the Local Community in Batu Ampar.

II. AN ASSESSMENT OF THE SCOPE, QUALITY AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PROJECT OUTPUTS PRODUCED TO DATE IN RELATION TO EXPECTED RESULTS

The sustainable management and development of Mangrove ecosystem in the SCS Demo-site of Batu Ampar, as related to Its Overall Objectives, is to maintain the sustainability of the mangrove forest in the area as in accordance to the existing condition, since the status is still in the natural stage, as stated in the environmental status which is in-line to the Guidelines of Sustainable Development Principles in order to support the local community concerning to their daily life.

The environmental development which is conducted is covering various efforts copyng the five objective and others related matters, has the following :

Objective 1. Establish an institutional framework for sustainable mangrove management in Batu Ampar

1. IMRED implementation of activities in Batu Ampar Mangrove Demonstration Site, have been commenced since September 2006 with the appointment of a Day to day operational Project personnel, including a Site Manager, an Assistant Site Manager and an Administrative support Staff.

After a little while, the establishment of an institutional framework for sustainable mangrove management in Batu Ampar is conducted by erection of a Multi-sector Stakeholders Management Board, as a result of the approach for emphasizing the identification of key local counterparts, intensive capacity building in sustainable mangrove management and related skills, the establishment of mechanisms for interagency and cross-sector collaboration, stakeholder participation, careful policy–relevant technical analysis and the production of action-oriented plans and reports. Aside of that, another key feature of the approach is guidance in designing a site plan, including emphasizes realistic time frames for the development of key groups or parties in commencing the implementation of activities, such as: Formal establishment of the Management Board by Local Government of West Kalimantan and the completion of significant tasks or Batu Ampar Mangrove Demonstration Site implementation of activities by IMRED. After the establishment of a Multi-sector Stakeholders Management Board coordinated by the Environmental Impact Management Agency or Bapedalda in Pontianak –West Kalimantan, the inter-sectors coordination between governmental agencies at the Local level in Pontianak and at the Central level in Jakarta are much stimulated, as a result of the interaction between the Specialized Executing Agency/SEA and the National Focal Point/NFP in implementing the activities concerning the Batu Ampar Mangrove Demonstration Site. Similar interactions are also undertaken between the Management Board in Pontianak and the Institutional Settings of the Villages in Batu Ampar, Nipah Panjang as well as Teluk Nibung. The Management Board has 20 members and has met several times, as appropriately needed, in discussing the main activities including the compilation and analysis of relevant biological and economic Data and Information, Central as well as Local policy and legislations, including Training needs to anticipation of resolving conflicts, and by formulating guiding principles in facing the development of activities as related to the Management Plan for the area.

2. The existence of the integration between the Demo-site Objective and the Local Development Plan (the Spatial Planning of the Province and Districts) have been taken into careful consideration, among others: the development of mangrove coastal potencies in Batu Ampar in view of: agriculture, fisheries, and economic business alternatives which are productive and environmental friendly to support the Sustainable Development in the country.

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 3 Page 4 3. Since the Management Board is guiding and supervising the implementation of activities on-site,

organizing of monthly meetings and other meetings with Private Sectors, Community Groups, Leaders as well as Village Leaders, is part of the its routine activities, to discuss the main activities including training needs, compilation and analysis of relevant biological and economic data and information, policy and legislation, to resolve conflicts, and to work on the development of the management plan for the area. (See further Appendix 4)

Objective 2. Develop baseline environmental and socio-economic databases and a decision

support system 1. The development is executed in the form of an Environmental Basic Data and Socio-economic

Database of Mangrove in Batu Ampar area as a decision support system in consideration of the Policy Management.

The development of a GIS/ Geographic Information System based on the data, including the provision of related Software and Hardware; and Citra Land-Sat together with the analysis have been taken care. Aside of that, also the preparation and undertakings of a baseline GIS map of habitat distribution, establishment of a GIS database and the distribution of initial habitat maps have been done.

2. The field Survey of Habitats and Land Use (in the form of a Report to create a Map with current data) have been conducted.

The Maps which are already available as resulted from the performed activities are: the Administration Maps, the Map of Demo-site limitations, the Map of Land Status, the Map of Land-systems, the Map of land-uses, the Map of Forest Concession, Land Cover 2002, Land Cover 2005, Land Cover 2006, Land Cover 2007, the Map of Jermal/ Fish Trap Distribution, the Map of Kepah / Molluscs and Ale–ale Distribution and the Map of Charcoal Kilns Distribution.

3. The Inventory of Flora and fauna in the Mangrove Demo-site of Batu Ampar, among others: the Biodiversity of types on mangrove flora 50 species, Mammals 11 species, Birds 57 species, Reptiles 10 species, Phyto-plankton 37 species, Zooplankton 20 species, Benthos 30 species, Mollusk 13 species, Crustacean 23 species, and Fishes 64 species. The potency of mangrove forest standings averagely 180 m3/ha; and the Potency of mangrove biomass averagely 262,86 ton/ha. The Inventory results have already been reported in the Publication entitled “Flora and Fauna Inventories at Batu Ampar Demosite, Pontianak District, West Kalimantan”. Publication ISBN No. 978-979-3667-16-4 year 2007, and are provided in 2 Languages (English and Indonesia), (See also Appendix 6)

4. The Inventory of mangrove resources use at the current situation and the economic valuation of the mangrove resources use, with the Total Economic Valuation of Rp. 107,47 billion/year. The Study results have already been compiled entitled “Inventory of current uses and economic values of mangrove resources”, with the registration number of Publication ISBN 978-979-3667-16-4 of year 2007. The Reports are provided in 2 Languages (English and Indonesia). (See also Appendix 6).

5. The development of a silvo-fihery system of the mangrove forest and its implementation, with has a two-fold benefit environment services and to enhance the local community income generation.

6. The resolution of management conflict in the use of mangrove forest resources is already conducted through discussions with the key stakeholders and related agencies, including the community and private enterprises.

Further in this case, the data and information together with information on policy and legislation have been analyzed in order to identify potential conflicts and solutions, which are incorporated into the management plan at the site level. Moreover, Reports on Mangrove flora and fauna, habitat distribution, land –use patterns, and economic values at Batu Ampar Mangrove Demonstration Site have been produced for the use in consultations with relevant Stakeholders.

Objective 3. Develop of a Business Plan in support of the implementation of the overall management plan

The other important way by which partnership with the private sector is being harnessed is through the identification of different types of business alternatives and opportunities based on the use of Non-wood products.


1. The Identification of 13 types of business alternatives and opportunities based on the use of non-

wood products is already conducted and visits to other locations in Java to increase the knowledge on the related topic have been taken place. The Business Alternatives which are potential to be developed are among others: mangrove charcoal, shell coconut charcoal, red/brown sugar, banana jam, furnace, fishpond, fish net, crab catch, soft shell crab, jermal/fish-trap, belat, trawl/fish-trap and coffee. The alternative businesses which are feasible enough to be developed are: Banana Jam, Brown/Red Sugar, Coconut Sugar and Coconut shell Charcoal.

2. Those alternative businesses are capable to increase the community income and support the mangrove conservation businesses which are related to mangrove conservational aspects such as: the production of coconut skin/shell charcoal, fish-net culture (grouper), crab molting, the production of mangrove charcoal which is environmental friendly in support of the Sustainable Development.

3. The development of leban (Vitex sp.) agriculture as an alternative for the production of raw material for the making of mangrove charcoal. The size of Leban plantation is 15 ha.

4. The development of Keramba /floating Fish –trap in the village of Batu Ampar and the crab molting business in the Village of Nipah Panjang through a mechanism of revolving fund.

Objective 4. Conduct training, education and public awareness activities

IMRED Trainings, particularly those related to Sustainable Mangrove Management are aimed primarily to local and national staff of agencies implementing Mangrove management programs and projects. Some of the specialized trainings including improvement of charcoal quality, management of mangrove ecosystems and silvo-fishery techniques have been delivered to students, government institutions and for local communities as appropriate.

1. Training on environmental education have been undertaken for students of the lower Schools, while Training in the quality increase of mangrove charcoal and training in fixing of coconut skin charcoal, fish-pond culture with environmental consideration, mangrove ecosystem management, Inventory technique of mangrove resources for the local community, local NGO’s including Managers, Field Staffs and Government Officials have already been taken place. In other words, numerous training, education and public awareness activities have been implemented of charcoal quality, management of mangrove ecosystems, and silvo-fishery techniques. (See also Appendix.7)

2. Other development activities as related to the alternative efforts, such as: training of Agriculture for Latex, Areca nut, and Oil Palm; Nypa rehabilitation criteria and indicators of sustainable management of the mangrove production forest have also been done.

3. The development and implementation of the educational program and public awareness are conducted through the activities of collection and compilation of data, Information, documentation, specimen, and photo collection, production of posters and brochures during visits to schools as related to environmental education, discussions with target schools, field trips and a series of meeting discussions with related Stakeholders.

4. Distribution of posters and brochures to the community through the educational activities and environmental awareness.

5. Publication of study results through printing and electronic media’s.

6. The establishment of an Information Center for Mangrove utilization, the finalization process is taken place and is agreed to be located in the auspices of the Environmental Impact Management Agency or Bapedalda (in close cooperation with University of Tanjung Pura) in Pontianak.

7. The establishment and publication of a Website for Batu Ampar Demosite which has already been conducted with the initial of: www.imred.org.

Objective 5. To facilitate of development and approval of local regulations regarding

mangrove management Activities for the Development of a Draft Local Level Regulation on Mangrove Management in Batu Ampar, which have been covering:

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 3 Page 6 1. The stakeholders’ partnership in the compilation of the Mangrove Management Plan of Batu

Ampar had already been conducted jointly by the related parties (Local Government, Private sector, NGO’s, Private Companies and the Community).

2. The Mangrove Management Plan of Batu Ampar, The Plan of Coastal Management in the coastal village of Nipah Panjang, which is already compiled and is in the final stage of the process and to be socialized to the Stakeholders is already approved by the Local Government.

3. In order to facilitate the development and approval of Local Regulations regarding management, the review and evaluation of existing rules and regulations pertaining to Community–Based mangrove ecosystem management have been performed, which consisted of activities concerning to: the community success opportunities in sustainable development, the community limitation as related to mangrove management, facilitation of the framework in community - based management for mangrove aspects, and the finalization of the draft on sustainable mangrove management. At large, the review has examined and analyzed constraints to successful management at the community level, Identification of constraints, include the need for training, the need for quantitative and qualitative assessment of current uses and ownership, and the low capacity of the local community to enforce regulations. The outcome of this review and analysis have been used in the development of local regulations for mangrove management.

The Activities as related to the Facilitation of Compilation of the Draft Local Regulations on Mangrove Management in Batu Ampar have been undergone a process as follows:

First, discussions at the community level have been taken place several times to get better understandings of the Topic to be faced and at a later stage to be proceeded with the revision of the Draft Regulation.

The finalization of the Draft Regulation would be then circulated to the related Parties for further and Final consideration and approval by the Government Agency concerned.

The Draft Local Regulations are covering specific Topics, among others, as follows:

- The facilitation of the legal aspect of the charcoal kiln and the agreement in the limitation of the amount of charcoal kilns

- Socialization of the government rules and regulations in the management of mangrove forest production

- The facilitation of mangrove forest production management legalization by panther cooperation

- Finalization of criteria and indicators on the sustainable management of the mangrove production forest

In terms of co-financing the Department of Forestry has provided US$100.000 between 2003 and 2006 in support of a trial program of Mangrove Forest Management by local people. The Department of Fisheries and Marine Affairs has provided US$90.000 for the years of 2005-2006, while the Provincial Government of West Kalimantan has provided US$10.000 in 2007 to support the implementation of project activities.

Aside of the 5 Immediate Objectives of the Batu Ampar Demonstration Site as mentioned above, other related activities carried out by IMRED in support of the Objectives are among others:

*) The Conduct of Echo-seminar and Socialization of the Mangrove SAP

The Echo-seminar has been conducted during 3-5 March 2008 which is been participated by 50 personnel from the Government, NGO’s, Universities and the Community. Aside of that the socialization of the SCS Strategic Action Program have also been conducted in order to get inputs to it.

*) Lesson Learned of the Implementation Activities in the Batu Ampar Demosite:

1. The socio-economic database, the use of mangrove resources and the development Plan of the of the alternative livelihood is very much needed to support the sustainable management

2. The training and enhancement of educational aspects are very much needed in the development of the alternative livelihood


3. The strengthening of the Institutional aspects and the mechanism of management as related to

the coconut skin charcoal in support of the production

4. The enhancement of the quality and the sustainable production and the market opportunity are very much needed in the support of the development of the Alternative Livelihood

5. Detail activities as related to lesson learned in the development of Batu Ampar Mangrove Demo-site are:

* The production of coconut skin /shell charcoal in the villages of Nipah Panjang and Teluk Nibung is 722.39 ton/year and is the resource for the daily income of 741 households.

* The Increase of House-holds daily income is from Rp503,300.76/household/ month to Rp914,552.76/households/month or 55%.

* The use of renewable energy of coconut skin charcoal which could change or substitute the consumption of kerosene in the amount of 399 Liter/household /year

* The decrease of mangrove cuttings of 17.78 ha per year

* The increase of the fishermen income as related to the crab-catch which is resulting in a positive impact on mangrove conservation.

* The increase in the mangrove size in Batu Ampar area of 383.44 hectares during 2006 up to 2007.

* The use of mangrove charcoal as raw material for cooking in the villages of Nipah Panjang and Teluk Nibung which are experiencing a decrease of 88.45% (from 48.15% to 5.56%) and is changed by the coconut skin charcoal. This case is also indirectly supported by the use of furnace for a cooking tool, where 100% of the communities are using furnaces, whether it is charcoal furnace as well as yard wood furnace.

* Other outputs achieved are: rehabilitation of environmental sanitation to anticipate the seawater intrusion by the establishment of 20 deep wells (currently, positive impacts already seen of 2 deep wells in the demo-site) and the sanitation system of bathing, washing and toilet or the sanitation system.

* It can be concluded from the foregoing lessons learned, which can be drawn from the Batu Ampar Mangrove Demonstration Site activities, include the assessment techniques used to evaluate the current uses and economic values of mangrove resources in the area and their application to the development of a business plan for alternative livelihood initiatives.

III. IDENTIFICATION OF ASSOCIATED INITIATIVES BY GOVERNMENTS ASIDE OF THE

OPERATIONAL PLAN 1. Since the Government in the country is currently dealing with the “Clean Seas Program”, the

Local Government in West Kalimantan, specifically the Environmental Impact Management Agency or Bapedalda in Pontianak is taking the lead and giving advices in the establishment of a Deep Well to support the Sanitation Program in Nipah Panjang Village.

2. Also in this case, 2 (two) units of Floating Fishery Nets are erected in the Village of Batu Ampar for White Snapper and Nyla species in support of the Community Income generation.

3. Guidance is also directed to maintain and to use the Yoshimura Kiln as it used to be, in the Villages of Nipah Panjang and Teluk Nibung to enhance the quality of Charcoal, since the raw materials used here are originated from Coconut shell and Leban wood ( Vitex) instead of using Mangrove wood.

4. Further in this case, the Local Government of West Kalimantan is giving advice to the Local people in the area by using Furnaces made of mud, while coconut shell or wood found in the neighbour hood as fire raw materials, to be used by the Local Community, since the energy used is based on saving energy method point of view, due to its focusing point of fire directed upwards to the cooking scale.

5. The Local Government of West Kalimantan is also giving support for the Irrigation system as related to the marine tidal movement mechanism, to overcome water shortage during Ebb-tide in order not to flush away the water to the sea, since water is always needed as appropriate during all time for the irrigation system.

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 3 Page 8 IV. EVALUATION OF TIMETABLE OF ACTIVITIES, ALLOCATION OF FINANCIAL RESOURCES

AND CONSISTENCY WITH THE OPERATIONAL PLAN

There are Time table irregularities found as due to Administrative reasons and as a result Budget Revision need to be adjusted properly, which usually need an ample time for consideration, such as: during Semester I and Semester II of June – December of 2006. Actually the implementation of activities is scheduled to start on June 2006, however as a result of the late achievement in budget support allocation, implementation of activities could only be started September 2006.

Consequently therefore, remedial action have been proposed by the Site Manager and further Budget revision be put forward for normalization of financial administration rendered.

Further in this regard, viewing from another side, it is notified that there are no changes happening as related so far to the allocation of financial resources and consistency with the operational plan is proven to be normal, since carry over of such financial resources are easily to be adjusted, after consultations be made with the PCU in Bangkok for further processes as appropriate.

V. IDENTIFICATION OF PROGRAMMATIC AND FINANCIAL VARIANCE AND ADJUSTMENT MADE

Programmatic and Financial variance are identified during the month of June 2007 of the I Semester and is carried to the II Semester 2007, while further adjustment have been made during the month of February 2008 for the IV Semester.

Perhaps most importantly the Batu Ampar Mangrove Demonstration Site project have established interagency collaborations and Stakeholder participation strategies designed to increase integration among organizations or agencies at the local level for the purpose of improving the Sustainable Mangrove management, an therefore the intension is a avoiding programmatic and financial variance.

IMRED commitment to fitting general management principles, such as: Environmental –sound Management and Sustainable Development to local situations, involving people in developing a local management agenda, field research to support the Demonstration Site implementation of activities that is based toward management and prolonging their engagement at the site level are among the factors that have served to build understanding, trust and commitment at the local level.

VI. EVALUATION OF PROJECT COORDINATION, MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION PROVIDED BY THE MANAGEMENT BOARD

a) As reference to the Organizational/ Institutional arrangements: The establishment of an institutional framework for sustainable mangrove management in Batu Ampar is conducted by erection of a Multi-sector Stakeholders Management Board/MMB, as a result of the approach for emphasizing the identification of key local counterparts, intensive capacity building in sustainable mangrove management and related skills, the establishment of mechanisms for interagency and cross-sector collaboration, stakeholder participation, careful policy–relevant technical analysis and the production of action-oriented plans and reports. Aside of that, another key feature of the approach is guidance in designing a site plan, including emphasizes realistic time frames for the development of key groups or parties in commencing the implementation of activities, such as: Formal establishment of the Management Board by Local Government of West Kalimantan and the completion of significant tasks or Batu Ampar Mangrove Demonstration Site implementation of activities by IMRED. After the establishment of a Multi-sector Stakeholders Management Board coordinated by the Environmental Impact Management Agency or Bapedalda in Pontianak –West Kalimantan, the inter-sectors coordination between governmental agencies at the Local level in Pontianak and at the Central level in Jakarta are much stimulated, as a result of the interaction between the Specialized Executing Agency/SEA and the National Focal Point/NFP in implementing the activities concerning the Batu Ampar Mangrove Demonstration Site. Similar interactions are also undertaken between the Management Board in Pontianak and the Institutional Settings of the Villages in Batu Ampar, Nipah Panjang as well as Teluk Nibung. The Management Board has 20 members and has met several times, as appropriately needed, in discussing the main activities including the compilation and analysis of relevant biological and economic Data and Information, Central as well as Local policy and legislations, including Training needs to anticipation of resolving conflicts, and by formulating guiding principles in facing the development of activities as related to the Management Plan for the area.


b). As reference to the mechanisms established: their effectiveness and consistency with the

operational plan are depending on: the existence of the integration between the Demo-site Objective and the Local Development Plan (the Spatial Planning of the Province and Districts) that have been taken into careful consideration, among others: the development of mangrove coastal potencies in Batu Ampar in view of: agriculture, fisheries, and economic business alternatives which are productive and environmental friendly to support the Sustainable Development in the country, since aside of MMB, the Department of Forestry and the Department of Fisheries and Marine Affairs are also taken care of this Project.

c) As reference to the Effectiveness of Project Management: Since the Management Board is guiding and supervising the implementation of activities on-site, organizing of monthly meetings and other meetings with Private Sectors, Community Groups, Leaders as well as Village Leaders, is part of the its routine activities, to discuss the main activities including training needs, compilation and analysis of relevant biological and economic data and information, policy and legislation, to resolve conflicts, and to work on the development of the management plan for the area. Therefore the flexibility of management, in terms of responsiveness to the need for changes in financial allocations or mode of operation are mostly in-line with the guidance of the MMB.

d) As reference to the effectiveness of the monitoring mechanisms currently employed by the MMB in monitoring on a day to day basis, progress in project execution; the project Coordination, Management and Administration matters are always going in-line with the supervision and guidance of the MMB and as a result the Coordination, Management and Administration aspects are always in a perfect situation and controlled by the MMB as needed.

e) As reference to Administrative, Operational and/or Technical problems and constraints that influenced the effective implementation of the project and present recommendations for any necessary changes; it is found that none of these problems have influenced the effective implementation of the project so far, since monitoring efforts in this case are always been secured on-site, if not by MMB, the Personnel of the Department of Forestry or from the Department of Fisheries and Marine affairs would be keeping it under their control.

f) As reference to financial management of the project, including the balance between expenditures on administrative changes in relation to those on the achievements of substantive outputs; it is also found that none of the matters have influenced the effective implementation of the project or the substantive outputs, since it is always under the control of both the MMB or the Department of Forestry and the Department of Fisheries and Marine Affairs on-site.

VII. ASSESSMENT OF THE EXTEND TO WHICH EXTERNAL SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION AND KNOWLEDGE THAT HAVE INFLUENCED THE EXECUTION OF THE PROJECT ACTIVITIES

Good Science is fundamental to effective Mangrove management. IMRED has sought to rely on Scientists when they can and to nurture the development of technical professionals. The networking of Working Groups both at the National as well as Regional level is one mechanism to strengthen research capabilities and encourage sharing of facilities and specialized skills in this regard. 1. Scientific and Technical Information and knowledge have for some extend influenced the

execution of Project activity, as could be seen in the case of the Use and Maintenance of the Yoshimura Kiln, where guidance by IMRED personnel still need to be conducted, since the Local Community in Nipah Panjang Village are still asking for it.

2. White charcoal technology for development of Carbon quality is performed by changing of construction for the kilns available in Batu Ampar, which could be resulting in gaining about 80% of Carbon Content in the charcoal itself.

3. Advance Scientific and Technical Information and Knowledge and Inputs to support decision –making is always of prime importance in this regard, as seen in the above-mentioned lessons learned results, and therefore is of great benefit to the project execution.

VIII. ANALYSIS OF THE EXTEND TO WHICH PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION MECHANISMS DEVELOPED AND APPROVED BY THE MANAGEMENT BOARD HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED

As mentioned above, that the Mangrove Management Board/MMB, among others task, is to supervise and guide the implementation of field activities on-site and therefore prior to the Site activities are to be undertaken, preparatory actions have to be arranged in a proper way under the guidance of MMB,

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 3 Page 10 especially as related to policy making. In this case, to be effective agents of change, policies should reflect the interests of stakeholders.

This can be done by developing in stakeholders a sense of policy ownership to foster cooperation and encourage a more responsible stakeholder behavior towards the environment. Involving stakeholders in policymaking will help creative ownership, achieve consensus and manage conflicts.

IX. AN EVALUATION OF THE STATUS IN MOBILIZING CO-FINANCING TO SUPPORT PROJECT ACTIVITIES AND ENSURE FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY

9.1 Six Monthly Progress and Expenditure Reports - Status

In general, it is seen that the use of the financial allocation of the project is in a good condition by having reached 93,45% (See Matrix in Appendix 8). At the starting stage, eventually it is observed that the use of the financial allocation is not maximum, due to the late start of the project implementation on-site including to the less knowledge and understanding in administrative aspects and financial responsibilities by the SEA to the PCU in Bangkok. While during the III and IV stages, the shortcomings have been overcomed, and consequently the implementation results have been corrected as needed. During the last stage or IV stage, the only outstanding activity as related to the project implementation is the Field Trip by the related countries participants to the Batu Ampar Demosite concerning the alternative Income generation of the people. As to the information during the discussions by the Indonesian Mangrove Focal Point and Demosite Manager,it is due to the though and late schedule of the implementation activities i n Batu Ampar; which afterwards was corrected with due intensive support of the PCU during the III and IV stages.

9.2 Co-Financing

It is shown that the Co-financing support for the implementation of Demo-site activities is covering a big enough some of money, which is supported by the Central Government (the Department of Forestry and Department of Fisheries and Marine Affairs), the Local Government (the Environmental Impact Management Agency or Bapedalda of West Kalimantan Province, the Forestry Office of West Kalimantan Province, the Forestry and Plantation Office of Kubu Raya District, the Fisheries Office of Kubu Raya –District), Universities (Bogor Agricultural University and Tanjung Pura University in Pontianak),Private Sector, IMReD and other co-financing partners.

The Total realization of co-financing during the project implementation is 101.71 % of the whole in-cash and in-kind financial allocation rendered.

Detail Co-financing for project activities implementation are as follows:

Co-Financing No Period

Planned Realization Source of Co- Financing

1 Jun-Dec 2006 111,354.80 107,334.47

2 Jan-Jun 2007 85,422.09 85,422.09

3 Jun-Dec 2007 105,310.18 105,310.18

4 Jan-Jun 2008 135,794.77 144,946.82

Central Goverment (MOF, MOMF), Local Goverment (Bapedalda, Forestry Office, Cooperative Office, and Industrial Office ), Private Sector (BIOS and Kandelia), University (IPB, UNTAN), Panter Coopeartive, IMReD, etc

437,881.84 443,013.56 Realization around 101.71 %

From the discussion among several stakeholders and members of the Management Board, it is informed that the Forestry Office of West Kalimantan is securing an amount of Budget allocation for Alternative generating income in the Villages of Nipah Panjang and Teluk Nibung for the years of 2009 and 2010.

Aside of that, IMReD together with Lawencon Foundation are promoting Batu Ampar as one of the locations which would be supported by the Small Grand Project (SGP), and is currently already on the stage of the Planning Grant. (See also Appendix 8)


X. SPECIFICATION OF ANY DEFCIENCIES IN PROJECT PERFORMANCE, ADMINISTRATION

AND MANAGEMENT THAT WARRANT CORRECTION WITH ASSOCIATED RECOMMENDATIONS

In general, during the course of implementation of activities in Batu Ampar Mangrove Demonstration Site, it is found that, there are no deficiencies experienced in the Project so far.

Nevertheless herewith, only the Field-Trip to Batu Ampar Mangrove Demonstration Site by the Participants of the 7(seven) countries, which is scheduled to be taken place during the IVth Semester of January –June 2008 is still undue, perhaps based on the time-constraint that are faced by the Project, but however in this case, judging from another side IMRED is still willing to commence the Field Trip as felt appropriately needed or so recommended.

XI. A PROGNOSIS OF THE DEGREE TO WHICH THE OVERALL OBJECTIVES AND EXPECTED OUTCOMES OF THE PROJECT ARE LIKELY TO BE MET

There are numerous other initiatives that have been or are being undertaken by other entities, whether led by Governments (both National and Local), donor agencies, civil society organizations, private business enterprises or communities themselves. However, the Vertical relationship by a country and the Horizontal relationship among SCS participating countries in the region, as the SCS overall approach, have made the SCS Project a great success to be met. Therefore it is also hoped that, these Vertical and Horizontal relationships, could always be the basis for the future Project‘s Objectives and Expected outcomes which are likely to be met in the regional, national as well as local area programs.

XII. RECOMMENDATIONS

1. In light of the evaluation, the Evaluator expresses concern over the potentially large experiences gained by IMReD after conducting the implementation of activities in the Mangrove Management Demosite of Batu Ampar in West Kalimantan Province, owing to strong partnerships and collaboration on-site that have been firmly put in place and resource contributions and commitments that have been made by various partners on the ground, and consequently therefore, external support is needed in order to recommend IMReD to conduct further enhancement in Batu Ampar.

2. It is a also incumbent upon the Regional relationship to acknowledge that, through their participation and support, especially in this case the PCU in Bangkok, a valuable partnership arrangement has been created along these recent years, which should be utilized, maintained and not lost or put to waste. Hopefully, the continued monitoring of the progress at the Local, National as well as Regional level for some extend will support the process, specifically by the Local Government of West Kalimantan.

XIII. RATING PROJECT SUCCSES

After having rated the Project Success, the Mean Percentage of all Components used in the process 87,51%, which is in Category 2 , meaning that the implementation of activities in Batu Ampar Mangrove Demo site is rated as Quite Good. (See further Appendix 9)

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 3

Appendix 1 - Page 1

Appendixes

Appendix 1 ToR of Final Evaluation

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 3 Appendix 1 - Page 2


Appendix 1 - Page 3


Appendix 2 - Page 1

Appendix 2

Contract SEA and Consultant of Evaluator


Appendix 2 - Page 3


Appendix 2 - Page 5


Appendix 2 - Page 7


Appendix 2 - Page 9


Appendix 2 - Page 11


Appendix 3 - Page 1

Appendix 3 Evaluation Work Plan & Timetable

The Work Plan & Timetable are fixed for the conduct of the Evaluation and are meant to ease the process by facing Individually or Group Meetings and Interviews, such as: with some Members or Groups of: 1) IMRED (Focal Point, Site Manager, Vice Site Manager, Administrator and other related members) in Jakarta and Bogor; 2) Management Board in Pontianak (such as: Environmental Impact Management Agency, Fisheries & Marine Affairs Office, Local Planning Board, Forestry Office, Agricultural Office, and other related Agencies): 3) Local Communities in Batu Ampar, Nipah Panjang and Teluk Nibung Villages, including Other related Personnel which are familiar to this Project activities. Timetable:

JUNE 2008

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

MB Site Visit

Act

ivity

Sign

ing

of C

ontr

act a

nd D

iscu

ss w

ithin

IM

RED

Check of Documents

Furt

her d

iscu

ssio

n w

ith IM

RED

Draft Report from Documents

Dis

cuss

ion

with

PIU

(Man

ager

Dem

osite

and

Sta

ff)

Trip

To

Wes

t Kal

iman

tan

Prov

ince

Met

ing

with

Sta

keho

lder

s

Mee

ting

with

Man

agem

ent B

oard

Trip

to B

atu

Am

par D

emos

ite a

nd M

eetin

g w

ith L

ocal

G

over

nmen

t and

Loc

al C

omm

unity

in B

atu

Am

par

Villa

ge

Mee

ting

with

Loc

al G

over

nmen

t and

Loc

al

Com

mun

ity in

Nip

ah P

anja

ng V

illag

e

Mee

ting

with

Loc

al C

omm

unity

inTe

luk

Nib

ung

Vi

llage

Trip

To

Pont

iana

k

Dra

ft R

epor

t Com

pila

tion


Appendix 4 - Page 1

Appendix 4 Lists of Persons Met and/or Interviewed Individually or in Groups

1. List of Participants of Meetings with Management Board

No Participant No Participant 1 Ir. Tri Budiarto

Environmental Impact Management Agency/ Bapedalda. Jl. Ahmad Yani Pontianak, Telp/Fax. (65 561) 746616

16 Andsfridus J. Andjoe Environmental Impact Management Agency/ Bapedalda. Jl. Ahmad Yani Pontianak, Telp/Fax. (65 561) 746616

2 Ir. Odang Prasetyo, MS Environmental Impact Management Agency/ Bapedalda. Jl. Ahmad Yani Pontianak, Telp/Fax. (65 561) 746616

17 Kressenjana K Environmental Impact Management Agency/ Bapedalda. Jl. Ahmad Yani Pontianak, Telp/Fax. (65 561) 746616

3 Wuyi Bardini Environmental Impact Management Agency/ Bapedalda. Jl. Ahmad Yani Pontianak, Telp/Fax. (65 561) 746616

18 Novila Dewi Environmental Impact Management Agency/ Bapedalda. Jl. Ahmad Yani Pontianak, Telp/Fax. (65 561) 746616

4 Puspaningsih Environmental Impact Management Agency/ Bapedalda. Jl. Ahmad Yani Pontianak, Telp/Fax. (65 561) 746616

19 Edi Marwadi Environmental Impact Management Agency/ Bapedalda. Jl. Ahmad Yani Pontianak, Telp/Fax. (65 561) 746616

5 Liwono Environmental Impact Management Agency/ Bapedalda. Jl. Ahmad Yani Pontianak, Telp/Fax. (65 561) 746616

20 Marwan Environmental Impact Management Agency/ Bapedalda. Jl. Ahmad Yani Pontianak, Telp/Fax. (65 561) 746616

6 Untad Darmawan Environmental Impact Management Agency/ Bapedalda. Jl. Ahmad Yani Pontianak, Telp/Fax. (65 561) 746616

21 R.M. Harmah Environmental Impact Management Agency/ Bapedalda. Jl. Ahmad Yani Pontianak, Telp/Fax. (65 561) 746616

7 Ir. Mulyadi Environmental Agency of Kubu Raya District. Jl. Ahmad Yani Pontianak

22 Sugiyono, AMd Agricultural and Plantation Agency of Kubu Raya District., Jl. Ahmad Yani Pontianak

8 Ferdinand Y. Pinga K Forestry and Plantation Office Jl. Ahmad Yani, Pontianak

23 Faridh Y Forestry and Plantation Office Jl. Ahmad Yani, Pontianak

9 Eri Rizaldi Forestry and Plantation Office Jl. Ahmad Yani, Pontianak

24 Wawan H. Forestry and Plantation Office Jl. Ahmad Yani, Pontianak

10 M. Marcelilius D. Environment Office and Energy and Human Resources Office

25 Hotmartua Siagian Forestry and Plantation Office Jl. Ahmad Yani, Pontianak

11 Ir. Gunawan PT. BIOS, Jl. Sui Raya Dalam Kompleks Sui Raya Lestari 2 No. AA2 Pontianak, Kalimantan Barat Tel. 0561 581416; Fax. 0561 581417

26 Ir. Taju Solihin PT. Kandelia., Jl. Sui Raya Dalam Kompleks Sui Raya Lestari 2 No. AA2 Pontianak, Kalimantan Barat Tel. 0561 581416; Fax. 0561 581417

12 Dr. Ir. Gusti Z. Anshari, MS Forestry Faculty Tanjungpura University Jl. Daya National, Pontianak

27 RM. Hamzah Forestry Faculty Tanjungpura University Jl. Daya National, Pontianak

13 Hendri Forestry Faculty Tanjungpura University Jl. Daya National Pontianak

28 Salwa Department of Resources Conservation Faculty of Forestry Bogor Agricultural University Kampus IPB Darmaga – Bogor 16001, Kabupaten Bogor - Propinsi Jawa Barat, Tel. 62-251-621947, Fax: 62-251-621947

14 Ir. Jarwadi B. Hernowo, MScF Department of Resources Conservation Faculty of Forestry Bogor Agricultural University Kampus IPB Darmaga – Bogor 16001, Kabupaten Bogor - Propinsi Jawa Barat, Tel. 62-251-621947, Fax : 62-251-621947, PO Box 16680

29 Ir. Agus Priyono, MS Department of Resources Conservation Faculty of Forestry Bogor Agricultural University Kampus IPB Darmaga – Bogor 16001, Kabupaten Bogor - Propinsi Jawa Barat, Tel. 62-251-621947, Fax : 62-251-621947, PO Box 16680


15 Andre Department of Resources Conservation Faculty of Forestry Bogor Agricultural University Kampus IPB Darmaga – Bogor 16001, Kabupaten Bogor - Propinsi Jawa Barat, Tel. 62-251-621947, Fax : 62-251-621947, PO Box 16680

2. List of Participants of Meeting with Local People in Batu Ampar Village

No Institution Participant 1 Imanullah

Panter Cooperative / Pedada Foundation Batu Ampar Village, Batu Ampar Sub District, Kubu Raya District, West Kalimantan Province

4 Kamarudin Panter Cooperative / Pedada Foundation Batu Ampar Village, Batu Ampar Sub District, Kubu Raya District, West Kalimantan Province

2 Arman Buah Panter Cooperative Batu Ampar Village, Batu Ampar Sub District, Kubu Raya District, West Kalimantan Province

5 Erwin Panter Cooperative / Pedada Foundation Batu Ampar Village, Batu Ampar Sub District, Kubu Raya District, West Kalimantan Province

3 Rusli Panter Cooperative Batu Ampar Village, Batu Ampar Sub District, Kubu Raya District, West Kalimantan Province

6 Sudirman Panter Cooperative / Pedada Foundation Batu Ampar Village, Batu Ampar Sub District, Kubu Raya District, West Kalimantan Province

3. List of Participants of Meeting with Local People in Nipah Panjang Village

No Participant No Addres 1 Mokhtar Derai

Head of Nipah Panjang Village, Batu Ampar Sub District, Kubu Raya District, West Kalimantan Province

9 Suparman Nipah Panjang Village, Batu Ampar Sub District, Kubu Raya District, West Kalimantan Province

2 Sabirin Nipah Panjang Village, Batu Ampar Sub District, Kubu Raya District, West Kalimantan Province

10 Topik Nipah Panjang Village, Batu Ampar Sub District, Kubu Raya District, West Kalimantan Province

3 Budianto Nipah Panjang Village, Batu Ampar Sub District, Kubu Raya District, West Kalimantan Province

11 Sabirin Nipah Panjang Village, Batu Ampar Sub District, Kubu Raya District, West Kalimantan Province

4 Syafaruddin Sukamaju Sub Village, Nipah Panjang Village, Batu Ampar Sub District, Pontianak District, West Kalimantan Province

12 Bacok Sukamaju Sub Village, Nipah Panjang Village, Batu Ampar Sub District, Pontianak District, West Kalimantan Province

5 Andre Department of Resources Conservation Faculty of Forestry Bogor Agricultural University Kampus IPB Darmaga – Bogor 16001, Kabupaten Bogor - Propinsi Jawa Barat, Telp. 62-251-621947, Fax : 62-251-621947, PO Box 16680

13 Salwa Department of Resources Conservation Faculty of Forestry Bogor Agricultural University Kampus IPB Darmaga – Bogor 16001, Kabupaten Bogor - Propinsi Jawa Barat, Telp. 62-251-621947, Fax : 62-251-621947, PO Box 16680

6 Hendri Forestry Faculty Tanjungpura University Jl. Daya National Pontianak

14 Ir. Taju Solihin Assistant Site Manager Batu Ampar Komplek IPB II. Jl. Merkurius Blok C No 4. Sindangbarang, Bogor Phone/Fax : 61 251 621672 Email : [email protected]

7 Ahmad Faisal Siregar Manager Demosite of Batu Ampar Komplek IPB II. Jl. Merkurius Blok C No 4. Sindangbarang, Bogor Phone/Fax : 61 251 621672 Email : [email protected]

15 M. Sobar Technical assistance for Focal Point: Field assistance Komplek IPB II. Jl. Merkurius Blok C No 4. Sindangbarang, Bogor Phone/Fax : 62 251 621672 Email : [email protected]





Appendix 4 - Page 3

8 Rae Birumbo Fish Cultivation Expert Komplek IPB II. Jl. Merkurius Blok C No 4. Sindangbarang, Bogor Phone/Fax : 61 251 621672 Email : [email protected]

4. List of Participants of Meeting with Local People in Teluk Nibung Village No

Participant No Participant

1 Musthapa Head of Teluk Nibung Village, Batu Ampar Sub District, Kubu Raya District, West Kalimantan Province

9 Suparman Teluk Nibung Village, Batu Ampar Sub District, Kubu Raya District, West Kalimantan Province

2 Sarikun Teluk Nibung Village, Batu Ampar Sub District, Kubu Raya District, West Kalimantan Province

10 Topik Teluk Nibung Village, Batu Ampar Sub District, Kubu Raya District, West Kalimantan Province

3 Budianto Teluk Nibung Village, Batu Ampar Sub District, Kubu Raya District, West Kalimantan Province

11 Sabirin Teluk Nibung Village, Batu Ampar Sub District, Kubu Raya District, West Kalimantan Province

4 Syafaruddin Teluk Nibung Village, Batu Ampar Sub District, Kubu Raya District, West Kalimantan Province

12 Bacok Teluk Nibung Village, Batu Ampar Sub District, Kubu Raya District, West Kalimantan Province

5 Teluk Nibung Village, Batu Ampar Sub District, Kubu Raya District, West Kalimantan Province

13 Kusnadi Teluk Nibung Village, Batu Ampar Sub District, Kubu Raya District, West Kalimantan Province



7 Ahmad Faisal Siregar Manager Demosite of Batu Ampar Komplek IPB II. Jl. Merkurius Blok C No 4. Sindangbarang, Bogor Phone/Fax : 61 251 621672 Email : [email protected]

15 M. Sobar Technical assistance for Focal Point: Field assistance Komplek IPB II. Jl. Merkurius Blok C No 4. Sindangbarang, Bogor Phone/Fax : 62 251 621672 Email : [email protected]

8 Rae Birumbo Fish Cultivation Expert Komplek IPB II. Jl. Merkurius Blok C No 4. Sindangbarang, Bogor Phone/Fax : 61 251 621672 Email : [email protected]

16 Ir. Taju Solihin Assistant Site Manager Batu Ampar Komplek IPB II. Jl. Merkurius Blok C No 4. Sindangbarang, Bogor Phone/Fax : 61 251 621672 Email : [email protected]







Appendix 5 - Page 1

Appendix 5 List of Contracts

No Name of Contract Personal Name /

Institution Phase/ Semester Number of Contract

A Project Personal Sub-Contract Ahmad Faisal Siregar I 026/LPPM/IX/2006 Ahmad Faisal Siregar II 064/MOU/LPPM/I/2007 Ahmad Faisal Siregar III 85/MOU/LPPM/VI/2007

1 Demo Site Manager

Ahmad Faisal Siregar IV 126/MOU/LPPM/2008 Taju Solihin I 027/LPPM/IX/2006 Taju Solihin II 065/MOU/LPPM/I/2007 Taju Solihin III 86/MOU/LPPM/VI/2007

2 Demosite Manager Assistant

Taju Solihin IV 127/MOU/LPPM/2008 Irma Nurhayati, S.Hut I 029 /LPPM/IX/2006 Yanti Apriyanti, SPi II 067/MOU/LPPM/I/2007 Yanti Apriyanti, Spi III 89/MOU/LPPM/VI/2007

3 Administration to Demosite Manager

Yanti Apriyanti, SPi IV 52/MOU/LPPM/I/2008 Mohammad Sobar I 028 /LPPM/IX/2006 Mohammad Sobar II 066/MOU/LPPM/I/2007 Mohammad Sobar III 87/MOU/LPPM/VI/2007

4 Technical Assistant For Focal Point: Field Assistance

Mohammad Sobar IV 47/MOU/LPPM/I/2008 Adistiasih, S.Sos I 030 /LPPM/IX/2006 Novi Widiyanti,Amd.Hut II 068/MOU/LPPM/I/2007 Novi Widiyanti,Amd.Hut III 90/MOU/LPPM/VI/2007

5 Technical Administration Assistant to Focal Point

Novi Widiyanti,Amd.Hut IV 53/MOU/LPPM/I/2008 B Non Profit Organization Sub-Contract

I 038/MOU/LPPM/IX/2006 II 025/MOU/LPPM/I/2007 III 077/MOU/LPPM/VI/2007

1 Field Surveys of Habitats and Land Use

OISCA Kampung Cimenteng RT. 02 Desa Sukamulya, Kecamatan Cikembar, Cibadak-Sukabumi 41355, Bogor District, West Java Province 16001

IV 130/MOU/LPPM/2008

I 035/MOU/LPPM/IX/2006 II 026/MOU/LPPM/I/2007

2 Flora Fauna Inventories Forest Resource Conservation and Eco-Tourism Department, Bogor Agricultural University

IV 55/MOU/LPPM/I/2008

I 036/MOU/LPPM/IX/2006 II 027/MOU/LPPM/I/2007

3 Public Awareness Materials OISCA Kampung Cimenteng RT. 02 Desa Sukamulya, Kecamatan Cikembar, Cibadak-Sukabumi 41355, Bogor District, West Java Province 16001

IV 132/MOU/LPPM/2008

I 043/MOU/LPPM/IX/2006 II 028/MOU/LPPM/I/2007 III 124/MOU/LPPM/IX/2007

4 Asassessment of current use and economic values and development of the business plan

Human Resource Development Institution, Bogor Agriculture University, MMA IPB Building Jl. Raya Pajajaran Gunung Gede, Bogor city 16153 Indonesia.



No Name of Contract Personal Name / Institution

Phase/ Semester Number of Contract

I 037/MOU/LPPM/IX/2006 II 029/MOU/LPPM/I/ 2007 III 125/MOU/LPPM/IX/ 2007

5 Legal matters & local regulation

Forest Resource Conservation and Eco-Tourism Department, Bogor Agricultural University


6 Develop Alternative Income Pedada Foundation Jl. Syafe’i No. 20 Kubu Raya Selatan, West Kalimantan Province


7 Mangrove Rehabilitation Pedada Foundation, Jl. Syafe’i No. 20 Kubu Raya Selatan, West Kalimantan Province


8 Sustainable management of the mangrove production forest

Human Resource Development Institution, Bogor Agriculture University, MMA IPB Building Jl. Raya Pajajaran Gunung Gede, Bogor city 16153 Indonesia.


C Short Therm Consultant Contract I 025/LPPM/IX/2006 1 Stakeholder Analysis

Training Needs Assessment Ir. Herry Wiyono

II 082/LPPM/I/2007 III 122/MOU/LPPM/IX/2007

II 022/LPPM/I/2007 III 121/MOU/LPPM/IX/2007

2 Consultant for Prepare Site Based and Open Access GIS Data Based

M. Sayidina Ali, Amd

IV 50/MOU/LPPM/I/2008 Ir. Fairus Mulia I 035/LPPM/X/2006 3 Consultant: Conflict

Resolution & Mangrove Management Plan

Ir. Herry Wiyono IV 51/MOU/LPPM/I/2008

4 Shot term consultant: Charcoal Kiln Management and latex, areca nut and oil palm Feasibility Analysis

Rae Birumbo, S.Pi IV 43/MOU/LPPM/II/2008

5 The Study of Nypa Resources (size, density and development)

Sutopo, S. Hut IV 62/MOU/LPPM/III/2008


Appendix 6 - Page 1

Appendix 6 List of Documents

No Document Note A Adendum to MoU Between UNEP and IMReD

(Ref: UNEP GEF/SCS/Ind/MoU 2a) 4 September 2006

B Budget Revision (ref :061/08) 13 February 2008 C Progress Report, Expenditure Report, CAR Jun-Dec 2006 Final D Progress Report, Expenditure Report, CAR Jan-Jun 2007 Final E Progress Report, Expenditure Report, CAR Jun-Dec 2007 Final F Progress Report, Expenditure Report, CAR Jan-Jun 2008 Draft G Self Assesment Report For Mid-Term Evaluation September 2007 H Achievements, Plan for Completion And Lesson Learnt of

the Demonstration Site in Batu Ampar February 2008

I Report Activities 1 Field Surveys of Habitats and Land Use Final 2 Flora Fauna Inventories Final 3 Public Awareness Materials Final 4 Assessment of current use and economic values and

development of the business plan Final

5 Legal matters & local regulation Draft 6 Develop Alternative Income Draft 7 The Study of Nypa Resources (size, density and

development) Draft

8 Mangrove Rehabilitation Draft I Leaflet, Booklet, Calender

1 Potensi Pengembangan Matapencaharian Alternatif di Batu Ampar

Final

2 Budidaya Kepiting dalam Keramba Final 3 Ekosistem Mangrove Batu Ampar Final 4 Penilaian Ekonomi Mangrove Batu Ampar Final

J Document Contract with Personal, Non Profit Organization, and Shorttherm Consultant (see Appendix 5)


Appendix 7 - Page 1

Appendix 7 List of Trainings/Study Visits

Code Name of Training / Study Visit Number of Participant Schedule Notes

3201 Conduct Community level training on organization development and management (20persons, 3 days, 2times@$42/person/day/time)(act 4.1.4)

20 Semester I and III

3202 Conduct training of institution on mangrove management in field (20persons, 3 days, 2 times@$42 /person/day/time) (act. 4.1.5)

20 Semester I , II and III

3203 Training on techniques to improve charcoal quality (20persons, 3 days, 2 times,@$28/person/day/time) (act 4.1.6a)

20 Semester I and II

3204 Conduct training on silvofishery technique (20 persons, 2 days, 2 times@$43/person/day/time) (act 4.1.6.b)

20 Semester II and III

3205 Conduct on techniques moulting crab culture (20 persons, 2 days, 2 times @$43/person/day/time) (act 4.1.6. c)

20 Semester II and III

3206 Conduct training on seafish (Ephinephelus sp) cultivation (20 persons, 2 days, 2 times@$43/person /day/time) (act.4.1.6.d)

20 Semester I and III

3207 Conduct training on post harvest techniques (20 persons, 2 days, 2 times @43/person/day/time) (act. 4.1.6.e)

20 Semester III and IV

3208 Conduct training on marketing techniques (20 persons, 2 days, 2 times @$43/person/day/time)) (act. 4.1.6.f) 20 Semester III and IV

3209

Conduct community level training on management of mangrove ecosystems (20 person, 3 times@$178/person/time) (management Board Members) (act 4.1.7.)

20 Semester I, III and IV

3210 Conduct training for local NGOs (20 person, 3 times@$178/person/time) (act 4.1.8)

20 Semester I, III and IV

3211 Conduct training for government institution (20 person, 3 times@$178 /person/time)(management Board Members) (act. 4.1.9)


3212 Conduct training for staff from private sector (20 person, 3 times@$178/ person/time) (management Board Members) (act. 4.1.10)


3213 Conduct training for Site Manager and staff via field visits and short courses (5persons, 7 days, 3 times@$123/ person/day/time)(act . 4.1.12)

5 Semester I, II and IV

3214 School visit to implement environmental education (3persons, 1 day, 9 times@$179/person/time) (act. 4.2.6)

3 Semester II, III and IV

3215 Organisation of school fieldtrips to mangrove ecosystem area (24 children, 3 schools, 4 times@$59/child/school /time) (act 4.2.7.)


3216 Conduct regular programme of awareness activities in local communities (100persons, 6 times @$15/person/time) (act 4.2.9.)

100 Semester I, II, III and IV

3217

Study visit on improvement of charcoal quality (10pesons, 5days, 2 times@$88/ person/day/time) (activity 3.2.1)



Code Name of Training / Study Visit Number of Participant Schedule Notes

3218 Together with community seeking export opportunities of charcoal (10persons, 10 times @$54/person/time) (activity 3.2.2.)


3219 Together with community improving market mechanism through existing institution (10persons, 10 times@$54/person/time) (activity 3.2.3)


3220 Study visit on development of Alternative Business on Mangrove Utilization (10 persons, 5 days, 2 times@$88/person /day/time) (activity 3.1.2)

10

Semester I and IV

3221 Seeking market for products (10persons, 1 day, 10 times@$54/ person/day/time) (activity 3.3.1) 10 Semester III and IV

3222

Field trip and dissemination of alternative livelihood development in mangrove demonstration site, Batu Ampar (tickets 20persons, local transportation, boat rent, accommodation and meals 25persons, materials, safety life rent )

- Not executed yet -

3223 Training of agriculture for latex, areca nut and oil palm (34 persons, 2 days) (Improvement of MP act 2.3) 34 Semester IV

3224 Training of rehabilitation on Nypa vegetation (Improvement of MP act 3.2) 20 Semester IV

3225 Training and trial by using Nypa for food, drinks, sugar and handicrafts (24 persons, 2 days) (Improvement of MP act 3.4)

24 Semester IV

3226

Training of the implementation on the criteria and indicators of the sustainable management of the mangrove production forest (21 persons, 3 days) (Improvement of MP act 4.2)

21 Semester IV


Appendix 8 - Page 1

Appendix 8 Six Monthly Progress and Expenditure Reports Cash advance and expenditure- Status

a. Six Monthly Progress and Expenditure Reports - Status

Reports Date accepted

Sixth monthly reports for the period July-Des 2006 21/2/2007

Sixth monthly reports for the period Jan-June 2007 14/9/2007

Sixth monthly reports for the period June-Dec 2007 5/2/2008

Sixth monthly reports for the period Jan-June 2008 -

Annual audit report July 2007

May 2008

b. Cash advance and expenditure

Reports Date Amount (US$) Expenditure/ advance (%)

First advance 18th Sept 2006 103,988 23.77 % of Total Project Funding First expenditure 21st Feb 2007 98,425.54 22.50 % of Total Project Funding Second advance 21st Feb 2007 110,199.28 25.19 % of Total Project Funding Second expenditure 30th June 2007 80,249.09 18.34 % of Total Project Funding Third advance 14th Sept 2007 49,898.50 11.40 % of Total Project Funding Third expenditure 31st Dec 2007 85,406.75 11.52 % of Total Project Funding Fourth advance 12th/2/2008 173,426.46 39.64 % of Total Project Funding

Fourth expenditure 20hJune 2008 144,753.98 (Draft Report) 33,09 % of Total Project Funding

Total advance 20th June 2008 437,512.24 100 % Total Project Funding Total expenditure 20th June 2008 408,835.36 93.45 % Total Project Funding


Appendix 9 - Page 1

Appendix 9 Rating Project Success

No Indicator Rating Percentage Rate

1.1 Reporting: several late deliveries of progress reports , Expenditure Reports and CAR during each period

63.06 % 1 Timelines

1.2 Implementation of Activities are good enough, since only one of the activities, as related to the operational plan, is not implemented

93.45 %

2.1 Output: All of the implementation activities have been done, except for the commencement of the Fieldtrip (105 activities out of 106 UNEP/GEF funded activities)

99.36 %

2.2 Outcome: the expected planned outcomes have been achieved after the establishment of MMB as the guiding and supervising Body in Pontianak in facing the implementation activities of Batu Ampar Mangrove Demo-site. The development of mangrove forest in size and the community welfare through the enhancement of the alternative generation income have also been achieved.

Aside of that, the Government support to the Coastal Management in this area is also quite high , such as: on environmental aspects as related to the Clean Seas Program , e.g. sanitation, establishment of deep wells to overcome clean water shortage, Yushimura Kiln, floating fish-nets and the tidal irrigation system. Nevertheless, in general the issue of sanitation is still an issue in the area of demo-site, since it is an overall issue in the country which need strongly socialization efforts and should be totally conducted by all related stakeholders based on the crucial issue to be met, especially in Batu Ampar Mangrove Demosite.

100.00 %

2 Achievements

2.3 Co-Financing Support: The support achieved from different sources in the Batu Ampar Mangrove Demosite management are also quite high, whether in Cash or in Kind.

101.71

3.1 The development in Scientific matters through training activities; field-trips for Government Officials, NGO’s, Private Sectors and the general Public / Community have resulted very fruitful in the area.

75.00 %

3.2 The Enhancement in perception of the Stakeholders on the Sustainable Mangrove Management, that is still need to be done.

80.00%

Impact

3.3 The Development in Alternative Generation Income ( in the form of: The floating Fish –nets Crab moulting, coconut shell as raw material for charcoal, crab catching and Latex planting, which are beneficial for the Local Community. Is Still needed to be executed.

80.00 %

3

3.4. The enhancement in genetion income of the farmers as related to coconut shell as raw material for charcoal still need to be stimulated.

95.00 %

Mean percentage of all components

87,51 % Category 2 , meaning that the implementation of activities in Batu Ampar Mangrove Demosite is rated as Quite Good


ANNEX 4

Draft Terminal Evaluation Report for the Mu Koh Chang Coral Reef Habitat Demonstration Site in Thailand

SUMMARY

The Koh Chang was selected as the coral reef priority site of Thailand in the network of demonstration sites in the framework of the UNEP/GEF Project entitled “Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand”. The demonstration site is operational during April 2005 – June 2008.

As Mu Koh Chang is located near the border of Cambodia and not far from Vietnam, and harbours some of the richest marine communities in the western South China Sea. The Thai Government has initiated a project to develop Mu Koh Chang as an important regional ecotourism site. A relatively large amount of funding has been spent on infrastructure development and establishing new development and management schemes. The additional support from the UNEP GEF/SCS project emphasized immediate objectives as follows.

• Raise public awareness and education on ecological importance and sustainable use of coral reefs.

• Build networks among government institutions, private sectors and local communities for coral reef management and conservation as well as get approved mechanism for network long – term co-ordination.

• Develop a sustainable ecotourism program for Mu Koh Chang and its vicinity. • Encourage capacity building in all levels and sectors. • Develop alternative income generating program for fishermen. • Support for coral reef monitoring and rehabilitation.

The visit of the independent consultant for the terminal evaluation was implemented during 17th – 20th July 2008. The consultant worked closely with management team and conducted a meeting with management board, meetings with local fishermen of the Local Guide Centre and coral reef protection volunteer groups. A field trip to a diving and snorkling site, and coral reef rehabilitation was organised during the visit.

Regarding outputs of the project the consultant is of the view that: the outputs for public awareness and education meet requirement as planed in the operational plan of the project. It is recognised during the visit to sites that a huge materials distributed widely and a large number of people get benefit from activities of this component. The outputs regarding establishing network for coordination are very significant in integration of related stakeholders in order to manage effectively coral reef habitat and utilisation of related resources. Meeting during terminal evaluation with stakeholders indicated that the established network would be maintain for long term integration. Programme fro sustainable tourism achieved a series of outputs, which contribute significantly to tourist activities in a tourist centre as Mu Koh Chang. Results from the studies on carrying capacity and tourism fee have been referred by local policy makers in order to develop management procedures. Through project activities local people has been involved more not only in tourist business but also in consultation of how to improve effectiveness of mooring buoy system and their contribution in enforcement. For capacity building, a large number of local stakeholders were trained through diverse activities. Database developed by the project provided scientific base for planning and management of resource uses by local authorities. The consultant appreciates to the approach in seeking solution for alternative and additional livelihood through enhancement of natural resources by setting artificial reefs. Although some activities have not completed by the time of the terminal evaluation, it is recognised that outputs of this component would be maintained and expanded. Activities under the component of monitoring and rehabilitation were implemented as planned. However, lack of involvement of local stakeholders in monitoring practices is a weakness, which should be improved in the activities following completion of the SCS project as a discussion in meeting of the consultant with local management board during the terminal evaluation. A number of initiatives implemented during the course of the project include: coral rehabilitation supported by local administration office of Koh Chang district and International Cultural and Education Foundation (ICEF); .coral reef clean up supported by DASTA & ICEF; coral reef monitoring using

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 4 Page 2 manta tow technique done by DMCR, once per annum; and fifty mooring buoy settled by National Park and DASTA to avoid impacts of anchoring of tourist boat in tourist areas. Only research for soft coral culture belonging to the component of alternative income generating programme has been delayed and will be completed in late July 2008. It is noted that a number of project activities and outputs not fully completed and delayed at the time of the mid-term evaluation were re-planned and implemented completely by June 2008. Total estimated budget of the demonstration site project is US$441,088, all of which was transferred to the Specialised Executing Agency. By the end of 2007, more than US$344,500 was under expenditure. More than US$90,000 has been spent for the first half of 2008 and reported in the end of July 2008. Funding of US$40,000 for an additional activity and US$50,000 for dissemination of lessons learnt on sustainable tourism to the SCS network has been reported at the end of July 2008 too. The expenditure for the two periods of 2006 was delayed but improved during 2007. At the time of the terminal evaluation, expenditure report for the 1st 2008 has not completed. It was informed by the Focal Point that there in no delays or difference in spending budget allocated for this period, and expenditure report covering all remaining budget would be finalised at the send of July 2008. Development of management plan and guideline for sustainable tourism based on coastal habitats were added in project activities, taking account involvement of related stakeholder in developing the plan. More than US$9,500 was removed from other budget lines to re-allocated for this. As agreed by the PSC, the work plan and budget of the project were revised by February 2007 with the extension of project duration to June 2008 and then US$40,000 was provided for additional activity to promote application of sustainable tourism based on coastal habitats and another US$50,000 received for dissemination of lessons learnt from Koh Chang demonstration site to the SCS network. The two activities were completed as revised work plan and budget in the end 2007. Local management board for coral reef demonstration site involved related stakeholders for policy-making and operate activities at the site level has been coordinating smoothly activities of the demonstration site project. It is clear that the local management board has worked properly in terms of assignment and execution of project activities, and flexibility of management in terms of responsiveness to the need for changes in financial allocations and timing of activities. It is noted that DASTA and National Park authorities play an important roles in working closely with Focal Point and Site Managers in demonstration site operation. Cost for administrative management in implementing the project is mainly contributed from co-finance sources. A constraint influenced implementation of the project is changes of chief of district during the course of the project. It led to inadequate involvement of district departments in some periods of project implementation. Changes of management board members caused some difficulties in coordinating a number of planed activities. The project encouraged participation of diverse academic institutions which assist to apply scientific knowledge in implementing activities, including methods for tourism carrying capacity provided by Kasesart University; marine culture of soft coral by Burapha University; guideline for self assessment of project management from Mahidol University; and coral reef monitoring and database development by Rajangala University of Technology. Total co-finance from different sources is more than 1.5 million USD with high contribution from DASTA and National Park Authority. As recognised during terminal evaluation, funding from Government (almost coming through DASTA) for sustainable tourism in Mu Koh Chang is available for long term actions. Regarding institutional arrangement, Koh Chang National Park Management Board with wide involvement of related stakeholders is considered as operational organisation in coordinating management practices beyond the demonstration site project. It is clear that all objectives designed in the operational plan of demonstration site project are likely to be met. An outstanding outcome was a formal establishment and smooth operation of Management Board at the district level. This supported to coordination of the activities in the project and harmonisation of conflicts in development of the islands. The outcome regarding the establishment of institutional arrangement for long-term management at the site level has been achieved with


developing coordination network, mooring committee, local guide centre and coral reef protection volunteer group. Management plan and guideline for sustainable use developed as agreement in the mid-term evaluation assist related agencies in the Islands to design their activities in only framework to ensure long term and sustainable development of tourism in the islands. It is noted that results of studies on carrying capacity and tourist fee provided scientific baselines for more effective tourism management by the National park Authorities. Among stress reduction outcomes, capacity building is most outstanding with large number were trained in coral reef conservation and sustainable uses. It is also recorded reduction of illegal fishing under improved enforcement made by the Park Authority and local fishermen. Data from ecological monitoring has not indicated clearly improvement of environment state. It seems that short period of project implementation does not allow to verify outcomes based on performance indicators as designed in monitoring and evaluation plan. It is noted that the performances regarding sustainable uses, habitat under management have not verified to assess if the demonstration site project supports to reduce stress at the site level. It is recommended that:

• The district authorities, DASTA and National Park Management Board shall inherit them and maintain the network established by the project to ensure long term and sustainable tourism in Mu Koh Chang.

• Volunteer groups and Local Guide Centre shall receive supports from the Park Authority to activities of these people’s organisation to enable further their efforts in harmonisation between exploitation and conservation.

• Monitoring practices shall continue to detect changes of resources and ecological conditions under increased pressures of human activities and natural variances. Involvement of local people in monitoring practices with additional local indicators should be encouraged.

• The management team shall finalise all required reports to enable completion the demonstration site project in time.

SCOPE, QUALITY AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PROJECT OUTPUTS

1. Public awareness and education The project implemented comprehensive activities in order to enhance public awareness and understanding of diverse related stakeholders. The outputs included: 3 types of posters with 2000 copies for each; 3 types of brochures with 2000 copies for each; 10 training courses on marine ecosystems and sustainable utilisation for 646 local students, and 523 tour guides, tourism businessmen, local communities; 500 copies of Coral Reef Ecosystem Conservation Handbook distributed to schools, universities, local libraries, stakeholders and involved institutions; and a series of materials used by local radio, television and website. The view of independent consultant is that the outputs for public awareness and education meet requirement as planed in the operational plan of the project. It is recognised during the visit to sites that a huge materials distributed widely and a large number of people get benefit from activities of this component. 2. Building the network for coral reef management and conservation for long term

coordination Given the fact that there are two UNEP/GEF demonstration site projects in Trat Province, a provincial management board was established to coordinate both projects. In parallel local management board for coral reef demonstration site has been coordinating activities of coral reef project in Mu Koh Chang, including Head district office; National Park, head of 4 commune administration organizations, DASTA, Thailand focal point for coral reefs, expert from Burapha University, and site manager.

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 4 Page 4 During the course of the project 3 meetings of provincial level and 12 meetings of local management board were convened. The network for coordination between government institutions and local communities was also established through 3 meetings with 62 participants. The project support for activities of the coral reef protection volunteer group with 35 members and promote their linkage with local government agencies responsible for patrolling. In order to improve effectiveness in setting and using mooring buoy system, the mooring buoy committee with members from DASTA, National Park, diving business and local fishermen was established. The project organised 3 meetings of this for planning, setting and maintaining mooring buoys of all Koh Chang area. In addition, one meeting among NGOs for cooperation in resource management (58 participants), and 2 meetings with 75 participants from government agencies, private sector, NGOs and local communities for delivering the park regulations regarding tourism were organised as planned. The international coral reef information network for exchange marine biodiversity data in which National Park, researchers in universities, and private sector work together to develop database on coral reefs at the entire Mu Koh Chang was also established by the project. The consultant is of the view that the outputs of this component are very significant in integration of related stakeholders in order to manage effectively coral reef habitat and utilisation of related resources. Meeting during terminal evaluation with stakeholders indicated that the established network would be maintain for long term integration. 3. Development of a sustainable ecotourism programme for Mu Koh Chang and its vicinity Activities of the project in this component were implemented as operational plan, giving outputs as follows:

• A carrying capacity study for tourism around Koh Rang Island implemented by Kasesart University, providing useful data for tourist management

• A study to determine tourism fee for coral reef management purposes • Establishment of diving trail at Koh Yak, providing four types of plastic sheet exhibits

information of the trail; 1000 for each type and these used for diving operators • Installation of 10 additional mooring buoys at Hin Look Bad & Hin Lap & Koh Rang area; other

50 buoys settled by DASTA, National Park and Navy with guidance from the project. • Establishment of local guide centre with 26 members from local fishermen • Organisation of coral reef clean up by local people and tourism organization (2 times with total

of 145 participants) mainly at Koh Rang and a number of submersed banks • Development and approval of management plan and guideline for sustainable tourism of Mu

Koh Chang; including prior activities with implementing and supporting organisms • Publication of the manual of information concerning fisheries and coral reef conservation • Two study tours convened, providing lessons learnt regarding sustainable tourism based on

coastal habitats for 37 participants from Cambodia, Viet Nam, Philippines, Indonesia and Malaysia.

The consultant’s view is that the outputs of this project component contribute significantly to tourist activities in a tourist centre as Mu Koh Chang. Results from the studies on carrying capacity and tourism fee have been referred by local policy makers in order to develop management procedures. Through project activities local people has been involved more not only in tourist business but also in consultation of how to improve effectiveness of mooring buoy system and their contribution in enforcement. It is noted that management plan developed by the project is considered as basic guideline for tourism management beyond the project.


4. Capacity building in all levels and sectors The activities in capacity building component mainly focussed on organisation of training courses on coral reef management and conservation for sustainable tourism, including: 3 courses with 200 participants from district officials, local centre & business; 2 courses as training trainers with 16 participants; and 4 courses with 60 participants from coral reef volunteer group. The project developed a manual for self assessment of coastal management with the aim to support local managers in project management. Thirty five people from local communities were also trained through a study tour; Koh Yao Noi (Phangnga Province) where there is experience in coral reef management, home stay business and sustainable fisheries The project also support to build-up coral reef and marine organism GIS database with 500 CD-room provided to local stakeholders. This database was developed based on detailed surveys at 12 reef areas and assessment by manta tow technique made by Department of Marine and Coastal Resources. In addition, the local guide centre and coral reef protection volunteer group received some facilities and equipment from the project such as: computer, masks and snorkles. The consultant is of the view that a large number of local stakeholders were trained through diverse activities. In comparing with the operational plan more activities were implemented in this component. 5. Development of an alternative income generating programme for fishermen A number of activities were implemented as designed in the operational plan of the project, including:

• Socio-economic study in local communities that use coral reef as a fishing ground • Training course for illegal fishermen with 3 courses with 60 participants; considering

sustainable fishing; conservation of marine resources; laws concerning fisheries and introduction of methods for culture of seabass, mussels as an alternative; 2250 seabass juveniles provided following the training

• Financial stability study; planning for future actions with total budget estimated more 200 million baht from provincial office and DASTA

• Establishment of new artificial reefs to enable more resources for fishermen depending on line fishing; in a total 130 blocks established at Koh Khlum & Koh Lao Ya on muddy and sand substratum

A research on soft coral culture considered as an economically important marine organism has been delayed and planned to be finalised in late July made by Burapha University. The consultant appreciates to the approach in seeking solution for alternative and additional livelihood through enhancement of natural resources by setting artificial reefs. Although some activities have not completed by the time of the terminal evaluation, it is recognised that outputs of this component would be maintained and expanded. 6. Coral reef monitoring and rehabilitation This last component achieved some outputs as follows:

• Report of monitoring coral reef conditions in ecological and socio-economics aspect (twice per year * 3 years); using LIT and Video transect made by experts from Rajamangala University. Observation reflects no significant change of coral cover (+2%) and fish density.

• Initial results of monitoring and control of land-based pollution. • Demonstration project of coral reef restoration at Koh Kra; providing 50 blocks of concrete

blocks and 50 plastic tube frames with 14 coral fragment in each frame; high survival for plastics frames observed by consultant during the time of the terminal evaluation.

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 4 Page 6 The consultant is of the view that activities under this component were implemented as planned. However, lack of involvement of local stakeholders in monitoring practices is a weakness, which should be improved in the activities following completion of the SCS project as a discussion in meeting of the consultant with local management board during the terminal evaluation. ASSOCIATED INITIATIVES

Based on experiences made by the demonstration site project, local administration office of Koh Chang district supported the local centre for coral rehabilitation at Koh Chang Noi. International Cultural and Education Foundation (ICEF) assisted coral rehabilitation at Koh Wai. Costs for the activities are US$2,000 and US$14,000 respectively.

In addition to planned activities of the demonstration site project, DASTA & ICEF carried out coral reef clean up with participation of 200 people and cost of US$15,000.

During the course of the demonstration site project, DCMR continued to practice coral reef monitoring using manta tow technique, once per annum. Fifty mooring buoy costed around 20,000baht were also settled by National Park and DASTA to avoid impacts of anchoring of tourist boat in tourist areas.

TIMETABLE OF ACTIVITIES AND ALLOCATION OF FINANCIAL RESOURCES

Only one output has not achieved in the time of the terminal evaluation. This is a research for soft coral culture belonging to the component of alternative income generating programme. As informed by the management team, the research has been implemented by Burapha University and completed in late July 2008.

It is noted that a number of project activities and outputs not fully completed and delayed at the time of the mid-term evaluation were re-planned and implemented completely by June 2008; including: including studying carrying capacity for tourists, cleaning up coral reefs, socio-economic study, publication and distribution of information concerning fisheries and coral reef conservation.

Total estimated budget of the demonstration site project is US$441,088, all of which was transferred to the Specialised Executing Agency. By the end of 2007, more than US$344,500 was under expenditure. More than US$90,000 has been spent for the first half of 2008 and reported in the end of July 2008. This figure does not include US$40,000 for an additional activity and US$50,000 for dissemination of lessons learnt on sustainable tourism to the SCS network. This total US$90,000 has been reported at the end of July 2008 too.

The table below provides figure regarding budget provision from UNEP and expenditure reported by the Specialised Executing Agency. It is clear that expenditure for the two periods of 2006 was delayed but improved during 2007. At the time of the terminal evaluation, expenditure report for the 1st 2008 has not completed. It was informed by the Focal Point that there in no delays or difference in spending budget allocated for this period, and expenditure report covering all remaining budget would be finalised at the send of July 2008.

Period Cash advance

Accumulative advance Expenditure Accumulative

Expenditure Balance

2nd 2005 14,758.00 14,758.00 18,783.86 18,783.86 4,025.861st 2006 161,378.86 176,136.86 69,705.02 88,488.88 -87,647.982nd 2006 27,472.16 203,609.02 72,864.66 161,353.54 -42,255.481st 2007 43,585.51 247,194.53 89,746.41 251,099.95 3,905.422nd 2007 99,872.81 347,067.34 93,467.39 344,567.34 -2,500.00

PROGRAMMATIC AND FINANCIAL VARIANCE AND/OR ADJUSTMENTS Development of management plan and guideline for sustainable tourism based on coastal habitats were added in project activities, taking account involvement of related stakeholder in developing the plan. This was decided by Local Management Board during mid-term evaluation, indicating that Designated Area for Sustainable Tourism Administration (DASTA Area 1) and Koh Chang National Park Management Board would play an important role in review and consultation. It was also agreed that Governor of Trat Province will approve this plan in the end of demonstration site project. More than US$9,500 was removed from other budget lines to re-allocated for this.


Given that the PSC agreed to extent activities of the entire demonstration site to June 2008 and some delays in implementing the Koh Chang demonstration site in 2006, the work plan and budget of the project were revised by February 2007 with the extension of project duration to June 2008. An additional activities regarding development of management plan and guideline for sustainable tourism based on coastal habitats were included in the revised version of work plan and budget allocation. As agreed by the PSC at its 7th meeting, US$40,000 was provided for additional activity to promote application of sustainable tourism based on coastal habitats and another US$50,000 received for dissemination of lessons learnt from Koh Chang demonstration site to the SCS network. The two activities were completed as revised work plan and budget in the end 2007. PROJECT COORDINATION, MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION The Provincial Management Board of the demonstration site includes Governor and representatives from different entities at the provincial level, Tourism Authority, Mu Koh Chang National Park, Thai Navy Region I and regional offices of certain Central Entities. The SEA serves as Secretary to the Management Board. Local management board for coral reef demonstration site has been coordinating activities of coral reef project in Mu Koh Chang, including Head district office; National Park, head of 4 commune administration organizations, DASTA, Thailand focal point for coral reefs, expert from Burapha University, and site manager. It is recognised that management bodies have contained related stakeholders for policy-making and operate activities at the site level. Mu Koh Chang is a prior area for tourist development of the central government and has received large investment from government for infrastructure related to tourism. Recently, nearly 1 million people visit the islands in 2007. There are many stakeholders related to tourism. To support tourist development, the Royal Thai Government created the Designated Area for Sustainable Tourism Development Administration (DASTA) as a public organisation. DASTA Area 1 was established in 2002 to administrate an effective, multiparty joint effort to maintain a balanced interaction between nature conservation and tourism development in Mu Koh Chang and related areas. This is very important channel to get funding from government through DASTA central office in Bangkok for tourism development. Koh Chang National Park is responsible to conservation of natural terrestrial and marine resources. The park established 5 patrol stations for forest protection and 2 stations for marine enforcement. In addition, volunteer groups for conservation of natural resources and environment were established and coordinated by the provincial Department of Natural Resources and Environment (DONRE). Recently, this NGO in Trat Province has 1,300 registered members belonging to 31 groups and received financial support from the government for salary of 3 DONRE staff, meeting organisation and training courses. Five volunteer groups in Koh Chang islands involve members from local tourist business, fishermen and land users. Aim of establishment of volunteer groups is to have strong power to protect benefits of local people again impacts of commercial fishing boats to natural resources around the islands. The management board of the demonstration site, head of the sub-district expressed strong support to the demonstration site project, indicating importance of establishment of coordination mechanism for coral reef based tourism and the need in developing management plan and guideline for sustainable use of coral reef resources. As agreed in the mid-term evaluation, the management plan and guideline for sustainable tourism based on coastal resources were developed in the framework of coral reef demonstration site project, taking account functions of related stakeholders and linage in the network. This ensures for long-term coordination of all tourist-related activities in the islands. It is clear that the local management board has worked properly in terms of assignment and execution of project activities, and flexibility of management in terms of responsiveness to the need for changes in financial allocations and timing of activities. It is noted that DASTA and National Park authorities play an important roles in working closely with Focal Point and Site Managers in demonstration site operation. A constraint influenced implementation of the project is changes of chief of district during the course of the project. It led to inadequate involvement of district departments in some periods of project

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 4 Page 8 implementation. Changes of management board members caused some difficulties in coordinating a number of planed activities. Cost for administrative management in implementing the project is mainly contributed from co-finance sources. Budget from GEF was used only for site coordination, monitoring and evaluation, and auditing with reasonable amounts. EXTERNAL SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION AND KNOWLEDGE The project encouraged participation of diverse academic institutions which assist to apply scientific knowledge in implementing activities, including methods for tourism carrying capacity provided by Kasesart University; marine culture of soft coral by Burapha University; guideline for self assessment of project management from Mahidol University; and coral reef monitoring and database development by Rajangala University of Technology. CO-FINANCING AND FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY Total co-finance from different sources is more than US$1.5 million. It makes Koh Chang demonstration site project become one among project having the highest co-funding. It is noted that DASTA as a coordinating agency reporting directly to Government Cabinet contribute a large portion of co-finance from Government. Annual budget provided by Government to National Park Authority is another permanent source co-funded to the demonstration site project. As recognised during terminal evaluation, funding from Government (almost coming through DASTA) for sustainable tourism in Mu Koh Chang is available for long term actions. Regarding institutional arrangement, Koh Chang National Park Management Board with wide involvement of related stakeholders is considered as operational organisation in coordinating management practices beyond the demonstration site project. DEFICIENCIES IN PROJECT PERFORMANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT Lack of involvement of local people in monitoring practice should be improved as soon as possible. Given the fact that lots of diving businesses are operating in Mu Koh Chang and a number of local people were trained for SCUBA diving, monitoring of ecological condition and resource use are feasible. It was agreed by the Focal Point that this would be proceeded in near future with funding from another project following the completion of the demonstration site project. OVERALL OBJECTIVES AND EXPECTED OUTCOMES It is clear that all objectives designed in the operational plan of demonstration site project are likely to be met. An outstanding outcome was a formal establishment and smooth operation of Management Board at the district level. This supported to coordination of the activities in the project and harmonisation of conflicts in development of the islands. The outcome regarding the establishment of institutional arrangement for long-term management at the site level has been achieved with developing coordination network, mooring committee, local guide centre and coral reef protection volunteer group. Management plan and guideline for sustainable use developed as agreement in the mid-term evaluation assist related agencies in the Islands to design their activities in only framework to ensure long term and sustainable development of tourism in the islands. It is noted that results of studies on carrying capacity and tourist fee provided scientific baselines for more effective tourism management by the National park Authorities. Among stress reduction outcomes, capacity building is most outstanding with large number were trained in coral reef conservation and sustainable uses. It is also recorded reduction of illegal fishing under improved enforcement made by the Park Authority and local fishermen.


Data from ecological monitoring has not indicated clearly improvement of environment state. It seems that short period of project implementation does not allow to verify outcomes based on performance indicators as designed in monitoring and evaluation plan. It is noted that the performances regarding sustainable uses, habitat under management need to verify to assess if the demonstration site project supports to reduce stress at the site level. RATING PROJECT SUCCESS This rating shall be semi-quantitative and is conducted on a scale of 1 to 5 with one (1) being the highest (most successful) and five (5) the lowest rating. The evaluators shall specify in the report the nature of the scale used. E.g. 1 = 90-100%; 2 = 70-90%; 3 = 50-70%; 4 = 40-50%; 5 = <40%.

Timeliness Achievement Impact Public awareness 1 1 1 Networking 2 1 1 Sustainable tourism programme 2 1 1 Capacity building 2 2 2 Livelihood generating programme 3 2 2 Monitoring and rehabilitation 2 1 2 Overall 2 1 1

RECOMMENDATIONS The demonstration site project has achieved lots of significant outputs and outcomes. It is recommended that the district authorities, DASTA and National Park Management Board shall inherit them and maintain the network established by the project to ensure long term and sustainable tourism in Mu Koh Chang. Volunteer groups and Local Guide Centre have contributed significantly for coral reef conservation, which is a mandate of National Park Authority. Supports from the Park Authority to activities of these people’s organisation are reasonable to enable further their efforts in harmonisation between exploitation and conservation. Monitoring practices shall continue to detect changes of resources and ecological conditions under increased pressures of human activities and natural variances. Involvement of local people in monitoring practices with additional local indicators should be encouraged. It is also recommended that the management team shall finalise all required reports to enable completion the demonstration site project in time.


ANNEX 5

Draft Terminal Evaluation Report for the Masinloc Coral Reef Demonstration Site in the Philippines

Executive Summary

GENERAL CONCLUSIONS The Masinloc Coral Reef Demonstration Site contributed to the overall goal of the UNEP South China Sea Project to reverse the degradation of critical habitats, in particular, coral reefs, by putting 200 hectares of coral reefs under strict protection and another 80 hectares under a regime of regulated fishing out of a total of 2,200 hectares, or roughly 10% of total area covered by the municipal waters of Masinloc. Three new marine protected areas (MPA) established by the project, in addition to an existing one, interact with each other in terms of social connectivity (learnings and experience in enforcement are shared among council members) and ecological connectivity (transfer of nutrients, unhampered movement of fish and other aquatic species). This template can be replicated by other coastal municipalities (especially those with a large coastal area) or those which are components of seascapes or marine eco-regions both at the national and regional level. The model of community-led determination of MPA, broad-based consultations, and ensuing institutional adaptation through enactment of plans and supporting legislation can be emulated elsewhere. The 2-year time table was a very tight one especially considering all the necessary processes required for setting up MPAs, drafting and enacting a CRM code as well as the supporting legal and institutional structures. Nevertheless, the project showed that with some creativity (supporting public hearings, use of IEC materials, community level feedback mechanisms), the objectives can be attained without circumventing the legal processes. Infusion of scientific and technical inputs has proven to be well-received even at the community level. New information informs the process and erases all bias that communities do not or cannot appreciate highly technical information. Based on a comparison of activities identified in the proposal as well as subsequent amendments to the work plan, the level of accomplishment has been HIGH especially for the first two outcomes: MPA network and healthy coral reefs. Activities that would have improved livelihood opportunities and enhanced awareness were either not completely implemented or suffered from mis-targetting. Resulting impacts are generally MEDIUM to HIGH as seen through a change in attitudes and behavior of fisherfolk (e.g. dynamite fishers becoming MPA leaders); working institutions at the micro (MPA/community), meso (LGU) and macro (sub-national/national) levels; and positive prospects for improved livelihood associated with healthy reefs and increased fish catch. A comparison of the implementation plan with the progress reports (mainly to assess slippages) shows that except for the delays experienced in the first semester, the sequencing of activities has been followed. In general, the expenditures have hewed faithfully to the work and financial plan. Start-up delays in financing were just carried over to the next reporting period. ISSUES AND SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS Given a relatively short period of project implementation and accompanying tight schedule of monthly activities, this evaluation sees a disconnection between financial and logistical support by the Specialized Executing Agency, UP MSI. UP MSI/MERF should have established a more flexible and supportive accounting/administrative setup. The administrative office could have hired project assistants who could assist in overall operations. Though based in Manila, these assistants may be required to travel to the site at least once a month to deliver supplies and assist the Demo Site Manager in cash management. Reporting protocols with the regional Project Coordinating Unit can be improved if policies have been previously established and tested. Initial confusion regarding charging of “opportunity costs” of fishers/community members attending Project activities resulted to a significant increase in co-funding.

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 5 Page 2 A roster of possible consultants or experts should have been identified together with the submission of proposal. This would minimize delays in contracting. With regard GEF funding allocation, it was observed that a small amount was provided for IEC. Some monies might have been used to train community members to produce their own IEC Materials with in-cash funding from the LGU. The community members of Bani have demonstrated their skills in replicating IEC materials, for example. The conclusions derived in this report pertaining to livelihood may indicate a cost – inefficiency, i.e., high cost relative to low success rate. This is because the regular micro financing of the LGU was entered here as co-funding when it may not necessarily be related to livelihood needs of the reef stewards who are primary beneficiaries of the project or cover a more expansive list of LGU beneficiaries who are not targeted by the project as well.


FINAL EVALUATION OF THE MASINLOC CORAL REEF DEMONSTRATION SITE

OF THE UNEP GEF Project entitled: “Reversing Environment Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand”

Submitted by: Ms. Annabelle Cruz-Trinidad, Consultant PURPOSE This final evaluation is conducted to assess the extent by which stated objectives and outcomes have been achieved, the overall performance of the demonstration site, and the extent to which these objectives and outcomes are sustained beyond the lifetime of the project. BACKGROUND Masinloc, Zambales has had a relatively long history of involvement in coastal resource management initiatives. Amidst a backdrop of declining fish catches and destroyed habitats, the Haribon Foundation implemented the Marine Conservation Project for San Salvador1 (MCPSS) from 1989 to 1993. Using a co-management framework, the project was able to institute property rights mainly through the establishment of the San Salvador Marine Sanctuary which was (and still is) a no take fishing zone and stricter enforcement of fishing regulations. In 1993, the Masinloc-Oyon Bay was declared as a Protected Seascape under RA 7586 or the National Integrated Protected Area System (NIPAS) creating a management layer called the Protected Area Management Board under the DENR. The PAMB-LGU nexus has been complicated at times by issues pertaining to jurisdiction, management, and collection of fees from the Masinloc Coal Fired Power Plant. Nevertheless, the management overlay resulting from NIPAS has contributed to the “maturity” of Masinloc in dealing with institutional/co-management issues. UP Marine Science Institute has included the San Salvador fish sanctuary as part of its monitoring program from 2000 till the present while the DENR-Coastal Environment Program has included Masinloc as a site for its activities including mangrove reforestation. In 2002-2003, Masinloc was once again selected as a site for the Asian Development Bank’s (ADB) Project Preparation for the Integrated Coastal Resource Management Project (ICRMP). ADB noted several opportunities to advance coastal management in Masinloc including preparedness of LGU and populace, financial capacity, and challenges in coastal management such as the issue of migrant fishers and illegal fishing methods associated with the collection of aquarium fish. As of writing, the DENR is in the final stages of consultant selection after which full blast project implementation will ensue. The latest of initiatives is the South China Sea Project (August 2005- June 2008) where Masinloc was selected as the Demonstration Site for Coral Reefs. Coral reefs are widespread in Masinloc Bay and are considered to be one of the best coral reef areas in Western Luzon. There is high live coral cover for all species, i.e., 29% inside and 33% outside the marine protected area, although reef fish density is rather low at 7-8 MT/sq.km. METHODOLOGY In order to accomplish the final evaluation, the following steps were taken:

• Review of project documents and related literature (ICRMP 2003; Arceo and Alano; Katon, Pomeroy and Salamanca; and Dizon and Miranda);

• Site visitation (Annex A, Trip Report, and Minutes of the Meeting, CRM Board/Briefing Re Final Evaluation, 23 June 2008) and Presentation of Work Plan to CRM Board re Final Evaluation,23 June 2008, Annex B);

• Listing of resource persons for key informant interviews (Annex C); • Participation in project consultations (Sustainability Workshop, June 25, 2008)

A semi-quantitative scoring system was developed to assess accomplishment levels; impacts; and sustainability potential of the Masinloc Demonstration Site. For the accomplishment level, each objective/outcome was given a maximum score of 2.5 points or a total of 10 points for all four components. A maximum of 2.5 points was garnered if all activities were fulfilled and vice-versa. 1 An island barangay in Masinloc, Zambales.

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 5 Page 4 For the impact scoring, a set of parameters was identified and the scores based on the intensity or magnitude of impacts. For the sustainability scoring, positive and negative determinants were identified as being contributory to continued implementation of activities. FRAMEWORK The four project objectives/ outcomes (Table 1) are interrelated and can be interpreted as occupying differing hierarchies (Figure 1). At the core of the Project is the attainment of healthy coral reefs which is to be achieved by establishing co-management structures as well as enhanced capacities of members for (i) governance and (ii) maintenance of healthy coral reefs. The governance aspect involves the establishment of structures at various management levels with a critical mass of individuals, planned action, legally recognized, and with appropriate budgetary support. However, this may only be achieved if the individual members are appropriately trained to be managers and/or members of the governing bodies. Thus, the other box indicates that enhanced capacities are critical for good governance.

Table 1 Objectives and outcomes of the Masinloc Coral Reef Demonstration Site.

Objectives Outcomes Component 1: To demonstrate sustainable community-

based marine sanctuaries network • To develop adaptive management strategies and

coordination through monitoring and performance of MPA networks

• To enhance coral reef and their adjacent mangrove areas

• To regulate and manage reef uses in surrounding reef areas

Enhanced sustainability of coral reef adaptive co-management with the government and community-based stakeholders as seen in the implementation and their adjustment in the implementation of management plans, the performance of management bodies with regular allocation budget

Component 2: To help build local co-management capacities and strengthen law enforcement capabilities of Bantay Dagat (sea wardens) personnel together with the establishment of cooperative coordination systems

Maintained health of reefs and their associated ecological goods and services based on participatory impact monitoring and evaluation

Component 3: To conduct and implement livelihood support mechanisms by determining the potential alternative and/or supplemental livelihood options and establishing appropriate guidelines/policies for reef stewardship

Improved quality life of fisher stakeholders as indicated by an increase in supplemental incomes derived from reef stewardship

Component 4: To conduct Information Education Campaign in order to develop public awareness about environmental issues and concerns through the production of brochures and posters of coastal resources of Masinloc, Zambales and broadcasting knowledge on radio station

Strengthened capacity of governing bodies and stakeholder stewardship as seen in compliance of policies and good monitoring and evaluation practices (e.g., participatory performance)

The framework also shows that enhanced capacities have a direct link to healthy reefs. That is because per program design, members of the governing bodies were trained on various aspects of reef management --- from monitoring to patrolling operations to the more esoteric function of coral transplantation. Lastly, as a result of maintaining healthy coral reefs, fishers are expected to benefit from increased catches of fish and increased incidence of high valued, coral-reef associated species in catch which contribute to a betterment of lives.


Healthy coral reefs

Enhanced adaptive co-management structures

Improved quality of life

Enhanced capacities

Fig. 1. A representation of the dynamics of outcomes of the Masinloc Coral Reef Demonstration Site

Evaluation of the Masinloc Coral Reef Demonstration Site 1. Summary evaluation of activities the project has undertaken

Most of the activities laid out in the project have been accomplished. Furthermore, all activities are essential or contributory to the component objective/outcome. All activities are rightfully classified except for some which straddles two components. The inter-relatedness of components 1 and 2 may account for this but does not dilute in any manner the delivery of outcomes. Based on a comparison of activities identified in the proposal as well as subsequent amendments to the work plan, the level of accomplishment has been HIGH especially for the first two outcomes: MPA network and healthy coral reefs. Activities that would have improved livelihood opportunities and enhanced awareness were either not completely implemented or suffered from mis-targetting. Resulting impacts are generally MEDIUM to HIGH as seen through a change in attitudes and behavior of fisherfolk (e.g. dynamite fishers becoming MPA leaders); working institutions at the micro (MPA/community), meso (LGU) and macro (provincial) levels; and positive prospects for improved livelihood associated with healthy reefs and increased fish catch. The MPA network and resulting healthy reefs (Objective 1) is a “flagship” component of the project; thus, all efforts converge to this. Trainings and other capacity building exercises also support the attainment of objective 1. Livelihood activities could have benefited more by a broader scoping. The desire to provide reef stewards alternative or supplemental livelihood is good and justified; but it is too limiting in this case. The sea urchin ranching exercise proved costly but a tremendous learning experience was derived from it. Micro-financing, which is a staple of the LGU, is sometimes lumped as project livelihood efforts but it is not and must be treated separately. IEC has received little focus in terms of funding and activities. IEC materials were not disseminated early on and where they were, they were limited in distribution to the three barangays were the sanctuaries are found. Initiatives with respect to curriculum development was not pursued. 2. Assessment of the scope, quality and significance of project outputs in relation to

expected results

The assessment of the scope, quality and significance of project outputs in relation to expected results covered the selection of three parameters: (i) accomplishment level; (ii) impacts; and (iii) sustainability. Accomplishment is based on whether the activities identified per proposal and subsequent amendments to it have been fulfilled or not. Accomplishment status is contained in Annex D while the scoring is provided in Table 2.

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 5 Page 6 Table 2 Summary scoring of project accomplishments.

Objective/Outcome Accomplishment Objective/Outcome 1: Demonstrate sustainable community-based marine

sanctuaries network 2.5

Objective/Outcome 2: Build local co-management capacities and strengthen law enforcement capabilities

2.5

Objective/Outcome 3: Conduct and implement livelihood support mechanisms 1.5 Objective/Outcome 4: Conduct Information Education Campaign to develop public

awareness 1.5

Total 8.0

Accomplishment ratings. Objective/Outcome 1 was given a perfect score for accomplishment because it fulfilled all activities outlined in the work plan. Three new MPAs were formed with accompanying plans, organization and budget support. Necessary infrastructure was likewise provided by the project. The concept of networks, though esoteric in general, was fully understood by fisherfolk as meaning social connectivity (sharing of information and experiences) as well as ecological connectivity (exchange and support of biophysical flows). Impacts of the MPAs on fish catch and coral reef health was evident within project lifetime. It was not very clear if mangrove reforestation was a planned activity because the proposal mentioned it although it was not featured as one of the coded activities. In any case, the mangrove reforestation activity was implemented with sincere interest from the communities. Furthermore, other sources of financing was tapped, i.e., Philforest Corporation of the DENR and the LGU, which does reforestation on an annual basis. Objective/Outcome 2 was given a perfect rating because of the knowledge levels attained by the fisherfolk, members of MPA councils, and CRM Board. The level of technical expertise provided by the project was much appreciated by the members of the CRM Board despite the fact that related resource management meetings have been regularly organized, i.e., no new knowledge formed. Based on focused group discussions, the MPA council members and Bantay Dagat were very well versed with the intricacies of fishery law enforcement including rules on apprehension, confiscation of gears/caught fish, examination of dynamited fish, examination of cyanide-laced fish, and preparation of legal forms. With respect to maintaining healthy reefs, the objective was attained based on information provided by the fishers themselves who noted an increase in fish catch and improved coral cover. Monitoring by MSI confirmed this perception with percentage hard coral cover inside the San Salvador Fish Sanctuary being maintained at a relatively stable rate of 30% and up from 2002 to present compared to the below 30% levels from 1991-94 (Deocadez, this project). Deocadez further noted the increase in dead corals and attributed it to natural events such as El Nino and crown of thorns infestation. The same trend was observed outside the fish sanctuary which saw hard coral cover increased from a low rate of 5 to 6% in 1994 to a hike of 40% in 2001 followed by a stable rate of 30% onwards to 2007. Mean abundance and mean biomass of reef fish (total and target species) also indicate a significant increase from 2000 to present. For example, target species inside the fish sanctuary was estimated at 184 fish/250m2 in 2000. By 2007, this estimate has increased to 271 fish/250m2.

Objective/Outcome 3 was given a rating of 1.5 out of a total of 3 because two important activities were not implemented: (i) marine sanctuary fund; and (ii) report card and incentive system. The sea cucumber experiment, which eventually did not succeed, is not evaluated in a negative light in this instance; instead, it provided a valuable learning experience for the fisherfolk. Nevertheless, this report is of the opinion that options for assessing alternative livelihood and the introduction of entrepreneurial values has not been thoroughly exhausted. The scope for livelihood improvement was also limited with only the reef stewards being directly targeted. It is furthermore inappropriate to assume that the project’s livelihood activities are one and the same as the existing micro-financing activities of the cooperative office. Objective/Outcome 4 was given a rating of 1.5 out of a total of 3. One activity, the development of middle school curricula was not pursued despite interest amongst principals and science teachers who participated in the seeding of giant clams. As of the second semester of 2006, the IEC materials planned to be contracted out were not produced yet due to delays in contracting. Nevertheless, available materials were used for trainings. In summary, the rating for Accomplishment Level is High.


Impact ratings. Project impacts include the long-term effects on behaviour and attitudes towards coral reef management, enhanced governance structures and performance, and improvements in the quality of lives of stakeholders especially those affected by the establishment of MPAs. A summary listing of impacts and ratings are as follows:

• On knowledge and attitudes, micro level: High • On knowledge and attitudes, meso/macro: Low to Medium • On governance, MPA level (micro): High • On governance, meso and macro level: Medium • Improvements in quality of life, indirect: High • Improvements in quality of life, short term, direct: Low

Change in knowledge and attitudes attributed to trainings, IEC and frequent community consultations were observed to be HIGH in the three barangays where MPAs are located. While this was true for the “beneficiary barangays”, the same can not be said for barangays that were not part of the sanctuary establishment, thus a Low to Medium rating. Governance is high at the micro or MPA level due to the existence of the MPA councils, plans, trained people, and budget. Governance at the LGU level is rated Medium due to the non-involvement of barangays in the process and the non-inclusiveness of initiatives to non-MPA barangays. Although there is a CRM office at the municipal level, the lack of permanently designated staff is a threat to good and sustained governance. In terms of livelihood opportunities, indirect impacts are potentially high as measured through an improvement in fish biomass and increased incidence of target species. However, the direct impacts envisioned by the project were not forthcoming due to the reasons pointed out earlier. In summary, the Impact Rating is Medium to High. Sustainability ratings. Sustainability is defined as the likelihood of continuing interventions through strengthened institutional arrangements, informed citizenry, capacitated leaders and staff, and wherewithal to continue activities. This report identifies positive and negative determinants to sustainability (Table 3). Table 3 Positive and negative determinants of Sustainability.

Positive Determinants Negative Determinants CRM Code has been enacted Not all stakeholders engaged (migrants,

aquarium fishers, barangay officials, non-MPA sites)

Environmental Fund assures funding

No roll over plan for CRM office

Overlay of management layers at micro(MPA Council), meso (CRM Board) and macro (PAMB) levels

Future leadership thrust in coastal management not assured

“Maturity” to plan for and implement “new” Projects

Positive perceptions regarding MPA impacts are apparent

Empowered citizenry A summary of the Ratings is presented in this Report as Annex E, Presentation made during the Turn Over Ceremonies, 30 June 2008. Timeliness. This parameter is based on the difference between originally planned schedule vis-à-vis actual timing which reflects on realism and prudence of proposal. Because the project needed to adapt to local situation, the item on timeliness was not given weight in the scoring process. Some factors contributing to delays in project implementation include:

• Start up operations including transfer of funds and hiring of Demo Site Manager The Memorandum of Understanding for the Masinloc Coral Reef Demonstration Site was formally signed last August 25, 2005, two months behind the approved work plan’s commencement semester. The fund was received by the Specialized Executing Agency a month later, which


is practically half the semester. The funding delays did not allow for the project to field a Demonstration Manager right away; thus, project activities were delayed by at least one semester. This was remedied by the flexibility of the PCU in allowing the funds to be utilized for a period of one semester after the “supposed” termination of the project.

• Lengthy process of consultations related to establishment of new MPAs, planning process, and ultimately, the enactment of the CRM Code. Legitimization process took time because not all were immediately convinced after realizing that a portion of the fishing area would be cordoned off for use. In Bani, some delay was experienced because the original plan of delineating 20 hectares, which was acceptable to the fisherfolk, was amended to include a larger area comprising 100 hectares. This possibility was not accepted right away by the community; thus, a compromise was reached and instead the MPA comprised 50 hectares. As for the CRM Code, it has only been approved by the Masinloc Sangguniang Bayan on the last month of project implementation, i.e., June 2008, owing to the consultations required.

• Delays/unavailability of consultants/experts. This has affected activities such as monitoring of sanctuaries and IEC.

This report appreciates the catch-up plans implemented by the project; as such, almost all activities were attained. To help shorten the legitimization process of the MPA and the CRM Plans, the project assisted in the conduct of public hearings and consultations as well as in the reproduction of the plans for information dissemination. The delay in contracting the IEC consultant resulted in the lack of IEC materials to disseminate; this was remedied by using available materials from MSI. 3. Identification, and to the extent possible, quantification of any associated initiatives

undertaken by government beyond those specified in the operational plan As an offshoot of CRM activities and in particular the establishment of MPAs including the Taclobo Farm, the LGU of Masinloc has steered slowly towards an eco-tourism framework. As such, it has supported activities under the broad purview of marketing Masinloc as an eco-tourist spot. This includes the hosting of study tours for other UNEP components and academic institutions (Ateneo de Manila University, University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne). Costs incurred by LGU included local transport, coordination with San Salvador barangays for hosting, and some refreshments. Continued involvement in the collection and release of turtle hatchlings in Barangay Bani also jibes with the overall tourist framework as well as the Youth Education Camp which is held yearly in San Salvador. Mangrove reforestation was insinuated as a project activity (per proposal) but it was not funded by UNEP-GEF. The LGU supported this activity including the sponsorship of a Mangrove Management Planning Workshop. The LGU also sponsored a Fisheries Resource Development Planning meeting for San Salvador. Although San Salvador Fish Sanctuary existed prior to the entry of SCS-UNEP, fisheries planning is regarded as a critical management component that complements the MPA network concept. The LGU sponsored the venue, food and local transport. Lastly, in support of SCS-UNEP’s livelihood initiatives, the LGU sponsored a livelihood training for women which focused on the production of small decorative items. These items are currently displayed at the CRM Office and per communication with the CRM Officer, have generated a considerable amount of interest among tourists. 4. Evaluation of timetable of activities and allocation of financial resources and determination

of consistency with operational plan A comparison of the implementation plan with the progress reports (mainly to assess slippages) shows that except for the delays experienced in the first semester, the sequencing of activities has been followed. Activities pertaining to the establishment of the MPA Network comprised the bulk of activities. For the first semester of 2006, several initiatives were implemented: (i) orientation on fish registry and licensing; (ii) project orientation and planning; (iii) CRM workshop; (iv) Public consultation on the CRM Plan; and (v) initial assessment of proposed MPAs. Based on the implementation plan, most of the activities related to the establishment of the MPA Networks would have been accomplished by end 2007; thus, the remaining activities would be monitoring, continuous enforcement operations, and information campaigns. This strategy and sequencing is viewed as appropriate.


Patrolling activities was one of the start-up activities. This was possible due to the existence of the Bantay Dagat. The project strengthened patrolling operations by providing equipment (binoculars, spotlight, and snorkeling equipment). More importantly, the project provided training on legislation, registration and licensing, and enforcement skills with the former being held three times during project period. This serves to reinforce and validate the learnings. Scoping for livelihood options was planned for 3rd quarter of 2006. Based on progress reports, this activity has been jumpstarted by a visit to the Sea Cucumber Grow Out Culture in Bolinao, Pangasinan. Subsequent to this, a sea cucumber planning workshop was held in December 2007 to evaluate the feasibility of a refugia to complement the grow out culture. The development and dissemination of IEC materials (newsletter, insert, and calendar) was very much delayed from the indicated schedule which is 4th quarter of 2005 to 1st quarter of 2006 (Note:these materials were produced in 2008!).

Table 4 Allocation of Project Funding per Objective/Outcomes.

Objective/Outcome % of GEF Funds

% of In kind Co Financing

% of In Cash Co Financing

Objective/Outcome 1: Demonstrate sustainable community-based marine sanctuaries network 0.24 0.65 0.13 Objective/Outcome 2: Build local co-management capacities and strengthen law enforcement capabilities 0.04 0.00 0.02 Objective/Outcome 3: Conduct and implement livelihood support mechanisms 0.23 0.22 0.74 Objective/Outcome 4: Conduct Information Education Campaign to develop public awareness 0.06 0.12 0.03 Project Support (personnel, travel, equipment) 0.44 0.00 0.09

Almost 50% of the GEF funds are used for overall program support (personnel, travel, equipment) consistent with planned funding. Objective 1 received the highest percentage of funds at 24%. Looking at the specific activities however will indicate that activities under cost item 2000 (referring to Objective 2) are really in support of Objective 1 as was earlier noted that these two components are closely interrelated. The major cost item for Outcome 3 is the purchase of sea urchins. While this report observes that the livelihood experiment was not a failure per se, it proves to be a costly exercise. In hindsight, the experiment could have used a smaller volume of sea urchins and used the rest for follow through activities with women and youth. Likewise, it is also noted that GEF provided a very small amount for IEC amounting to 6% only. Some monies might have been used to train community members to produce their own IEC Materials with in-cash funding from the LGU. The community members of Bani have demonstrated their skills in replicating IEC materials, for example. The bulk of in-kind expenses was also utilized heavily by Objective 1. Since most of the experts are senior scientists from UPMSI, the result is not surprising. Lastly, the In-cash financing was spent mostly for livelihood activities. The conclusions derived in this report pertaining to livelihood may indicate a cost – inefficiency, i.e., high cost relative to low success rate. This is because the regular micro financing of the LGU was entered here as co-funding when it may not necessarily be related to livelihood needs of the reef stewards who are primary beneficiaries of the project or cover a more expansive list of LGU beneficiaries who are not targeted by the project as well. In general, the expenditures have hewed faithfully to the work and financial plan. Start-up delays in financing were just carried over to the next reporting period. 5. Evaluation of any programmatic and/or financial variance and any adjustments made and

assessment of their conformity with decisions of the management board No programmatic and/or financial variance was needed despite project delays. The work plan was adhered to in all instances. Financial variance was minimal and mainly dependent on activities implemented semestrally; the variance is immediately reflected in the adjusted financial report.

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 5 Page 10 6. Evaluation of project coordination, management and administration provided by the

Management Board The Management Board of the Masinloc Coral Reef Demonstration Site consists of roughly twenty seven (27) individuals from the local government, national agencies, MPA councils, NGOs, private sector, etc. duly enumerated in Chapter IV, entitled the Governing Board, of the Masinloc CRM Code. Also called the CRM Board, it is chaired by the Municipal Mayor of Masinloc. Because of the nature of the leadership of the Board and its rather broad constituency, day to day management of the Project is not and have not been expected of them.

As far as project coordination, management and administration is concerned, the Mayor has designated Ms. Olive Gregorio as OIC of the CRM Office, also formalized under the CRM Code. Ms. Gregorio has been functioning as the alternate of the Demo Site Manager and is being compensated as Project Technical Assistant. Project coordination and management rests on the Demo Site Manager together with Ms. Gregorio, the CRM Officer, and UP-MSI/MERF, as the Specialized Executing Agency, for financial/administrative support. The CRM Board approval is only required for policies related to the Demo Site. Co-financing of the LGU is done through normal governmental processes. Agreements on the activities supported by UNEP/GEF vis-à-vis those supported by LGU co-financing have been previously agreed upon per proposal.

However, some internal dynamics need to be clarified. It must be remembered that the Mayor is the Chair of the CRM Board and Chief Executive Officer of the Municipality. The project is both an SCS-UNEP Project and a Project of the Municipality. It is for this reason that the Mayor has to be given prior notice of all activities, especially those involving visits/consultations in the barangays. Regular briefings are also provided to him and are required.

Due to the relatively short period of project implementation (virtually two years only) and a very hectic implementation schedule, several major activities are thus organized in any one month. This necessitates financial flexibility on the part of the Demonstration Site Staff and strong logistical support in the area of coordination, planning, and execution. Financial flexibility appears to be a major issue in project implementation due to the limits allowed by MSI/MERF on the allowable cash advances. For instance, the allowable cash advance is P30,000 or about US$700 ++ which is patently inadequate to cover a month’s expenditure (assuming at least two major meetings!). A system of immediate financial transfers should have been planned for other than the current set up where frequent travels to Manila had to be made. The burden of all logistics pertaining to project implementation is borne by the Demo Site Manager and the Project Assistant who both have risen to the occasion through their passion and dedication and being “all-around” personnel. The use of personal funds, especially when transfers are delayed, indicate how the two project staff have circumvented an otherwise frustrating situation; this, however, should not be the norm and future projects with this intensity should ensure that modalities for disbursement do not burden the staff in said manner. 7. Extent to which external technical and scientific information and knowledge have

influenced activities

External technical and scientific information imparted by the Project through the participation of experts from UPMSI, NGOs such as Tanggol Kalikasan, and Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR), is very well received by the Demo Site. UPMSI is the primary source of experts for coral reef assessment and monitoring as well as coral reef transplantation, biology and ecology of giant clams, sea urchins and sea cucumbers. Time and expertise shared by senior scientists of MSI is well recognized and lauded. Tanggol Kalikasan, an NGO, as well as BFAR, have provided legal and enforcement training that includes proper apprehension and boarding techniques, preparation of legal forms, patrolling operations, and identification of dynamited/cyanide-laced fish.

According to a CRM Board Member, the infusion of new knowledge is very welcome since most of the interagency meetings involve the same persons; thus, the topics and issues discussed revolve around the same standard themes. Enhanced performance of activities such as regular Bantay Dagat Patrolling, participatory monitoring of coral reefs, and seeding of giant clams, is a direct result of “new” knowledge. MPA council leaders have expressed interest to want to do coral transplantation on their own in areas where no coral reefs exist. While being an incorrect supposition as it may alter existing habitats, the initiative showed how well new knowledge was embedded in their thinking.


8. Extent to which project implementation mechanisms developed and approved by the

Management Board have been implemented As explained in item 6, the Management Board is not directly involved in direct project implementation. However, for activities that will require the presence of the CRM Board and more particularly the head of the board, the Municipal Mayor, and those that will require co-funding from the LGU, then permission is sought – not from the Board per se but from the Mayor or his designate that may approve expenditures. 9. Evaluation of the status in mobilizing co-financing to support project activities and ensure

financial sustainability Co-financing for the project was proposed at a funding level of US$255,950 consisting of contributions In-Cash (97%) and In-kind (3%). The In-Cash contribution consists of contributions of the Municipality of Masinloc the bulk of which is accounted for by livelihood investments covering around 600 households at an estimated cost of US$300 per household. The In-Kind contribution is the contribution of national government and accounts for the time of scientists/experts from the UPMSI. Sources of In-Cash co-financing are: (1) Energy Regulation Act No. 1-94 (EO 1-94) which is coursed through the NAPOCOR Coal Plant; (2) LGU General Fund; and (3) Municipal Development Council (MDC). EO 1-94 provides funding equivalent to 35% municipal share for the implementation of the Watershed Management, Health and Environment Enhancement Projects for the municipality of Masinloc and support to the Multi-Partite Monitoring Group/Committee, which primarily aims to monitor compliance of the NPC to the ECC conditions and stipulations. EO 1-94, however, is NOT an automatic assignment of funds to the municipality. It is a three-year fund which requires that proposals have to be written in line with the intent of EO 1-94. No problems in drawing on this fund was experienced by the project; although the lag time of at least two years (processing and release of funds) burdens the LGU to advance monies before actual receipt. The LGU regular fund is used for monthly honoraria of the Bantay Dagat Volunteers, Gasoline expenses, patrol boats with complete paraphernalia and other related expenses to be used in the implementation of RA 8550 and in the monitoring and apprehending of illegal fishing activities. This funding source has been made available by the LGU with no encumbrance whatsoever. 10. Specification of any deficiencies in project performance, administration and management

that warrant correction Project staff (Demo Site Manager, Technical Assistant, and National Focal Point) have all shown dedication, aggressiveness, creativity and perseverance in fulfilling the objectives of this Project. Any minor irritants such as delays in funding and cash disbursement, lack of support staff for organizing and general office work, and lack of skills in technical writing and cash flow management, have been dealt with graciously and proactively. There are no serious concerns regarding project performance beyond the usual start up delays and perceived lack of personnel at the Demo Site. However, the attainment of project objectives at the specified time indicates these have generally been surmounted. IEC Contracting was very delayed; thus, the project was not able to go beyond the three barangays where the MPAs are located and also inform the general public. This report realizes the limited budget and time to saturate the entire municipality (and perhaps beyond) with project fervour but the IEC approach would have multiplied the awareness levels significantly. 11. Prognosis of the degree to which project objectives and outcomes are likely to be met Most of the objectives and outcomes have been met; discussed in Item 2.

12. Recommendations regarding any necessary corrections and adjustments to the overall

project work plan and timetable for the purposes of enhancing the achievement of project objectives and outcomes.

The 2-year time table was a very tight one especially considering all the necessary processes required for setting up MPAs, drafting and enacting a CRM code as well as the supporting legal and

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 5 Page 12 institutional structures. Nevertheless, the project showed that with some creativity (supporting public hearings, use of IEC materials, community level feedback mechanisms), the objectives can be attained without circumventing the legal processes. UP MSI/MERF should have established a more flexible and supportive accounting/administrative setup. The administrative office could have hired project assistants who could assist in overall operations. Though based in Manila, these assistants may be required to travel to the site at least once a month to deliver supplies and assist the Demo Site Manager in cash management. It must be noted, however, that the Administrative Office based in UP/MSI has already functioned with the utmost flexibility government offices can allow. Reporting protocols with the regional Project Coordinating Unit can be improved if policies have been previously established and tested. Initial confusion regarding charging of “opportunity costs” of fishers/community members attending Project activities resulted to a significant increase in co-funding. A roster of possible consultants or experts should have been identified together with the submission of proposal. This would minimize delays in contracting. The budgetary allocation shows the focus given to Objective 1 --- which was fully attained and which resulted to a HIGH rating. However, IEC was allocated a very small amount (6% of GEF Funding). Some monies could have been used training community members develop their own IEC materials as the people of Bani have shown interest here. Also, some monies used for the purchase of sea urchins could have been diverted to more training on entrepreneurship and follow through livelihood activities with women and children.


Annex A - Page 1

Annex A

Trip Report and Highlights of Meetings/Key Informant Interviews Masinloc Coral Reef Demonstration Site

June 23-25, 2008

Itinerary

June 23: • Leave Manila 0500 • Arrive Masinloc 0900 • Present Workplan to CRM Board and Discuss Evaluation Parameters, 0930-1100 • Lunch, 1130-1230 • Discussion with MPA Council Members (Panglit and Bani) and Bantay Dagat, CRM Demo

Site Staff, 01300-1600 • Report Writing, 1630-1930 June 24: • Meet DENR CENRO Juanito David, 1000-1130 • Lunch, 1130-1230 • Meeting with NAPOCOR/AES, Sonia Lopez, 1330-1530 • Inspection of IEC Billboards, Bani, 1530-1600 • Discussion with Demo Site Staff, Collection of Monitoring Data, 1630-1730 • Report Writing, 1800-2000

June 25: • Attend Sustainability Workshop, Iba, Zambales 1000-1600 • Meet with Raffy Apelado, Candelaria, Zambales, PARAZAMASA, 1230-1300

Highlights/Points of Discussion CRM Board (Municipal Mayor, MPA Council Members, Bantay Dagat, Municipal Agricultural Officer, DA-BFAR, DENR, Philippine Coast Guard, Department of Education, Barangay Representatives)

• Difficulty implementing livelihood programs; • Mayor’s learnings from trip to Go Chang in relation to ecotourism potential of Masinloc; • Better coral reefs in Masinloc but attitudes and preparedness towards tourism lacking; • Coral reefs, giant clams, turtles (Bani), caves and natural springs contribute to ecotourism

showcase; • BFAR suggests a tiered approach to mariculture with seaweeds on top, sea cucumber at the

bottom and siganids midway; • Seaweed operations used to be bountiful in the area but calamities and disease have negated

gains; • Department of Education expressed appreciation for having been exposed to coral reef/MPA

and giant clam seeding; also expressed regret that curriculum development did not push through as scheduled;

• As Provincial Head of the League of Mayors, Masinloc is able to influence fishing regulations in nearby municipalities, Palauig and Candelaria;

• Knowledge of social and ecological connectivities related to MPA networks; • Knowledge of coral reef and fish species, transplantation protocols, monitoring, etc; • Knowledge of basic law enforcement skills;

CENRO Juanito David, DENR

• Difficult at this point to measure project impacts, long term in nature but very positive signs; • Functioning institutional partnerships; • Risks/threat attributed to politicized decision making; • Conflict regarding PAMB and local government; • Prospects offered by ICRMP to continue activities

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 5 Annex A - Page 2 Ms. Sonia Lopez, AES/NAPOCOR Environment Officer

• Very appreciative of technical/scientific information provided by experts invited by the Project; this has allowed PAMB- Multi partite monitoring committee to enhance understanding instead of talking about the same issues only;

• Awareness among communities is very strong; • Observation of improved state of coral reefs and fish abundance even near coal plant; • Regular sharing of monitoring data with LGU; • Opportunity to continue project activities with EO 1-94.

Mr. Raffy Apilado, PARAZAMASA, Candelaria FARMC

• Candelaria has a longer experience in CRM courtesy of SIKAT; • Livelihood activities focused on fish marketing; • Candelaria has ordinance which designates the PO to manage the MPA; • MPA has annual budget; • PARAZAMASA is a confederation of all POs in Zambales

Ms. Olive Gregorio and Ms. Milen Celeste Dizon

• No CRM Office yet; only designated for project although CRM Code creates one; no permanent personnel and budget

• Lack of project staff for SCS Project; two of them have to do all the work from contracting, to training, to community organization, to sweeping the floors of office;

• Financial management not very flexible; low level of cash advances allowed; need to shell out personal money, at times;

• Project is already embedded in LGU; acceptance level is very high • Inconsistency of project reporting with PCU; misunderstanding re valuation of opportunity

costs of attendees to meetings bloat the co-financing component.


Annex B - Page 1

Annex B

Presentation to the CRM Board Work Plan for Final Evaluation, 23 June 2008

UNEP-GEF Project: Reversing environmental degradation trends in the South China Sea and the Gulf of Thailand

Work Schedule10-day period for data collection, review of documents, and report writing beginning June 17 until July 2Meetings to be conducted with CRM Board, Demo site Staff, MPA Council (2 batches), AES, DENR and BFAR, Livelihood/Micro Finance Focal Person, Palauig and Candelaria Replication Sites, June 23-26Report writing, June 26-29Present Final Evaluation results week on June 30

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 5 Annex D - Page 2

1. Enhanced sustainability of coral reef adaptive co-management with the government and community-based stakeholders as seen in the implementation and their adjustment in the implementation of management plans, the performance of management bodies with regular allocation budget

2. Maintained health of reefs and their associated ecological goods and services based on participatory impact monitoring and evaluation

3. Improved quality life of fisher stakeholders as indicated by an increase in supplemental incomes derived from reef stewardship

4. Strengthened capacity of governing bodies and stakeholder stewardship as seen in compliance of policies and good monitoring and evaluation practices (e.g., part icipatory performance)

Component 1Demonstrating sustainable community-based marine sanctuaries network

1.1. Monitoring of coral and reef fish abundance inside and outside the sanctuary 1.2. Initial benchmark assessment of two additional marine sanctuaries/reserves1.3. Detailed assessment of two (2) additional marine sanctuaries and subsequent participatory monitoring1.4. Install mooring buoys for sanctuaries and navigation markers1.5. Improving coordinating mechanisms for a network of marine sanctuaries and functional patrolling1.6. Reef Fishery and licensing establishment and implementation and degree of compliance1.7. Training on restocking and grow-out methods (e.g. sea urchin)1.8. Training on coral reef rehabilitation methods (e.g. coral transplantation) and implement transplantation


Annex B - Page 3

2.1. Team building efforts for various marine sanctuary management teams2.2. Legal and paralegal training of Bantay dagat personnel 2.3. Strengthen law enforcement capabilities of Bantay dagat (sea wardens) personnel

3.1.Determination of potential alternative and/or supplemental livelihood options and appropriate guidelines/policies on its implementation3.2. Implementation of livelihood projects through priority marine sanctuary stewards3.3. Establishment of marine sanctuary fund3.4. Establishment of the report card and incentive system

4.1. Production of brochures and posters on the coastal resources of Masinloc, Zambales and 4.2.Install permanent notice boards for raising awareness on coral reefs and their announcements4.3. Radiobroadcast of information on the coral reef ecosystem and appropriate management actions being undertaken4.4 Prepare middle school curricula on coral reef ecological management4.5. Meetings of Protected Area Management Board (PAMB) and Strategic Action Plan for Masinloc 4.6. Publication of the reports

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 5 Annex D - Page 4

What we want to achieve

What the project has provided to contribute to achievement of outcomes

Technical expertise, IEC, Training

Healthy reefs, co-management systems, capacitated managers, and improved opportunities for increasing incomes

Overall summary of project success measured in terms of conformity with planned activities, timeliness and impact

Scope, quality and significance of project outputs produced to date in relation to expected results

Identification and, quantification of any associated initiatives beyond those specified in the Operational Plan

Evaluation of timetable of activities and the allocation of financial resources to project activities and a determination of their consistency with operational plan. Where activities and/or outputs have been delayed the cause should be identified, remedial actions identified, and current status assessed

Identification of any programmatic and financial variance and/or adjustments made during project implementation and assessment of their conformity with decisions of the management board

Evaluation of coordination, management and administration provided by management board


Annex B - Page 5

Assessment of the extent to which external scientific and technical information and knowledge have influenced the execution of project activities e was generated by project

Analysis of the extent to which project implementation mechanisms developed and approved by the Management Board have been implemented

An evaluation of the status in mobilizing co-financing to support project activities and ensure financial sustainability

Specification of any deficiencies in project performance, administration and management that warrant correction with associated recommendations


Annex C - Page 1

Annex C

Final Evaluation, Masinloc Coral Reef Demonstration Site

List of Interviewees/ Resource Persons 1. Engr. Jessu Edora Municipal Mayor Masinloc, Zambales 2. Ms. Olive Gregorio CRM Officer – designate Masinloc, Zambales 3. Mr. Juanito David Community Environment and Natural Resources Officer DENR 4. Ms. Antonia Lopez Environment Officer NAPOCOR/AES 5. Ms. Melissa Nepal DILG Municipal Local Government Operations Officer 6. Mr. Isidro Imperial MPA Chairman, Panglit 7. Mr. Ariel Ebue MPA Chairman, Bani 8. Mr. Dario Diaz MFARMC, Masinloc 9. Mr. Ruperto Apilado PARAZAMASA Candelaria, Zambales 10. Ms. Emerlinda Celeste-Dizon Demonstration Site Manager 11. Dr. Porfirio Alino National Technical Focal Point


Annex D - Page 1

Annex D

As of June 30, 2008

Component and activities Status Notes/ Comments

1. Demonstrating sustainable community-based marine sanctuaries network

1.1 Monitoring of coral and reef fish abundance inside and outside the sanctuary

Accomplished

1.2 Initial benchmark assessment of two additional marine sanctuaries/reserves

Accomplished

1.3 Detailed assessment of two (2) additional marine sanctuaries and subsequent participatory monitoring

Accomplished

1.4 Install mooring buoys for sanctuaries and navigation markers

Accomplished

1.5 Improving coordinating mechanisms for a network of marine sanctuaries and functional patrolling

Accomplished Also interrelated with Component 2

1.6 Reef Fishery and licensing establishment and implementation and degree of compliance

Accomplished Also interrelated with Component 2

1.7 Training on restocking and grow-out methods (e.g. sea urchin)

Accomplished

1.8 Training on coral reef rehabilitation methods (e.g. coral transplantation) and implement transplantation

Accomplished

2. Helping build local co-management capacities and strengthen law enforcement capabilities of Bantay Dagat (sea wardens) personnel together with the establishment of cooperative coordination systems

2.1 Team building efforts for various marine sanctuary management teams

Accomplished No budget provided

2.2 Legal and paralegal training of Bantay dagat personnel Accomplished 2.3 Strengthen law enforcement capabilities of Bantay dagat

(sea wardens) personnel Accomplished

3. Conduct and implement livelihood support mechanisms by determining the potential alternative and/or supplemental livelihood options and establishing appropriate guidelines/policies for reef stewardship

3.1 Determination of potential alternative and/or supplemental livelihood options and appropriate guidelines/policies on its implementation

Accomplished

3.2 Implementation of livelihood projects through priority marine sanctuary stewards

Accomplished

3.3 Establishment of marine sanctuary fund Not accomplished

3.4 Establishment of the report card and incentive system Not accomplished

4. Conduct Information Education Campaign in order to develop public awareness about environmental issues and concerns through the production of brochures and posters of coastal resources of Masinloc, Zambales and broadcasting knowledge on radio station

4.1 Production of brochures and posters on the coastal resources of Masinloc, Zambales and

Accomplished

4.2 Install permanent notice boards for raising awareness on coral reefs and their announcements

Accomplished

4.3 Radiobroadcast of information on the coral reef ecosystem and appropriate management actions being undertaken

Accomplished

4.4 Prepare middle school curricula on coral reef ecological management

Not Accomplished

4.5 Meetings of Protected Area Management Board (PAMB) and Strategic Action Plan for Masinloc

Accomplished

4.6 Publication of the reports Planned


Annex E - Page 1

Annex E

Presentation made during the Turn Over Ceremonies, 30 June 2008

Masinloc Coral Reef Demo Site Final Masinloc Coral Reef Demo Site Final EvaluationEvaluation 11

Final Evaluation Final Evaluation

MasinlocMasinloc Coral Reef Demonstration Coral Reef Demonstration SiteSite

Ms. Ms. AbbieAbbie C. Trinidad, MERF C. Trinidad, MERF ConsultantConsultant

11Masinloc Coral Reef Demo Site Final Masinloc Coral Reef Demo Site Final

EvaluationEvaluation

Healthy coral reefs

Enhanced adaptive co-management structures

Improved quality of life

Enhanced capacities

Fig. 1. A representation of the dynamics of outcomes of the MasinlocCoral Reef Demonstration Site

Outcome 3

Outcome 2

Outcome 1

Outcome 4

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 5 Annex E - Page 2



Measures of SuccessMeasures of Success

Accomplishment LevelAccomplishment LevelImpactsImpactsSustainabilitySustainability



Accomplishment Level Scoring Accomplishment Level Scoring ProtocolProtocol

2.5 Maximum points for every objective/outcome 2.5 Maximum points for every objective/outcome or total of 10 pointsor total of 10 pointsTotal points : Total points :

8.0 8.0 –– 10, HIGH accomplishment level10, HIGH accomplishment level5.5 5.5 –– 7.5, Moderate accomplishment level7.5, Moderate accomplishment levelBelow 7 points, Low accomplishment levelBelow 7 points, Low accomplishment level


Annex E - Page 3



Accomplishment LevelAccomplishment Level

Objective / Outcome 1 : MPA network, 2.5 pointsObjective / Outcome 1 : MPA network, 2.5 pointsObjective/ Outcome 2: Healthy coral reefs, 2.5 Objective/ Outcome 2: Healthy coral reefs, 2.5 pointspointsObjective/Outcome 3: Sustainable livelihoods, Objective/Outcome 3: Sustainable livelihoods, 1.5 points1.5 pointsObjective / Outcome 4 : IEC, 1.5 pointsObjective / Outcome 4 : IEC, 1.5 points

Accomplishment Rating : HIGH



Impact Level Scoring ProtocolImpact Level Scoring Protocol

Knowledge and attitudes related to coral Knowledge and attitudes related to coral reef/coastal managementreef/coastal management

Relevant knowledge (technical information, law enforcement, Relevant knowledge (technical information, law enforcement, connectivitiesconnectivities ))Change in attitude (exChange in attitude (ex--dynamite fishers, leadership potential)dynamite fishers, leadership potential)

GovernanceGovernancesystems, human resources, budgets, planssystems, human resources, budgets, plans

Improved quality of livesImproved quality of livesLong term, improved coral cover and fish catchLong term, improved coral cover and fish catchShort term, supplemental livelihoodShort term, supplemental livelihood

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 5 Annex E - Page 4



Impact AssessmentImpact AssessmentKnowledge and attitudes, micro : HIGHKnowledge and attitudes, micro : HIGHKnowledge and attitudes, Knowledge and attitudes, mesomeso/macro : Low to /macro : Low to MediumMediumGovernance, micro : HighGovernance, micro : HighGovernance, Governance, mesomeso/macro : Medium/macro : MediumImproved livelihoods, indirect : HighImproved livelihoods, indirect : HighImproved livelihoods, direct : Low to MediumImproved livelihoods, direct : Low to Medium

Impact Rating : Medium to HIGH



Sustainability Scoring ProtocolSustainability Scoring Protocol

Positive determinantsPositive determinantsCRM CodeCRM CodeEnvironmental FundEnvironmental FundMPA Council/ CRM Board / PAMBMPA Council/ CRM Board / PAMBPotential for “new” ProjectsPotential for “new” ProjectsPositive perceptions regarding MPA impacts Positive perceptions regarding MPA impacts are apparentare apparentEmpowered citizenryEmpowered citizenry


Annex E - Page 5



Negative determinantsNegative determinantsNot all stakeholders engaged (migrants, Not all stakeholders engaged (migrants, aquarium fishers, aquarium fishers, barangaybarangay officials, nonofficials, non--MPA MPA sites)sites)No roll over plan for CRM officeNo roll over plan for CRM officeFuture leadershipFuture leadership



Congratulations to all !Congratulations to all !


ANNEX 6

Draft Terminal Evaluation Report for the Phu Quoc Coral Reef and Seagrass Habitat Demonstration Site in Viet Nam

Final Evaluation Summary

1. INTRODUCTION The Phu Quoc Demonstration Site for Seagrass and Coral Reefs under the framework of the UNEP/GEF Project entitled “Reversing environmental degradation trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand” is managed and executed by the Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Kien Giang Province, Vietnam (Kien Giang DoNRE) in close collaboration with the Vietnam National Focal Point, VEPA and the Seagrass and Coral Reef National Focal points (Institute of Oceanography), and with the Cambodian partners. The demonstration project (demo project) will contribute to maintaining existing biodiversity (coral reefs, seagrass beds and endangered species) in the trans-boundary waters of the Phu Quoc islands and reduce the human causes of degradation (over fishing, endangered species catching, destructive fishing). As the executing agency, the Kien Giang DoNRE works with the following institutions: Institute of Oceanography (IO) in Nha Trang, Vietnam, Institute of Marine Environment and Resources (IMER) in Hai Phong, Vietnam, other NGOs for awareness and capacity building, and Kampot province of Cambodia. The carrying out of an independent evaluation of the demo project is from 11 to 30 June 2008. The contract to carry out this evaluation was awarded to Dr. Tran Dinh Lan as an evaluator. 2. FINDINGS 2.1 Component 1: Management and coordination National action was generally well conducted with the formal establishment of the PSC and PMB and MAG by the PPC of Kien Giang. Periodically meetings of these units were run mostly as scheduled. Documentation of the meetings was generally prepared to a high standard and was appropriate to the circumstances of the meeting and the status of the project at that time. PMB run well the project operations and fulfilled its functions and responsibilities as indicated in the Decision of the PPC of Kien Giang. Project management (Auditing, Monitoring and Evaluation) was generally done well. Management plan was following the procedure designed in the demo project, but delayed to timeframe. There were a number of sub-activities late carried out at the beginning of the demo project. Joint action included Joint meeting both PMB/MAG of Vietnam/Cambodia and Development of policy and cooperation framework for project area. These sub-activities have been completed but all too late done. 2.2 Component 2: Survey and Monitoring Survey on biodiversity and resources were well done generally as scheduled for all sub-activities with high standard outputs. Development of GIS database done by SEA START RC was changed in implementing institution with the IO instead of SEA START RC. The GIS database have been built and in use. Extra work was done for training two people from Kampot (Cambodia) on GIS database use and integration of both databases of Phu Quoc and Kampot into one system. However, it is not clear how the database is used for management purpose in Kien Giang province. 2.3 Component 3: Training and Education Development of training materials for public awareness was well done with training materials produced as designed in the demo project (poster, video film, and leaflet). Extra materials of articles published in newspapers and e-newspapers were produced. Seminars for awareness enhancement were well conducted and successful with broad participation and good material preparation. However, there was not any course evaluation by the participants. Study tours out side Vietnam were changed to Thailand (Koh Chang site) and combined two tours in one with more officials from Kien Giang visiting the site. Inside tours were as planned. The tours brought provincial officials good knowledge and experiences on how to manage an MPA related to coral reef and sea

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 6 Page 2 grass beds. Training professional skills was well conducted and successful for both officials and local community with suitable materials and professional lecturers. However participants’ skills were not indicated in demo project documents. 2.4 Component 4: Environment Management/ Improvement Meetings for familiarisation with the project, environmental impacts and regulations regarding on waste disposal from tourist facilities and importance of CR&SG habitats were implemented as scheduled. All issues of the project were introduced to the targeted groups. To this extent, the demo-site project successfully completed the task. However, no participants’ evaluation was done. Reforestation has been implemented by National Park of Phu Quoc during the demo site project. So far, there have been 20,003 ha forest cared of and planted in Phu Quoc. The activity has been completed as scheduled and well done. Training in environment management for crews, especially for fishing boat captains was largely participated by total 1,389 participants, including fishing boat captains from most areas of the province were trained on 10 subjects. All trainees passed the course and were received the certificates of the course. Printed poster (big size - 3 copies, small size - 600 copies), Leaflets (5000 copies), Guideline for sustainable uses of coral reef and seagrass bed (300 brochures), 100 CD containing all above training materials were produced. 2.5 Component 5: Sub Demo site Management plan of sub demo site for coral reef involving local stakeholders were well prepared and following the procedure designed in the demo project. Zoning plan was accepted and approved by provincial authority with the PPC decision No. 272. The demo site project set up at sub demo site with 01 logo buoy and 02 anchor buoys. 2000m2 of coral were in rehabilitation at a damaged reef at An Thoi Island. Management plan of sub demo site for seagrass beds involving local stakeholders was done similar to the sub demo site of coral reef and 5000m2 seagrass was in rehabilitation. However, regulations for seagrass zones were violated by some fishing boats with their destructive gears. 2.6 Component 6: Pilot activities for financial sustainability at sub-demo site Analysis of present use, value, net come and cost was limited done. The values of coral reef and sea grass beds were evaluated in the approach of direct use values and indirect use values at the site level. But the provincial level revenue and management costs were not clearly evaluated. Analysis of potential future use, value, net come and costs was very poor done. The analysis was made roughly. Only core issues were identified but not detail enough. The developed business plans were not mentioned. To this extent, the second issue of this activity was not completed. Identification of present threats and potential threats was done in time and the analysis on the alternative new use was made and some present and potential threats were identified in some parts of the document. However, the structure as well as the content of the report was not much met the aim of this activity. Establishment of financial management framework and Establishment of financial management mechanism were prepared by CERED. It is not clear that these issues were done. Also other documents indicated the sub-issues of these activities are not showed at the demo project files. Therefore, the two activities were not fully finished. The component is the weakness of the demo project. 2.7 Other activities unplanned in operational plan: the demo project in cooperation with other organizations such as WWF, Vietnam MoF, and SEAFDEC, DANIDA, NOAA, etc organised workshops, trainings on MPA, conservation of dugong dugon and sea turtle, etc. These contributed to raising officials and community awareness. In the first part of 2008 the demo project cooperated with the IO to set up two community-based management models for sub demo site of coral reef in Phu Quoc. The data and documents of the demo project were also used for establishment of the MPA of Phu Quoc that was approved in early part of 2008. 3. RECOMMENDATIONS This evaluation is made at the concluding stage of the demo project, therefore following recommendations would be for a new phase or project related to the site, for example Phu Quoc MPA.


Management & operational plan • There have been delays and slippage in a significant number of activities within the Operational

Plan at the beginning stage of the demo project due to late agreement (MOU signing) between donors and executing agencies. We therefore recommend that the Operational Plan should be revised after the agreement made then the PMB and SEAs could complete their tasks at higher quality due to not facing with timeframe pressure.

• Experience so far indicates that it is difficult to get officials and stakeholders to travel to events in other countries. It therefore seems most unlikely that stakeholders (outside Phu Quoc district) from coastal province of Vietnam will attend the final conference in Phu Quoc. It is therefore recommended that a final conference of the demo project should be organised to disseminate the results of the final conference as widely as possible to relevant stakeholders in Vietnam.

Information and Communication • It is clear that there has not been smooth in communication between PMB and other partners

(SEAs for example), particularly remote partners due to lack of a communication network set up. It is strongly recommended that a website and email system should be employed to fast and conveniently communicate between PMB and partners and among them.

• Communication within training courses, workshops, meeting and conferences was done well in terms of lecturers to trainees. However, there have not any official responses from the trainees to lecturers and the organizers. Therefore, it is strongly recommended that evaluations for each event should be completed by trainees, so that lecturers and the organizer could improve their works.

Sustainability • Phu Quoc MPA has been established as the good follow-up action of the demo project. This

secures the sustainability of the demo site in legal, institutional and researching issues as well as part of finance from the government. However, alternative income generation for local people (fishermen) and the establishment of sustainable finance (framework, mechanism) with funding non-governmental sources (private sectors, business...) for maintaining the site have not been clearly created. It is very urgent in Phu Quoc MPA that sustainable financial mechanism and framework would be established and alternative income generation for fishermen would be identified and put in place.


THE PHU QUOC DEMONSTRATION SITE OF THE UNEP GEF Project entitled: “Reversing Environment Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand”

Final Evaluation Report

1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 The Phu Quoc Demonstration Site The Phu Quoc Demonstration Site for Seagrass and Coral Reefs under the framework of the UNEP/GEF Project entitled “Reversing environmental degradation trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand” is managed and executed by the Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Kien Giang Province, Vietnam (Kien Giang DoNRE) in close collaboration with the Vietnam National Focal Point, VEPA and the Seagrass and Coral Reef National Focal points (Institute of Oceanography), and with the Cambodian partners. The demonstration project (demo project) will contribute to maintaining existing biodiversity (coral reefs, seagrass beds and endangered species) in the trans-boundary waters of the Phu Quoc islands and reduce the human causes of degradation (over fishing, endangered species catching, destructive fishing). The demonstration project immediate objectives are to:

- develop and establish a coordinating mechanism among provincial sectors and between Viet Nam and Cambodia in management of coral reefs and seagrass beds in the coastal waters of Kien Giang.

- execute studies and monitoring activities in order to collect data and information for planning and management purposes.

- enhance public awareness and to improve management capacity for policy makers, managers and local communities in resource conservation and environment protection.

- improve environment management in the islands (reforestation, waste management) to minimize negative impacts on coastal ecosystems.

- have some important sub-sites managed as pilots in favourable ways with involvement of park authorities, local fishermen, tourist sector operators and others as appropriate.

- execute pilot activities in financial sustainability at 2 sub-demo sites. To achieve these objectives, a Project Steering Committee (PSC) has been established under the leadership of the PPC and supported by a Management Advisory Group (MAG) with participation of experts on legal, economic, ecology, tourism and related fields. The Project Management Board (PMB) includes leaders and staff of DonRE and the Site Manager. As the executing agency, the Kien Giang DoNRE works with the following institutions: Institute of Oceanography (IO) in Nha Trang, Vietnam as the Specialized Executing Agency (SEA) for sub-demo site of coral, Institute of Marine Environment and Resources (IMER) in Hai Phong, Vietnam as the Specialized Executing Agency for sub-demo site of seagrass, other NGOs for awareness and capacity building, Kampot province of Cambodia as developing co-ordinating mechanism for of the two countries’ border provinces. The project started in April 2005 and was expected to be completed by December 2007 and is extended till 30 June 2008. It comprises six components: Management & Coordination, Survey and Monitoring, Training and Education, Environment Management/ Improvement, Sub Demo site, and Pilot activities for financial sustainability at sub-demo site. The carrying out of an independent evaluation of the demo project is an important component of the agreed work programme and from 11 to 30 June 2008. The contract to carry out this evaluation was awarded to Dr. Tran Dinh Lan as an evaluator. 1.2 Purpose of the Evaluation The purpose of the evaluation is to evaluate the extent to which the stated objectives and outcomes have been achieved; the overall performance of the demonstration site project; and determine the likelihood that the objectives will be sustainable following implementation of the activities.


1.3 Approach & Contents In order to do this, the evaluation consultant: • Collected and analysed all relevant demo project documents • Undertook a field visit in order to hold meetings with all demo project partners and other relevant

stakeholders • Provided a draft evaluation report and a final evaluation report detailing the findings and

recommendations • Met with the Project Management Board Director to present and discuss the evaluation results,

based on the draft evaluation report. The visits by Dr Tran Dinh Lan to demo project site and relevant agencies in Vietnam was carried out during the period 20 to 28 June 2008 (Annex 1). Following the visits, this evaluation report was prepared: • Evaluation of Progress with Operational Programme by Components presents my overall

evaluation of the activities carried out within the project implemented programme, based primarily on project documentation, on meetings with key project personnel at Kien Giang DoNRE, SEAs (IO and IMER) and some other stakeholders. The evaluation is also following the TOR attached to the contract between the demo site project and the evaluator, signed on 11 June 2008.

• Conclusions from Evaluation present the key conclusions from the preceding sections, focusing particularly on the efficiency, effectiveness and management of project implementation and on the achievement of results in terms of impact and sustainability;

• Recommendations present the recommendations for the PMB and SEAs, together with the lessons learned, focusing particularly on changes that might usefully be made for the upcoming projects to be carried out at the site.

The evaluation is supported by a number of Annexes, including the visits to demo project site and relevant agencies in Vietnam (annex 1) a list of meetings held/persons consulted (Annex 2), more detailed activity rating (Annex 3) and a list of documents (and other sources) consulted (Annex 4).

2. EVALUATION OF PROGRESS WITH IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMME BY COMPONENTS Signing MOU was done by UNEP, Kiengiang DoNRE and VEPA on 26 July, 2005 2.1 Component 1: Management and coordination The component comprises two separate activities (tasks) which have been evaluated separately: National action, Joint action. National action: This activity includes ten sub-activities and is evaluated as follows. Formal establishment of the PMB by the PPC and annual meetings of PSC: PSC and PMB were scheduled to be established in the second quarter of 2005. These actions were done as scheduled by the Kien Giang PPC with The Decision No. 2767/QD-UB and No. 1906/QD-UBND for PMB (six Kien Giang provincial officials) and The Decision No. 2768/QD-UB and No. 1907/QD-UBND for PSC (21 Kien Giang provincial officials, two scientists from IO (coral sub-site) and one from IMER (seagrass sub-site). Functions and responsibilities of the two bodies were indicated in these documents. The PSC conducted 4 meeting during the project, each every year except for the first meeting at the beginning of the project (2005). Documentation of the meetings was generally prepared to a high standard and was appropriate to the circumstances of the meeting and the status of the project at that time and containing inputs for six month reports to the UNEP GEF Project. Operation of PMB: PMB conducted one meeting every quarter during the project. Except for the first meetings of the body dealt with task assignment for each members of the body, all other meetings were to focus on reviewing activities and preparing a work plan for the next quarter, with minutes feeding into the technical & financial issues. The documentation of the meetings was generally

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 6 Page 6 prepared to a high standard and was appropriate to the circumstances of the meeting and the status of the project at that time. Apart from management meeting of the body, PMB in cooperation with other agencies of Vietnam and Cambodia conducted and coordinated other meetings, workshops and conferences designed in the project, and run the project operations. PMB also under project established mechanisms in effective ways to work with other partners such as central and provincial agencies and SEAs (IO and IMER) through contracting of works for tasks of each component. All activities of each component of the demo-site project were detailed by PMB into tasks then assigned professional institutions to implement through contracts signed by both sides. These flexible mechanisms ensured the fulfilment of all tasks in provision of operational plan. However, it seems that some activities were not done in time. It is not clear if PMB set up a mechanism in monitoring on a day to day basic, progress in project execution although each member of PMB was assigned specific tasks at every regular meeting (every three months). As reported at the meeting between PMB and the evaluator on 23 June 2008, all members of PMB kept orally communicating and being responsible to orally report to the director of PMB. PMB fulfilled its functions and responsibilities as indicated in the Decision of the PPC of Kien Giang. Formation of the MAG and annual meetings of MAG: MAG was scheduled to be formed and had first meeting in 3rd of 2005 and would have each meeting every following year. However this body was formed with 15 members from relevant agencies, including most of Kien Giang provincial departments, Sai Gon-Phu Quoc Resort (tourist company) and scientists from SEAs, and had the first meeting in April 2006 and the second meeting in 2007. MAG members were consulted and gave their valuable contributions to the management of the demo site through MAG meetings and sometime via emails. The limitation of this sub-activity is that MAG was delayed in formation. Therefore, PMB and PSC could not consult MAG members for the first year of the project (2005). Maintenance of the project office: the project office was set up at the beginning of the project and equipped with basic equipment (tables, chairs, computers...) within Kien Giang DoNRE. Although there were not any reports on the maintenance of the office, except for the indicating in financial reports, the office was in good condition for the project and run well by PMB. Project management (Auditing, Monitoring and Evaluation): this task was scheduled in 1st and 3rd quarters of 2006 and 1st and 4th quarters of 2007, and included auditing, midterm review, Evaluation the Progress by Management Board and Evaluation in the end of project. At PMB meetings and MAG meetings, the site manager reported the progress of the project and highlight critical matters. Total 5 of six-month reports and a midterm review was done by PMB. These reports provided the status of the project at reported stages and followed UNEP format. However, some reports were late completed. The demo site project did not meet administrative requirement. This was because of the site manager inexperience as explained at the midterm report. There were a number of workshops, training courses held within the framework of the project. However, there are no documents indicating the evaluation of stakeholders on these events to show their perception of the project benefits. The demo site project should do the evaluation for each event as part of its program. Auditing was scheduled for 3 times at 1st quarter of each calendar year. However, there were two of auditing done for each project stage. This was approved by the PCU. The first auditing made by Auditing and Accounting Financial consultancy Service Company (AASC) was done for the project stage from April 2005 to June 2006 and the second one made by the same company (AASC) was for July 2006 to December 2007. The extension stage of the project from January 2008 to June 2008 is not made yet and would be carried out one month after finished the stage. Both auditing reports indicate the demo site project have been in compliance with the Financial Agreement and Memorandum of Understanding signed between UNEP and VEPA and Kien Giang DoNRE dated 26 July 2005, in accordance with Vietnamese accounting Standards and System and comply with relevant statutory requirements. For this auditing aspect, the project was in good management. Development of draft management plan: this was scheduled in the 2nd and 3rd quarters of 2006 and was made by the IO for the period till 2015 for the whole province of Kien Giang.


Review of draft of management plan by local/district stakeholders: this was scheduled in 4th quarter of 2006 and 1st of 2007 and was implemented by the demo site project Revision of draft and submission to the PMB for review and approval: this was scheduled in 4th quarter of 2006 and 1st of 2007 and done by the IO. However, the revised plan was not submitted to the PMB on time. This was delayed until December 2007. The management plan is containing the status of the ecosystems coral reefs and seagrass beds in Kien Giang Province, related environmental and legal issues. Six programmes and 13 projects that covered most areas of management and were for management implementation were also proposed in the plan. PMB reviewed and approved the plan. Formal approval of the management plan at the Provincial level: the formal approval at provincial level was scheduled at the same period as PMB the revision and approval. However, due to late submission, the approval is not made and would be done in the official meeting at provincial level in 10 July 2008 as reported by PMB at the meeting in 23 June 2008 between the evaluator with PMB. Publication of maps, guideline, and management plan: this sub-activity was scheduled to be done in the 2nd quarter of 2007. Maps of zoning for coral and seagrass management (100 copies) and maps of coral reef and seagrass bed (3 copies each) in Phu Quoc were already published. But the management plan is not published because it has not yet been approved at provincial level and scheduled to be published after the official meeting for approval in July. This is not as the first scheduled but the modified schedule was already approved by PCU as reported by PMB. Guidelines for the sustainable uses, fisheries promotion and awareness raising on coral reefs and seagrass beds in forms of leaflet and poster were published. Joint action: There are two sub-activities, including: Joint meeting both PMB/MAG of Vietnam/Cambodia and Development of policy and cooperation framework for project area. Joint meeting both PMB/MAG of Vietnam/Cambodia: Four meetings were scheduled in 3rd quarter of 2005, 2nd quarter of 2006, 1st and 4th quarters of 2007. However, only three meetings were held (two in Kien Giang and one in Kampot) and all were delayed to schedule. Updated results of the projects implemented by the two sides were reported and then plans for assistants from Vietnam to Cambodia dealing with coral reef and seagrass surveys and monitoring, and GIS trainings were done then implemented. Joint meetings were not held as scheduled. Development of policy and cooperation framework for project area: this was scheduled in the third quarter 2007. The effort from the Phu Quoc demo site project was made in preliminary step for preparing draft documents that were discussed at the second joint meeting related to policy and framework for cooperation in ecosystem and resource management in waters of Kien Giang (Vietnam) and Kampot (Cambodia). However, official documents have not yet been approved by the two sides so far (30 June 2008). The documents would be agreed and approved by the two sides in July 2008 as informed by PMB of the demo site project. 2.2 Component 2: Survey and Monitoring Survey on biodiversity and resources: The activity is divided into 7 sub-activities and evaluated specifically as follows. Surveys on biodiversity and resources of coral reef: These were scheduled in 3rd and 4th quarters of 2005 and 2nd and 3rd quarters of 2006 and implemented by Institute of Oceanography (IO), Nha Trang, Vietnam. Total 3 surveys were completed as scheduled and a report of high quality (data, figures, photos, interpretation...) was produced and reviewed by an outstanding expert. Surveys on biodiversity and resources of sea grass: These were scheduled in 3rd and 4th quarters of 2005 and 2nd and 3rd quarters of 2006 like coral reef surveys and implemented by Institute of Marine Environment and Resources, Hai Phong, Vietnam. Total 3 surveys were completed as scheduled and a report of high quality (data, figures, photos, interpretation...) was produced and reviewed by an outstanding expert.

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 6 Page 8 Surveys on resources used and market-based economic values - entire area: these were scheduled in 3rd and 4th quarters of 2005 and 2nd and 3rd quarters of 2006 and implemented by Centre for Environment Research Education and Development, Vietnam. Total 2 surveys were completed as scheduled and 2 thematic reports were produced and reviewed by an expert from Ha Noi Economic University. These reports met requirements for being basics for management. Establishing monitoring methodology for coral reef environmental state: this was done by the IO which is one of SEAs. The methodology was established for specific area of Phu Quoc based on popular methods applied over the world. Materialized methodology was a document on the establishment of monitoring methods for coral reef environment state which was submitted to PMB and approved. The documents and their contents are in good quality. Establishing monitoring methodology for seagrass bed environmental state: this was done by the IMER which is one of SEAs. The methodology was established for specific area of Phu Quoc based on methods applied over the world. Materialized methodology was a document on the establishment of monitoring methods for sea grass bed environment state which was submitted to PMB and approved. The documents and their contents are in good quality. Annual monitoring activities of coral reef sub-demo site: these were scheduled in 3rd quarters during implementing the demo site project and implemented mainly by the IO. Total 3 of monitoring with monitoring sites fixed were carried out but not as the first schedule in the document attached the MOA. However, the change in schedule was approved by the PCU as reported by PMB. Data and documents of annual monitoring of coral reef sub-demo site are systematic and managerial. Annual monitoring activities of seagrass sub-demo site: these were scheduled in 3rd quarters during implementing the demo site project and implemented mainly by the IM ER in May 2006, June 2007 and December 2007. Total 3 of monitoring with monitoring sites fixed were carried out but not as the first schedule in the document attached the MOA. However, the change in schedule was approved by the PCU as reported by PMB. Data and documents of annual monitoring of seagrass bed sub-demo site are systematic and managerial. Development of GIS database done by SEA START RC: The activity consisted of 6 sub-activities, including CR&SGFPs send existing data to SEA START RC,SEA START RC prepares draft site map, Standardization of the map, coding, layers, colour, Satellite interpretation by SEA START RC, Ground truthing by site manager and SEAs and Expansion GIS database for management purpose. The activity was scheduled in 4th quarter of 2005 and first 3 quarters of 2006. However, there were changed in sub-activities. SEA START RC was not involved in this activity and the IO that has good expertise of GIS, took over the task based on the contract between the demo site project with the IO. The GIS database with datum contribution extracted from satellite image was finished and transferred to PMB. Integration of the database developed for Phu Quoc demo-site (Vietnam) and the one for Kampot site (Cambodia) was made at the workshop for this purpose held in Rach Gia by both sides on 23-24 June 2008. There were two people from Kampot province (Cambodia) trained on GIS by the demo site project. However, it is not clear how the database is used for management purpose in Kien Giang province. 2.3 Component 3: Training and Education Development of training materials for public awareness: This activity consisted of three sub-activities, including Poster 100 copies, Video film (1 original and 100 copies) and leaflets 1000 copies. All sub-activities were completed and well delivered. Products (poster, video film, and leaflet) met the requirements of the task. Also, these materials have contributed much to local actions to reduce threats to coral reef and seagrass as responded from local people through interviewing them on 23 June 2008 by the evaluator. Apart from these materials many publications and articles related to the demo site project produced by the members of PMB (mostly by Site Manager) were published in provincial and national newspapers as well as electronic ones (internet) to contribute to the public awareness raising. Seminars for awareness enhancement: This activity included two sub-activities and is evaluated below.


Biodiversity & sustainable development for Policy makers: this was done in June 2006 with 20 participants from most provincial departments of Kien Giang and PMB members in Phu Quoc for two days. The lecturers and the contents and materials met the purpose of the seminar. However, there was not any course evaluation by the participants. Therefore, participant opinions were not indicated. Biodiversity and sustainable use for managers at the district level: this sub-activity was completed in Phu Quoc in June 2006 for two days with 50 participants who were officials from all offices, agencies, communes, public media, etc. of Phu Quoc district, Kien Giang province. The lecturers and the contents and materials met the purpose of the seminar. However, there was not any course evaluation by the participants. Therefore, participant thinking were not indicated. Study tours: Two study tours were planned to other countries, such as the Philippines (Apo) for coral reef and Indonesia (Trikora) for seagrass in 2006. However, as agreed between PCU and demo site project, only one tour with 18 officials from Kien Giang to Koh Chang site of Thailand was conducted. Other study tours to Hon Mun and Con Dao National Park were scheduled in 2006 and done in time with a visit of 13 officials from Kien Giang to Hon Mun in September 2006. Despite of some changes in the plan of study tours, the visiting of Kien Giang participants to those sites has brought officials of Kien Giang good knowledge and experiences on how to manage an MPA related to coral reef and sea grass beds. However, there were no study tour reports written. It is recommended that after each study tour, a report should be produced. It is noted that during project implementation, there were several visits to the demo site of Phu Quoc for study and awareness enhancement, including delegations from Kampot (Cambodia), Koh Chang (Thailand), students and pupils. Training professional skills:This activity includes three sub-activities to be evaluated as follows. Training on management project and professional skill for CR and SG: this sub-activity was scheduled in 2005. However, it was done in early period of 2006 with 8 participants from sub-demo site community and lectures provided by experts from VEPA. Training contents were suitable for the trainees. However, the participant selection procedure was not indicated in any documents of the demo site project and no participants’ evaluation was made. Training on English Foreign Language: this was done in 2006 despite it should be conducted in 2005 to meet timescale. There were 19 trainees from various agencies of Kien Giang province were provided English classes for six months with two level skills (A – basic and B – improved). The lecturers were from Kiengiang Center for Foreign Language and Informatics. There was not any document dealt with the final tests of the course. As such, English skills of trainees were not indicated. Financial management training for sub-demo site community: this sub-activity was scheduled to do in 2005. However, in 2006 the training was conducted for two times, with 20 participants from sub-demo site community and lectures provided by CERED and Economics University of Ho Chi Minh City. Training contents were suitable for the trainees. However, no participants’ evaluation was made. 2.4 Component 4: Environment Management/ Improvement Meetings for familiarisation with the project, environmental impacts and regulations regarding on waste disposal from tourist facilities and importance of CR&SG habitats: This activity included two sub-activities, such as Meetings for provincial authorities and private sectors for familiarisation with the project,…; and Meetings for districtial authorities and fishermen for enhancement of environment protection…, In fact, the demo-site project did not conducted those meeting as planned for sub-activities. The meetings were conducted at one side for officials at provincial and districtial authorities as well as private sectors, and at other side for local people. There were total 8 meetings for 266 officials from provincial and districtial authorities and local people from private sectors conducted in second part of 2005 and 2006 as scheduled. Not only fishermen group, but also other special groups such as pupils, youth and women were targeted with meetings for 111 people and one field trip for 48 people to demo-site. Most local people in Phu Quoc district and many people in Kien Giang province are familiar with and acknowledged the project with its general

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 6 Page 10 aspects. All issues of the project were introduced to the targeted groups. To this extent, the demo-site project successfully completed the task. However, no participants’ evaluation was done. Reforestation: Reforestation has been implemented by National Park of Phu Quoc during the demo site project. So far, there have been 20,003 ha forest cared of and planted in Phu Quoc. The activity has been completed as scheduled and well done. Training in environment management for crews, especially for fishing boat captains: the activity was planned with two sub-activities to be evaluated as followed. Training for crews, especially for fishing boat captains on the environment regulation and laws of central/local governments and fishermen's duties and responsibilities: the sub-activity was scheduled each training every project year. However, the trainings were conducted in early part of 2007 from January to June and including 6 stages with each of three week duration. Total 1,389 participants, including fishing boat captains from most areas of the province were trained on 10 subjects varying from legal issues to marine physical condition, maritime security as well as fisheries exploitation and protection of resources. Course materials were provided to trainees. Lecturers were from appropriate university and agency (Nha Trang University of Fishery, Kien Giang Fisheries Labor Union and Fisheries Resource Protection Sub-Department). All trainees passed the course and were received the certificates of the course. Printing leaflets, poster, brochures, handbooks: this sub-activity was done with printed poster (big size - 3 copies, small size - 600 copies), Leaflets (5000 copies), Guideline for sustainable uses of coral reef and seagrass bed (300 brochures), 100 CD containing all above training materials. 2.5 Component 5: Sub Demo site Management plan of sub demo site for coral reef involving local stakeholders: This activity include nine sub-activities to be evaluated as follows. Management plan of sub demo site for coral reef involving local community, stakeholders: this sub-activity should be carried out in the first part of 2006 as scheduled. Management plan of sub-demo site was prepared by the IO and contributed by stakeholders though stakeholder meetings. This procedure ensured the consensus of local community and stakeholders. Therefore, the implementation of management plan was feasible. Coral reef biophysical surveys in detail for zoning and regulation preparation: This sub-activity was implemented by the IO in the first part of 2006 despite it was scheduled in 2005 and the first part of 2006 in the operational program. The results of surveys for zoning of high quality were reported to PMB and PSC. Also, the IO prepared regulation for the sub demo-site and submitted to PMB and PSC. Discussion review and agreement of zoning plan by stakeholders: a zoning plan for the sub demo-site prepared by the IO and PMB was discussed and reviewed by stakeholders at a meeting held in Phu Quoc. Participants from various sectors and local community attended the meeting. Stakeholder comments were documented then taken into the process of revision of the zoning plan. This makes the plan feasible. The demo-site project has done this sub-activity well. Approval of zoning plan by the appropriate authorities: the revised zoning plan after stakeholder meeting was submitted to the Provincial People’s Committee (PPC) of Kien Giang and got approved on 9 February 2007 with the Decision No. 272. Zoning/demarcation (buoy setting): this sub-activity was completed after the PPC decision No. 272. The demo site project set up at sub demo site with 01 logo buoy and 02 anchor buoys. Participatory preparation of regulations regarding agreed uses within coral reef zones: the sub-activity was also done based on the outcomes of the above sub-activities. Regulations were in participatory preparation regarding agreed uses within coral reef zones. This preparation was completed after several community meetings held in Phu Quoc.


Enforcement & surveillance with involvement of local community (patrol, allowance, boat,…): The demo-site project had a ccontract with Phu Quoc Border Forces and also set up special team combined with local community (team members from functional agencies as Border Forces and from local communities) to patrol and protect the sub demo-site. The demo site project equipped the sub demo-site 01 composite boat with Mitsubishi engine. The team and boat with engine are in good operation. This is a good arrangement for community - based management of the sub demo site. Guideline for sustainable uses (fishing, tourism), fisheries promotion and awareness raising: this sub-activity was done in combination with other activities related to production of guidelines for the whole demo site. The guidelines were in form of brochure and booklet. These initiatives of the demo site project are appropriate to the social environment of the site, ensuring the easy use of the guidelines and also raising community awareness. Another promotion was taken into the demo site was the establishment and management of the pilot project about fisheries refugia. Rehabilitation trial of coral reefs at a damaged reef at An Thoi island: this sub-activity was scheduled for the whole duration of the demo-site project and allocated to the IO as one of SEAs to do the task; 2000m2 of coral were in rehabilitation at a damaged reef at An Thoi Island. Results from monitoring at rehabilitated site show the high rate of living coral. The sub-activity was done well. Management plan of sub demo site for seagrass beds involving local stakeholders: This activity includes nine sub-activities to be evaluated as follows. Management plan of sub demo site for seagrass beds involving local community, stakeholders: this sub-activity should be carried out in the first part of 2006 as scheduled. Management plan of sub-demo site was prepared by the IMER and contributed by stakeholders though stakeholder meetings. This procedure ensured the consensus of local community and stakeholders. Therefore, the implementation of management plan was feasible. Seagrass biophysical surveys in detail for zoning & regulation preparation: this sub-activity was implemented by the IMER in the first part of 2006 despite it was scheduled in 2005 and the first part of 2006 in the operational program. The results of surveys for zoning of high quality were reported to PMB and PSC. Also, the IMER prepared regulation for the sub demo-site and submitted to PMB and PSC. Discussion review and agreement of zoning plan by stakeholders: a zoning plan for the sub demo-site prepared by the IMER and PMB was discussed and reviewed by stakeholders at a meeting held in Phu Quoc. Participants from various sectors and local community attended the meeting. Stakeholder comments were documented then taken into the process of revision of the zoning plan. This makes the plan feasible. The demo-site project has done this sub-activity well. Approval of zoning plan by the appropriate authorities: the revised zoning plan after stakeholder meeting was submitted to the Provincial People’s Committee (PPC) of Kien Giang and got approved on 9 February 2007 with the Decision No. 272 (the same decision of coral reef zoning plan). Zoning/demarcation (buoy setting): this sub-activity was completed after the PPC decision No. 272. The demo site project set up at sub demo site with 01 logo buoy and 02 anchor buoys. Participatory preparation of regulations regarding agreed uses within seagrass zones: the sub-activity was also done based on the outcomes of the above sub-activities. Regulations were in participatory preparation regarding agreed uses within coral reef zones. This preparation was completed after several community meetings held in Phu Quoc. Enforcement & surveillance with involvement of local community (patrol, allowance, boat,…): The demo-site project had a ccontract with Phu Quoc Border Forces and also set up special team combined with local community (team members from functional agencies as Border Forces and from local communities) to patrol and protect the sub demo-site. The demo site project equipped the sub demo-site 01 composite boat with Mitsubishi engine. The team and boat with engine are in good operation. This is a good arrangement for community - based management of the sub demo site. However, there have been some violations of fishing boats using destructive fishing gears in zones of the sub demo-site.

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 6 Page 12 Guideline for sustainable uses (fishing, tourism), fisheries promotion and awareness raising: this sub-activity was done in combination with other activities related to production of guidelines for the whole demo site. The guidelines were in form of brochure and booklet. These initiatives of the demo site project are appropriate to the social environment of the site, ensuring the easy use of the guidelines and also raising community awareness. Another promotion was taken into the demo site was the establishment and management of the pilot project about fisheries refugia. Rehabilitation trial of seagrass at a damaged area (1000 m2) in Ham Ninh: this sub-activity was scheduled for the whole duration of the demo-site project and implemented by the IMER as one of SEAs, 5000 m2 of seagrass were in rehabilitation at a damaged area in Ham Ninh. Although the results from monitoring at rehabilitated sites show the fare rate of living seagrass, the rehabilitation trial of seagrass was done well. 2.6 Component 6: Pilot activities for financial sustainability at sub-demo site Analysis of present use, value, net come and costs: This activity was planned to include 3 issues, such as Site level social-economic evaluation including net sales value and costs of production, provincial level net income existing revenue (resource and other taxes), and management costs (government agencies costs). The activity was carried out by CERED on schedule. The results of the activity was a survey report on resource use and economics valued entire area of coral reefs and seagrass beds, and a thematic report on analysis of present use, value, income and costs of coral reef and sea grass beds in Phu Quoc. With these two reports, the values of coral reef and sea grass beds were evaluated in the approach of direct use values and indirect use values. For this aspect, the site level evaluation was made. But the provincial level revenue and management costs were not clearly evaluated. Analysis of potential future use, value, net come and costs: this activity includes two issues as identification of alternative products/uses/livelihood possibilities and development of appropriate business plans for new product/uses. CERED carried out this activity for the demo project as scheduled. The analysis was made in part of the same thematic report on analysis of present use, value, income and costs of coral reef and seagrass beds in Phu Quoc. Core issues were identified but not detail enough. The developed business plans were not mentioned in the document. To this extent, the second issue of this activity was not completed. Identification of present threats and potential threats: this activity was done in time by CERED and the output was a thematic report on this issue. The analysis on the alternative new use was made and some present and potential threats were identified in some parts of the document. However, the structure as well as the content of the report was not much met the aim of this activity. Therefore, the report was at low standard. Establishment of financial management framework and Establishment of financial management mechanism: these two activities were prepared by CERED in form of document based on the contract signed between the demo project and CERED. These issues were included in the thematic report on Identification of present threats and potential threats and Establishment of financial management framework and Establishment of financial management mechanism. However, it is not clear that these issues were compiled in the report. Also other documents indicated the sub-issues of these activities are not showed at the demo project files. Therefore, the two activities were not fully finished. 2.7 Other activities unplanned in operational plan Apart from the activities designed in project components, the demo project in cooperation with other organizations such as WWF, Vietnam MoF, and SEAFDEC, DANIDA, NOAA, etc organised workshops, trainings on MPA, conservation of dugong dugon and sea turtle, etc. These contributed to raising officials and community awareness. In the first part of 2008 the demo project cooperated with the IO to set up two community-based management models for sub demo site of coral reef in Phu Quoc. The data and documents of the demo project were also used for establishment of the MPA of Phu Quoc that was approved in early part of 2008.


3. CONCLUSIONS FROM EVALUATION 3.1 Project Implementation: Effectiveness The project to date has generally been effective and achieved good results at the outcome and output level. The effectiveness of each activity in terms of output, outcome and timing is summarised in Table 1 below. Outputs are physical outputs such as documents, with a score of 1 implying that all outputs were produced and are of the highest quality. Outcome is the wider measure of immediate achievement from the activity, with 1 indicating full achievement relative to the requirements identified in the MoU following evaluation indicators (1 = 90-100%; 2 = 70-90%; 3 = 50-70%; 4 = 40-50%; 5 = <40%). Timing relates to the completion of activity, a score of 0 signifying ‘on time’,-3 ‘very late’ and +3 ‘very early).

Table 1 Effectiveness of Individual Activities.

Activities Output (1-5)

Outcome (1-5)

Timing (-3 to +3)

1.1 National Action 1 1.4 -0.9 1.2 Joint Action 1.5 1.5 -2.5 2.1 Surveys on biodiversity and resources 1.3 1.3 -0.9 2.2 Development of GIS database done by SEA START RC 2 2 -2 3.1 Development of training materials for public awareness 1 2 0 3.2 Seminars for awareness enhancement 1 2 -2 3.3 Study tours 2 3 -2 3.4 Training professional skills 1.3 2.3 -1 4.1 Meetings for familiarisation with the project, environmental

impacts and regulations regarding on waste disposal from tourist facilities and importance of CR&SG habitats 1 1 0

4.2 Reforestation 4.3 Training in environment management for crews, especially

for fishing boat captains 1 1 0 5.1 Management plan of sub demo site for CR involving local

stakeholders 1 1.3 -1 5.2 Management plan of sub demo site for seagrass beds

involving local stakeholders 1 1.3 -0.9 6.1 Analysis of present uses, value, net come and costs 3.3 4 0 6.2 Analysis of potential future uses, value, net come and costs 4 4.5 0 6.3 Identification of present threats and potential threats 3 4 0 6.4 Establishment of financial management frameworks 4.5 5 0 6.5 Establishment of financial management mechanisms 5 5 0 Although the ratings in the table are partly subjective, they nevertheless provide a number of relevant insights: • A number of activities carried out secured good outputs and outcomes but were completed late

although the late was reported to PCU and approved. • The final activities of component 6 (Identification of present threats and potential threats;

Establishment of financial management framework and Establishment of financial management mechanism) has so far been disappointing in that they failed to well conduct and implement at demo site.

• In general outputs (concrete deliverables) were rated higher than outcomes, mainly because activities did not always reach their intended audiences.

• Adjustments of some activities such as Development of GIS database done by IO instead of SEA START RC and Study tour outside of Vietnam (to Thailand (Koh Chang site) instead of the Philippines and Indonesia) have still met the aims of these activity.

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 6 Page 14 3.2 Project Implementation: Efficiency

With time input, it was impossible to judge project implementation interms of efficiency (i.e. comparing inputs with outputs) because the inputs to individual activities were not known and the timesheets across the project used did not differentiate between different activities. However, with financial input of the approved budget that was broken down by activity, it was shown that to 30 December 2007, the budget used for each activity was efficient except for two activities of Development of GIS database (2.2) done by IO that covered only 38.44% to allocated fund and Pilot activities for financial sustainability at the sub-demo site (6) that covered 42.26% to allocated fund. This evaluation of efficiency is also supported by the auditing reports made for the stages to December 2007.

3.3 Project Implementation: Management

It is clear that PSC with PMB has in general provided strong and effective management for the project. This is reflected both in the terms of contracts signed with partners (SEAs and others), and in the records of PSC and PMB meetings and other project documents. A weakness was the communication between PMB and SEAs and English skill of PMB in making reports. Those weaknesses created some delays in terms of administration.

While the SEA partners dealt with ecological research in coral reef and seagrass beds (IO and IMER) have demonstrated a strong commitment to the project with their good expertise to well complete assigned tasks (activities), the CERED partner has shown its inappropriate expertise in doing assigned aspects related to financial sustainability at demo site.

3.4 Project Results: Impacts

The expected results of the project reflect the framework provided by the 6 components:

Management and coordination (component 1) have largely been achieved in relation to national action and joint action with Cambodia. Although there have been some delays in meeting organization and reporting. The institutional arrangement has been well done with the establishment of PSC, PMB and other organizations to support the management and coordination of the demo project. This organizational structure has been suitable for implementing the demo project. Beside PSC and PMB have supported the PPC of Kien Giang to quickly solve other relevant activities within the province.

Survey and Monitoring (component 2) have been successful. All activities with their outputs and outcomes have been to high standard, using for governmental officials and public raising awareness and for establishing an MPA of Phu Quoc. The limitation is that GIS database is still not in wild use for management purpose.

Training and Education (component 3) have been greatly successful. The training courses with a great number of participants and training materials related to demo- site and sub-demo sites have been provided to not only government provincial officials but also most local people in Phu Quoc district. Study tours inside and outside (Thailand) of Vietnam have brought governmental officials knowledge and understandings on how to use scientific and technical instruments for management of a conservation site. Most people in Phu Quoc and many people in Kien Giang acknowledge and appreciated the demo project activities. Also, the catching of Dugong dugon and sea turtle in Phu Quoc marine area has been stopped. However, the tour for a seagrass site in Indonesia as planned was not conducted then has limited the officials’ understanding.

Environment Management/ Improvement (component 4) have largely been achieved to date. It has proved to engage important groups of officials at provincial and districtial levels and a large number of stakeholders such as fishermen (crews and captains) to participate into environment management/improvement programs and to manage their own facilities for environmental protection in coastal and marine areas of the province.

Sub Demo site (component 5) has been greatly achieved. All outputs at high standard of the activities of this component have been contributed to or used for public awareness raising through meetings, conferences not only within the demo project but also in other events on environmental protection and natural resources conservation. The outcomes of these activities have been also acknowledged by officials of the central government of Vietnam (VEPAand MONRE, MOF...) and ones of the provincial authority of Kien Giang. This is indicated by the approval of a MPA of Phu Quoc having been made in the first part of 2008. However, there was only weakness related to the enforcement of regulations at


sub demo-sites. There have been some violations of fishing boats using destructive fishing gears in zones of the sub demo-sites.

Pilot activities for financial sustainability at sub-demo site (component 6) have been limited achieved. The financial framework and mechanism at sub-demo site have not clearly been established. Therefore local people at demo site have not much acknowledged these outcomes and not been benefited from the outputs of this component.

Other unplanned activities have greatly contributed to the public awareness raising. A larger number of audience in the nation and maybe international have been aware of the demo project though papers published in newspapers and e-newspaper (internet) and though participating conferences and workshops held in Phu Quoc with the contribution from the demo project.

3.5 Project Results: Sustainability

The sustainability of the project requires not only commitment (policy statement) but also the resources, expertise and experience needed to develop and implement a wider and more long-term programme than was possible during the demo project itself. A commitment to move towards a formal system of MAP has been made by the approval from the governments. Phu Quoc MPA with the core zones of two sub-demo sites is one of the three first MPAs in an approved MPA system of 15 sites. In all cases, a more long term conservation programme needs to be developed and resources (time and money) need to be committed to implementing it. Overall, our view is that at present the project is sustainable with the MPA system of this demo site.

4. RECOMMENDATIONS

This evaluation is made at the concluding stage of the demo project, therefore following recommendations would be for a new phase or project related to the site, for example Phu Quoc MPA.

Management & operational plan • There have been delays and slippage in a significant number of activities within the Operational

Plan at the beginning stage of the demo project due to late agreement (MOU signing) between donors and executing agencies. We therefore recommend that the Operational Plan should be revised after the agreement made then the PMB and SEAs could complete their tasks at higher quality due to not facing with timeframe pressure.

• Experience so far indicates that it is difficult to get officials and stakeholders to travel to events in other countries. It therefore seems most unlikely that stakeholders (outside Phu Quoc district) from coastal province of Vietnam will attend the final conference in Phu Quoc. It is therefore recommended that a final conference of the demo project should be organised to disseminate the results of the final conference as widely as possible to relevant stakeholders in Vietnam.

Information and Communication • It is clear that there has not been smooth in communication between PMB and other partners

(SEAs for example), particularly remote partners due to lack of a communication network set up. It is strongly recommended that a website and email system should be employed to fast and conveniently communicate between PMB and partners and among them.

• Communication within training courses, workshops, meeting and conferences was done well in terms of lecturers to trainees. However, there have not any official responses from the trainees to lecturers and the organizers. Therefore, it is strongly recommended that evaluations for each events should be completed by trainees, so that lecturers and the organizer could improve their works.

Sustainability • Phu Quoc MPA has been established as the good follow-up action of the demo project. This

secures the sustainability of the demo site in legal, institutional and researching issues as well as part of finance from the government. However, alternative income generation for local people (fishermen) and the establishment of sustainable finance (framework, mechanism) with funding non-governmental sources (private sectors, business...) for maintaining the site have not been clearly created. It is very urgent in Phu Quoc MPA that sustainable financial mechanism and framework would be established and alternative income generation for fishermen would be identified and put in place.


Appendix 1 - Page 1

Appendix 1 Visits to demo project site and relevant agencies in Vietnam

Date Location(s) Activities

20 June Hai Phong Visit and work with seagrass demo site partner (Institute of Marine Environment and Resources)

21 June Leave Hai Phong and arrive at HCM City

Travel

23 June Leave HCM City and arrive Kien Giang Province (Rach Gia Town)

Travel

23 June Kien Giang Province - Rach Gia Town - Phu Quoc

Visit and work with Project Management Unit, Visit to demo sites of coral and seagrasses

24 June Leave for HCM City Travel 27 June Leave for Nha Trang City Travel 27 June Nha Trang City Visit and work with coral demo site partner

(Institute of Oceanography) 28 June Nha Trang - Ha Noi - Hai

Phong Travel


Appendix 2 - Page 1

Appendix 2

Consultation with PMP and SEAs and Other Stakeholders

Agencies/ stakeholders Date of Consultation No. from

Agencies/stakeholder

Note

Demo Project PMB 23rd June 2008 2 PMB Director and Site Manager, Rach Gia Town

Cambodian GIS experts 23rd June 2008 3 Rach Gia Town

Institute of Oceanography 27th June 2008 1 Coral reef expert, Nha Trang City

Institute of Marine Environment and Resources

27th June 2008 2 Seagrass expert and seagrass national focal point

Hon Thom Commune (Phu Quoc) 23rd June 2008 1 Local people (via phone)

Ham Ninh Commune (Phu Quoc) 23rd June 2008 2 Local people (via phone)


Appendix 3 - Page 1

Appendix 3 Detail Activity Rating


Outcome (1-5)

Timing (-3 to +3)

1.1 National Action 1 1.4 -0.9 1.1.1 Formal establishment of the PMB by the PPC and annual meetings of PSC 1 1 0 1.1.2 Operation of PMB 1 1 -1 1.1.3 Formation of the MAG and annual meetings of MAG 1 2 0 1.1.4 Maintenance of the project office 1 1 0 1.1.5 Project management (Auditing, Monitoring and Evaluation) 1 2 -1 1.1.6 Development of draft management plan 1 1 -1 1.1.7 Review of draft of management plan by local/district stakeholders 1 1 0 1.1.8 Revision of draft and submission to the PMB for review and approval 1 1 -1 1.1.9 Formal approval of the management plan at the Provincial level 1 2 -3 1.1.10 Publication of maps, guideline, management plan. 1 2 -2 1.2 Joint Action 1.5 1.5 -2.5 1.2.1 Joint meeting both PMB/MAG of VN/CPC 2 2 -2 1.2.2 Development of policy and cooperation framework for project area 1 1 -3 2.1 Surveys on biodiversity and resources 1.3 1.3 -0.9 2.1.1 Surveys on biodiversity and resources of CR 1 1 0 2.1.2 Surveys on biodiversity and resources of SG 1 1 0 2.1.3 Survey on resource use and market-based economic values - entire area 1 1 0 2.1.4 Establishing monitoring methodology for coral reefs environmental state 1 1 -1 2.1.5 Establishing monitoring methodology for seagrass bed environmental state 1 1 -1 2.1.6 Annual monitoring activities of coral reef sub-demo site 2 2 -2 2.1.7 Annual monitoring activities for seagrass sub-demo site 2 2 -2 2.2 Development of GIS database done by SEA START RC 2 2 -2 2.2.1 CR&SGFPs send existing data to SEA START RC 2.2.2 SEA START RC prepares draft site map 2.2.3 Standardization of the map, coding, layers, colour 2.2.4 Satellite interpretation by SEA START RC 2.2.5 Ground truthing by site managers and SEAs 2.2.6 Expansion GIS database for management purpose

Changed to IO for development Done and Completed by NIO

3.1 Development of training materials for public awareness 1 2 0 3.1.1 Poster 100 copies 1 2 0 3.1.2 Video Film (1 original and 100 copies) 1 2 0 3.1.3 Leaflets 1,000 copies 1 2 0 3.2 Seminars for awareness enhancement 1 2 -2 3.2.1 Biodiversity & sustainable development for Policy makers 1 2 -2 3.2.2 Biodiversity and sustainable use for managers at the district level 1 2 -2 3.3 Study tours 2 3 -2 3.3.1 Study tours Apo (Philippines), Hon Mun & Con Dao National Park for CR 3.3.2 Study tours to Trikora (Indonesia) for seagrass component

Changed to Koh Chang (Thailand)

3.4 Training professional skills 1.3 2.3 -1 3.4.1 Training on management project and professional skill for CR and SG 1 2 -1 3.4.2 Training on English Foreign Language 1 2 -1 3.4.3 Financial management training for sub-demo site community 2 3 -1 4.1 Meetings for familiarisation with the project, environmental impacts and

regulations regarding on waste disposal from tourist facilities and importance of CR&SG habitats 1 1 0

4.1.1 Meetings for provincial authorities and private sectors for familiarisation with the project,… 1 1 0

4.1.2 Meetings for districtial authorities and fishermen for enhancement of environment protection… 1 1 0

4.2 Reforestation 4.2.1 Reforestation by National park of Phuquoc 1 1 0



Outcome (1-5)

Timing (-3 to +3)

4.3 Training in environment management for crews, especially for fishing boat captains 1 1 0

4.3.1 Training for crews, especially for fishing boat captains on the environment regulation and laws of central/local governments and fishermen's duties and responsibilities. 1 1 0

4.3.2 Printing leaflets, poster, brochures, handbooks 1 1 0 5.1 Management plan of sub demo site for CR involving local stakeholders 1 1.3 -1 5.1.1 Management plan of sub demo site for CR involving local community,

stakeholders 1 1 0 5.1.2 CR biophysical surveys in detail for zoning & regulation preparation 1 1 -1 5.1.3 Discussion review and agreement of zoning plan by stakeholders 1 1 -1 5.1.4 Approval of zoning plan by the appropriate authorities 1 1 -2 5.1.5 Zoning/demarcation (buoy setting) 1 1 -2 5.1.6 Participatory preparation of regulations regarding agreed uses within coral

reef zones 1 1 0 5.1.7 Enforcement & surveillance with involvement of local community (patrol,

allowance, boat,…) 1 2 -1 5.1.8 Guideline for sustainable uses (fishing, tourism), fisheries promotion and

awareness raising 1 2 -2 5.1.9 Rehabilitation trial of coral reefs at a damaged reef at An Thoi island 1 2 0 5.2 Management plan of sub demo site for seagrass beds involving local

stakeholders 1 1.3 -0.9 5.2.1 Management plan of sub demo site for seagrass involving local community,

stakeholders 1 1 0

5.2.2 Seagrass biophysical surveys in details for zoning & regulation preparation 1 1 -1 5.2.3 Discussion review and agreement of zoning plan by stakeholders 1 1 -1 5.2.4 Approval of zoning plan by the appropriate authorities 1 1 -2 5.2.5 Zoning/demarcation (buoy setting) 1 1 -2 5.2.6 Participatory preparation of regulations regarding agreed uses within

seagrass zones 1 1 0 5.2.7 Enforcement & surveillance with involvement of local community (patrol,

allowance, boat,…) 1 2 0 5.2.8 Guideline for sustainable uses (fishing, tourism), fisheries promotion and

awareness raising 1 2 -2 5.2.9 Rehabilitation trial of seagrass at a damaged area (1,000 m2) in Ham Ninh 1 2 0 6.1 Analysis of present uses, value, net come and costs 3.3 4 0 6.1.1 Site level social-economic evaluation including net sales value and costs of

production 1 2 0 6.1.2 Provincial level net income existing revenue, (resource and other taxes) 4 5 0 6.1.3 Management costs (government agencies costs) 5 5 0 6.2 Analysis of potential future uses, value, net come and costs 4 4.5 0 6.2.1 Identification of alternative products/uses/livelihood possibilities 3 4 0 6.2.2 Development of appropriate business plans for new products/uses 5 5 0 6.3 Identification of present threats and potential threats 3 4 0 6.3.1 Identification of present and potential threats resulting from alternative new

uses 3 4 0 6.4 Establishment of financial management frameworks 4.5 5 0 6.4.1 Establishment of formal Site/location based stakeholder management groups 4 5 0 6.4.2 Provision of advice as required 5 5 0 6.5 Establishment of financial management mechanisms 5 5 0 6.5.1 Agreement and implementation of revenue collection procedures 5 5 0 6.5.2 Agreement of disbursement procedures and financial controls 5 5 0 6.5.3 Establishment of micro-financing funds and loan procedures 5 5 0


Appendix 4 - Page 1

Appendix 4 Documents Consulted

1. Memorandum of understanding between: the United Nations Environment Programme; the Department of Natural Resources and Environment of Kien Giang Province, Viet Nam; and the Viet Nam Environment Protection Agency, regarding the Execution of the Phu Quoc Demonstration Site in the framework of the UNEP/GEF project entitled: “Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand” (ref.: UNEP/GEF/SCS/VIE/MoU 1a)

2. Self-Assessment Report for Mid-Term Evaluation by Demosite Manager 3. Six Month Reports (Annex Iii) from 2005 to 2007 (5 Reports) 4. The Management Plan of Coral Reefs and Seagrass Beds in the whole of Kien Giang Province

up to 2015 5. Monitoring Seagrass Resources in Bai Bon Seagrass Demonstration Site, Phu Quoc Island, Kien

Giang Province 6. Surveys on Biodiversity and Resources of Phu Quoc Seagrass Beds 7. Coral Reef Monitoring in Phu Quoc 8. Methodology for Coral Reef Monitoring 9. Methodology for Seagrass Monitoring 10. Identification of Present Threats and Potential Threats, Establishment of Financial Management

Frameworks and Establishment of Financial Management Mechanisms 11. Survey on Resource Use and Economics Valued-Entire Area of Coral Reefs and Sea Grass Beds 12. Analysis of Present Uses, Value, Income and Costs of Coral Reefs and Sea Grass Beds in Phu

Quoc 13. Financial Management for Community of Sub-Demo Site Coral Reefs and Sea Grass Beds in Phu

Quoc 14. Biodiversity and Resources of Coral Reefs in Phu Quoc 15. Zoning Plan for Sustainable Management of Coral Reef Resources in Phu Quoc


ANNEX 7

Draft Terminal Evaluation Report for the Bolinao Seagrass Habitat Demonstration in the Philippines

Final Evaluation Report

2 July 2008 Dr. John Pernetta Project Director UNEP/GEF Project Co-ordinating Unit I am privileged to submit this revised report on my evaluation of your project entitled “Bolinao Seagrass Demonstration Site (BSDS) Project”. This report is based on my independent appraisal on the project’s effectiveness, efficiency, impact prospects, and sustainability, as well as my other findings on its gender and poverty aspects. Some minimal changes were made in this report from the draft version. In my opinion, the findings herein fairly represent the results from the project since it ended in December 2007. These findings were derived from my review of the project documents and the interviews and discussions with various informants from the UP-MSI, the Municipality of Bolinao, the members of the Seagrass Management Board, the caretaker of the seagrass reserve, a sample of the livelihood beneficiaries, and representatives from civil society organizations that participated in the project. The conclusions and recommendations in this report are mine and they do not necessarily represent the views of the persons and organizations mentioned in the document. The National Technical Focal Point, the National Focal Point for Seagrass, and the former project management staff gave the necessary information and support to complete this report. Their local counterparts from the Seagrass Management Board in Bolinao also assisted in the convening of the on-site discussions and provided other relevant data for the evaluation. Joel Beasca Independent Consultant 17 Malusog Street, UP Village Quezon City, Philippines Telefax No. (+63 2) 435 70 33 E-Mail: [email protected]


Executive Summary

The BSDS Project was the demonstration project for seagrass in the Philippines. Funded mainly by the UNEP/GEF and implemented by the UP-MSI, the project ran for a period of 27 months from October 2005 until December 2007. The methodology applied for the collection of information involved document reviews, key informant interviews, and focus group discussions. The scope of personal informants was broad enough to represent the various stakeholders in the project. The evaluation found all the implied project outputs to have been achieved, and most outputs to be of excellent or good quality. At the higher level of results, most project outcomes have already been achieved or are likely to be achieved. Nevertheless, the project is challenged on the livelihood aspect of its results. Project coordination and monitoring was effective. Overall service delivery was also effective, although a weakness was noted in the advisory service for the livelihood component. The imprest system in project fund administration was believed to be deficient in the implementation of activities and the delivery of outputs. Most technical inputs were made available and were delivered on time. Financial inputs were however delayed at the onset of the project. Project operations were generally efficient, but beset by fund administration problems. While cost-efficiency practices were followed, a quality-based system for the procurement of expert services prevailed. Significant fund variances were observed in the project due to the preliminary delay in fund release, although cost management had already stabilized by the last year of implementation. The evaluation noted a positive change in perception on the value of seagrass resources. The ensuing change in public behavior may however take more time. There has been anecdotal information on the physical change in seagrass resources. Socio-economic impact by the project can be expected. The greatest impact potential of the project is its replicability as a successful model for good governance over seagrass resources. Policy and technical support were provided and these were key factors for the sustainability of the project. The local government has mobilized its own resources to continue the activities on the seagrass reserve and seagrass monitoring. The affairs of the Seagrass Management Board and the monitoring activities are going-concerns after the project exit. On the other end, activities related to the information and education campaign and livelihood components will not be sustained. The evaluation concluded that most of the project objectives are being met. Based on the performance rating system applied, the project has performed well with an overall weighted rating of 85%. The study also concluded that there was positive discrimination by the project towards women through its livelihood intervention, and that the project is contributing to income poverty reduction in the area. Among the project components, the evaluation concluded the project to be strong in the seagrass management planning and capacity-building components, and weak on the livelihood component. The evaluation recommended that similar future projects should be designed along the standards set by the UNEP and GEF. The design of livelihood components should also be included in the inception phase of future projects. An attribution system should also be developed, baseline data should be established, and a customized set of operations policies for UNEP/GEF projects should be adopted by the executing agencies. The evaluation further suggested continued interventions for the livelihood and information/ education activities in the current site, and that available funds under the SCS Project or from other facilities be used to promote the BSDS experience. Finally, the evaluation recommended a replication of the project to other areas, and for the UNEP/GEF to support this phase.


I. CONTEXT OF THE EVALUATION A. Project Description The Bolinao Seagrass Demonstration Site (BSDS) Project was part of a broader regional project being implemented by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) called “Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand” or South China Sea (SCS) Project. The SCS Project covers selected seagrass, mangrove, coral reef, and wetland areas in seven (7) countries bordering the South China Sea. In the Philippines, demonstration sites for seagrass and coral reefs were completed under this project. The BSDS Project was the focus project for seagrass in the Philippines. It was implemented for a period of 27 months (i.e. from October 2005 until December 2007). The objectives of the BSDS Project were: 1. To enhance resource management, particularly for seagrasses based on comprehensive data

and information; 2. To intensify and increase public awareness through an information, education and communication

campaign; 3. To strengthen stakeholders’ capacity in management of resources; and 4. To design and implement an alternative/supplemental livelihood program. In view of these objectives, the BSDS Project featured four (4) components. The main project component (i.e. Component 1) sought to develop and implement a local management plan for seagrass resources. Component 2 provided public information and education on seagrass. Component 3 was directed at capacity-building activities for stakeholders, while Component 4 piloted a livelihood program to selected beneficiaries. The project was implemented in the coastal town of Bolinao in Pangasinan Province. It was chosen as the demonstration site because of the presence of diverse seagrass habitats and strong local institutions, including the Bolinao Marine Laboratory (BML) of the University of the Philippines – Marine Science Institute (UP-MSI). The coast of Bolinao is also part of the Lingayen Gulf, which has become an environmentally critical area because of overexploitation of marine resources and the practice of destructive fishing practices. The UP-MSI was designated as the Specialized Executing Agency (SEA) for the project. It is an academic institution focused on research, teaching and extension work in marine biology, marine chemistry, physical oceanography, marine geology, and its related disciplines. Technical support to the project was provided by experts from the UP-MSI through the BML. Project personnel, headed by a Demonstration Site Manager, were hired to implement project activities. Stakeholder involvement was channeled through a local Seagrass Management Board, while oversight functions were rendered by a Philippine National Seagrass Committee. Funding to the BSDS Project mainly came from the Global Environment Facility (GEF). Total project investment was estimated at US$323,710, around half of which were provided in cash by the UNEP/GEF. B. Framework of the Evaluation This Final Evaluation was commissioned by the UP-MSI through the Marine Environment and Resources Foundation, Inc. (MERF) in June 2008. The purpose of the evaluation was to determine the extent to which the stated objectives and outcomes have been achieved, assess the overall performance of the project, and ascertain the likelihood that the objectives will be sustainable.2

2 The term “Final Evaluation” was used in the Terms of Reference (TOR) for this assignment. The specifications set in the TOR

however imply the undertaking to be both an End-Of-Project and an Ex-Post Evaluation.

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 7 Page 4 The Project Coordinating Unit (PCU) of the SCS Project provided the Terms of Reference (TOR) for this evaluation, which specified twelve (12) assessment concerns. These concerns have been structured in this report as part of the main discussion on project effectiveness, efficiency, impact, and sustainability. The project evaluation frameworks set by the UNEP [2005] and GEF [2006] could not be applied for this evaluation because of the lack of a logical framework and objectively verifiable indicators for the BSDS Project. The final design of the BSDS Project Proposal was completed in 2005 following the criteria and format set by the Project Coordinating Unit (PCU). Apparently, this was prior to or simultaneous with the UNEP’s adoption of a Project Manual in 2005 and the finalization of the GEF Monitoring and Evaluation Policy in 2006. As such, the “outputs” as specified in the TOR and hereinafter mentioned in this report are the implied immediate results of the set of activities per component, while the “outcomes” are those that are specified in the project proposal as “management outcomes”. Nevertheless, there are some findings on the thematic issues of poverty alleviation and gender equality that arose out of the course of the evaluation.3 The information for the evaluation was collected through documents review, key informant interviews, and focus group discussions. The documents that were reviewed for the work are listed in this report as Annex A. The list of informants who participated in the interviews and group discussions are likewise appended as Annex B. These face-to-face interviews and group discussions were held at the MSI Office in Quezon City and on-site in Bolinao, Pangasinan. The itinerary of the evaluation mission is disclosed in Annex C. Face-to-face and telephone interviews were also held with the former Demonstration Site Manager who was already based in another city at the time of this evaluation. The personal informants broadly represented the various stakeholders that were involved in project planning and implementation. They represented the views of the SEA, project management, the Local Government Unit (LGU), the partner Non-Government Organization (NGO) and People’s Organization (PO), and the project beneficiaries. As specified in the TOR, a performance rating system was used in the conclusions section of this report. The criteria of effectiveness, efficiency, impact prospects and sustainability were applied to come up with an overall performance appraisal of the project. A sub-criterion on the attainment of results was assigned a heavier weight in view of the prevailing results-based or results-oriented management concepts in the field of development. A draft version of this evaluation report was submitted to the UP-MSI/MERF and the PCU. There were minimal corrections made in this revised report. II. FINDINGS A. Effectiveness of the Project 1. Attainment of Results a. Outputs Achieved There were four (4) implied outputs from the BSDS Project and all these were achieved. A local Seagrass Management Plan (Output 1) was adopted on November 2007, the Information and Education Campaign (Output 2) and the Capacity-Building Program (Output 3) on seagrass were completed on April-May of 2007, and the Pilot Livelihood Program (Output 4) was delivered by December 2007. Outputs 1 and 4 appeared to have been completed on time per the project plan, while the production of Outputs 2 and 3 were delayed by 4-11 months [Table 1]. According to project management, these delays were caused by the process-oriented approach that was adopted by consultants hired for the implementation of activities under components 2 and 3 (e.g. community consultations and needs analyses), a lengthy time required for the hiring of these consultants, and tedious administrative procedures in obtaining fund releases. 3 The UNEP Project Manual [2005] identifies poverty alleviation and gender equality as among the key elements in project

formulation and in building a logical framework matrix. The GEF M & E Policy [2006], on the other hand, sets SMART (i.e. Specific, Measurable, Achievable and Attributable, Relevant and Realistic, Time-Bound/Timely/ Trackable/Targeted) indicators for a hierarchy of results.


Table 1 Outputs Achieved and Completion Dates.

Date of Completion Planned Actual Output 1: Seagrass Management Plan Output 2: Information and Education Campaign Output 3: Capacity-Building Program Output 4: Pilot Livelihood Program

2nd Half of 2007 1st Half of 2006 2nd Half of 2006 2nd Half of 2007

November 2007 May 2007 April 2007 December 2007

b. Quality of Outputs Most project outputs are highly relevant to the immediate beneficiaries. Informants from the LGU acknowledged the Seagrass Management Plan (Output 1) as having addressed a real need by the local government for a rationalized strategy specific to seagrass in the area, which is at the same time consistent with its overall Coastal Development Plan. The Information and Education Campaign (Output 2) was also believed to be highly relevant by both LGU and private sector informants because it corresponded to a real need to promote greater public understanding on seagrass. There was also common positive appreciation for the Capacity-Building Program (Output 3); those who attended the training activities and study visits noted the interventions to have matched their needs for new knowledge and skills on seagrass management. However, the beneficiaries of the Pilot Livelihood Program (Output 4) perceived this output to be of low relevance to them. While they reported to have gained new learning from the livelihood training course offered by the project, they also clarified that they have not been able to make use of the vacuum sealing equipment since it does not conform to the preferences of their current market. They further noted that project assistance in working capital for fish processing could have been more relevant to their needs.4 The technical content of Outputs 1, 3 and 4 were perceived by the end-users to be high. The National Technical Focal Point and the National Focal Point for Seagrass also believed that the outputs delivered by the BSDS Project met technical standards. Among these outputs, the seagrass resource assessment under Output 1 and the training courses under Output 3 were especially noted for their technical content. Notwithstanding the technical feature of these interventions, the local beneficiaries regarded these to be effective because it was explained to them by the experts in a simplified and functional way.5 Except for Output 4 (i.e. the Pilot Livelihood Program), the scope of the project outputs were broad enough to produce results. Output 1 (i.e. the Seagrass Management Plan) was most extensive, having covered activities on resource mapping, policy advocacy, strategic planning, and law enforcement. Output 2 (i.e. the Information and Education Campaign) also broadly addressed the needs for printed and broadcasted information on seagrass. The capacity-building activities under Output 3 featured formal training courses and site visits, which combined external technical researches with popular knowledge. The scope of Output 4 was nonetheless limited; there was no study done on the current market of the livelihood beneficiaries and this became a factor for the non-utility of the equipments that were granted by the project. The inputs provided for the production of Outputs 1 and 3 (i.e. the Seagrass Management Plan and the Capacity-Building Program) seemed adequate in leading towards the desired project outcomes. The process leading to the formulation and adoption of the seagrass management plan was thorough and sequential: technical research and community consultations were held, a local law (i.e. a municipal ordinance) was enacted, and a seagrass reserve was established. The training participants as well as the members of the Seagrass Management Board also perceived the set of training interventions to be enough for their needs. However, there may not have been adequate inputs

4 The project provided portable vacuum sealing equipment to 28 beneficiaries for their packaging of dried rabbitfish. The

beneficiaries however reported that their fish products are passed on to a trader in the standard (50-kilogram) plastic sacks that are normally used for packaging milled rice. Hence, they have not been able to make use of the equipment. They hold a view that the funds spent for the vacuum sealing equipment could have been more useful to them if these have been provided instead as their additional working capital.

5 Output 2 (i.e. Information and Education Campaign) featured the production and dissemination of promotional materials such as brochures, posters, and billboards that did not require much technical content.

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 7 Page 6 allotted for Outputs 2 and 4 (i.e. the Information and Education Campaign and the Pilot Livelihood Program). It is generally believed that the information and education materials under Output 2 were not enough to provide the needs of the schools and communities in the area. On the other hand, the Pilot Livelihood Program (Output 4) was limited to only twenty-eight (28) beneficiaries who were dispersed across four (4) communities in the project area. A summary of this discussion on the quality of the project outputs is presented in Table 2. The assessment shows that overall, Outputs 1 and 3 (i.e. the Seagrass Management Plan and the Capacity-Building Program) are of excellent quality, Output 2 (i.e. the Information and Education Campaign) is of good quality, while Output 4 (i.e. the Pilot Livelihood Program) is of poor quality. Table 2 Summary of Output Quality.

Relevance Technical Content Scope Adequacy Overall

Quality

Output 1: Seagrass Management Plan Output 2: Information and Education Campaign Output 3: Capacity-Building Program Output 4: Pilot Livelihood Program

High High High Low

High n. a. High High

Broad Broad Broad

Limited

Adequate

Inadequate Adequate

Inadequate

Excellent

Good Excellent

Poor

c. Achievement of Outcomes The project proposal indicated eight (8) outcomes that were expected from the BSDS Project. These are: (1) A functional linkage among stakeholders; (2) Increased public awareness; (3) Strengthened capacity building [sic] among stakeholders; (4) Improved legislation and enforcement practices from project recommendations; (5) Community establishment of protected sites; (6) Sustained monitoring through the Seagrass Watch; (7) Improved seagrass cover and maintenance of biodiversity; and (8) Developed and improved livelihood skills of coastal communities to protect and manage seagrass and related reef resources. As of the date of this evaluation, Outcomes 1-5 have actually been achieved. A functional linkage among the project stakeholders (Outcome 1) was found to be in place through the Seagrass Management Board. The local stakeholders manifested continued interest and participation on seagrass management activities through this mechanism. Funding for sustained meetings and other activities by the Seagrass Management Board is also being provided by the LGU. Increased public awareness (Outcome 2) on seagrass issues was established by an evaluation done earlier for the Information and Education Campaign (IEC) component. The study concluded high awareness among survey respondents on the ecological and economic value of seagrass. The creation of incremental knowledge among the respondents on seagrass (e.g. seagrass varieties and types of fish found in seagrass eco-systems) was also concluded by the study.6 The field discussions showed strong capacities (Outcome 3) among persons who were involved in the BSDS Project. Personnel from the LGU and the local NGOs and POs, as well as fishers who are tasked with seagrass monitoring and seagrass reserve administration, were apparently knowledgeable on seagrass issues. They also made sound technical sense and have apparently been skilled by the project interventions. Improved legislation and enforcement practices (Outcome 4) have been achieved through the passage of Municipal Ordinance Number 2007-02 which declared the current area established by the BSDS Project as a seagrass reserve. Law enforcement practices have also been observed: it was reported to the evaluation that there were around thirty (30) poaching cases in the seagrass reserve since January 2008. In these instances, the violators were warned and turned away. The passage of the municipal ordinance and the operation of the seagrass reserve also verified the attainment of Outcome 5 (Community establishment of protected sites).

6 Cruz-Trinidad [February 2008] crossed data from 2006 baseline study with the results of a 2008 survey, which involved 100

respondents.


Outcomes 6 and 7 (i.e. Sustained monitoring through the Seagrass Watch and Improved seagrass cover and maintenance of biodiversity) are also likely to be achieved. A local seagrass monitoring team is in place and the necessary equipments have been turned over to them by the BSDS Project. The members of the monitoring team who participated in the training courses offered by the project seemed to be capable and confident of doing the task. It was reported that the next round of seagrass monitoring is scheduled on July 2008.7 There was anecdotal information from the caretaker in the seagrass reserve that seagrass cover in the area has improved, since the time of its establishment as a protected area in January 2008. There was also secondary and primary information about increased fish catch in the area near the seagrass reserve. The sources perceived this to be an effect of the establishment of the seagrass reserve. Nonetheless, there have been no technical assessments to support this claim and to attribute it fairly to the BSDS Project.8 Outcome 8 (i.e. Developed and improved livelihood skills of coastal communities to protect and manage seagrass and related reef resources) is not likely to be achieved. The scope and adequacy of the livelihood component are simply not enough to lead to this outcome. 2. Effectiveness of Project Management a. Project Coordination At the site level, the Seagrass Management Board served as the mechanism for the coordination of project activities among the various organizations that took part in the BSDS Project. The agencies and groups comprising the board included the LGU, a local NGO (i.e. the Bolinao Marine Ecological Fund Foundation, Inc. or BOMEFFI), the SEA (i.e. UP-MSI), and the relevant units under the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (i.e. the Community Environment and Natural Resources Office and the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources). The evaluation found that the basic coordination arrangements were made clear in the early period of project implementation. Members of the management board who were interviewed by the mission noted that the presence of the various groups in the inter-agency mechanism indeed facilitated the execution of project activities.9 There was a shared observation among informants that the project manager (i.e. the Demonstration Site Manager) played a key role in the excellent coordination of project activities among the various agencies that were involved in the project. Good networking and inter-personal skills by the project manager apparently contributed to the development of harmonious working relationships between the institutions and among the persons who represented their agencies. b. Project Monitoring Records show that the Seagrass Management Board was convened seven (7) times throughout the project period. The board members who were interviewed by the evaluation believed that the quarterly meetings have been enough for the body to be continuously appraised about the progress of the project. It was also noted that the critical issues (e.g. early resistance by some communities to the establishment of the seagrass reserve and co-financing arrangements between the stakeholders) were appropriately raised and discussed at the level of the management board. c. Service Delivery Technical support to the project was provided by experts fielded by the SEA and other consultants that were contracted to deliver other services outside of the marine sciences domain. Based on the actual results, the services delivered by the National Focal Point for Seagrass and the other marine

7 The monitors clarified that seagrass monitoring is supposed to be done every six (6) months and that the last monitoring was

done in December 2007. 8 By far, there are seventeen (17) marine protected areas in Bolinao that have been established through various Coastal

Resource Management (CRM) projects. One such project (i.e. the Sagip Lingayen Gulf Project or SLGP) also asserted in its end-of-project evaluation that it has resulted in increased fish catch in the area [Araño, Beasca and Crossland, 2008].

9 The role of the management board was among the agenda in the first meeting of the Seagrass Management Board held on February 2, 2006.

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 7 Page 8 scientists from UP-MSI were effective. It was further evident that the method of cross-referencing technical research with community-based knowledge had been effective, and the approach of applying scientific studies to actual implementation was indeed useful for development purposes. Services were also contracted to non-marine science consultants who completed the work on the IEC and the livelihood components, the subsequent assessments on these, and the facilitation of the management plan for the seagrass reserve. The ex-post results as earlier disclosed in this report show that the outsourcing of these service requirements had been generally effective, except for the advisory service rendered on the livelihood component. d. Fund Administration The actual administration of project funds was coursed by the UP-MSI through the MERF. The MERF is an independent NGO that was set up by UP-MSI faculty members as a way to more effectively manage development projects and resources, in view of the stringent procedures and requirements prevailing in the university system. The MERF itself is guided by certain policies on fund administration, and it is following an imprest system for fund releases. The BSDS Project management however observed that the policies and the imprest system were not complementary to the requirements in project operations. Fund advances were made for each activity, and current advances needed to be cleared first before subsequent releases are made. According to project management, the situation was made more complicated by the distance of the fund administration office at the UP-MSI premises in Quezon City from the project site in Bolinao. Overall, it was perceived that the fund administration system was a factor in the delay of certain project activities and the delivery of outputs.10 B. Efficiency of the Project 1. Input Efficiency Both technical and financial inputs were required for the implementation of the BSDS Project. The technical inputs were mainly provided by the SEA, while the financial inputs were co-shared by the UNEP/GEF and the LGU. The technical inputs expected from the SEA were available and were provided on time to implement project activities. The presence of a seagrass expert and other marine science experts contributed to the efficiency of the project in this aspect. At the same time, expertise in the non-marine sciences that were also required by the project for the IEC and livelihood components were not immediately available, which caused some delay in the delivery of their inputs. Project management reported that the first fund transfer from UNEP/GEF was delayed by around four (4) months, and this resulted in a delay in the implementation of initial project activities. However, it was clarified that in general, the execution of activities under the BSDS Project throughout the project period was not negatively affected by the fund transfers. The counterpart funds expected from the LGU were also delivered, and these were not also seen to have affected project operations in a negative way. 2. Operations Efficiency Six (6) project personnel, including the project manager (i.e. the Demonstration Site Manager), were posted on-site and were housed at the premises of the BML. Technical experts were also based locally at the BML. This arrangement eased the flow of project operations, as staff and technical support were readily accessible. Facilities at the BML were also utilized for project meetings and training activities. Fund administration was however centralized at the UP-MSI/MERF office in Quezon City, and there was no banking facility in the town of Bolinao. These constraints caused unnecessary travels by the project staff for their fund advances and reporting transactions. On the whole, project management felt that the efficiency of project operations was negatively affected by the internal fund administration system and the inability of the SEA to make corresponding adjustments.

10 The travel time from the site in Bolinao to the UP-MSI/MERF Office in Quezon City is around six (6) hours.


Work and financial plans were prepared by project management on a regular basis. These plans were presented and discussed at the meetings of the Seagrass Management Board. This approach helped in the coordination of activities that needed to be undertaken individually by the various agencies and units (e.g. conduct of community consultations, local legislation, and LGU budgeting processes). The board meetings also served to clarify the co-financing arrangements that have been assumed in the work and financial plans. Informants who were privy to the progress of the SCS Project at the national level felt that there were operational inefficiencies created by a high turnover rate in the DENR. This constraint did not however affect project operations at the site level because the expected deliverables from the institution were coursed through its sub-agency and local office (i.e. BFAR and CENRO). Bilateral relationships have also been built between the BSDS Project and the other demonstration project on coral reefs in Masinloc, which negated any weakness by the DENR in this aspect. 3. Cost Efficiency According to project management, the procurement of major goods (e.g. computer units) were guided by physical canvasses from known suppliers, and this practice allowed the project to obtain the material inputs at the lowest possible cost. The procurement of services were on the other hand done through a method of negotiated contracting, in which known marine experts from the UP-MSI were employed to render short-term consultancy services (e.g. seagrass resource mapping) for a fee negotiable within the project budget. Non-marine experts who were likewise hired for other consultancy services were also subjected to the same cost management method. Consultants were selected on the basis of their known fields of specialization. Project management generally felt that the selection method followed in the BSDS Project was quality-based, while working within the bounds of the budget. The first fund transfer from the UNEP/GEF was delayed by around four (4) months and this caused most initial activities supposed to be implemented in the first semester to be moved to the next semester. Project management further explained that several project activities were sequentially designed, and this resulted in the rescheduling of activities until mid-way into the project. Hence, successive fund variances (i.e. the excess of periodic budgets over actual expenditures) occurred in the BSDS Project until Semester 3. By Semester 4 however, the project had made adjustments for the implementation of the delayed activities in preparation for the project exit by end-2007. As of the last semester of the project, the fund variance problem appeared to have been corrected [Table 3]. Table 3 Schedule of Fund Variances (US$).

Fund Variance Cost

Component Semester 1 Semester 2 Semester 3 Semester 4 Semester 5

Personnel Sub-Contract Training Equipment Miscellaneous Total

9,300 3,280 2,011 959

1,092

16,641

11,693 3,360

13,566 871

8,473

37,963

2,181 5,860 10,796

629 13,460

32,926

-1,700 2,544 -8,551 -235

-5,253

-13,196

0 0

100 0 0

100

Sources: Audited Financial Statements. C. Impact Prospects There are clear indications that the BSDS Project has contributed to a change in perception on the value of seagrass resources among local government officials and employees, civil society leaders, fishers, and residents. Informants from the various sectors who were interviewed by the evaluation were knowledgeable on the issues involved in seagrass management and were convinced on the important role of seagrass preservation to the ecology and the economy. The earlier assessment done for the IEC component also showed a change in public understanding over seagrass resources.

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 7 Page 10 The local government has included a budget item for the maintenance of the seagrass reserve in its current appropriation schedule.11 However, a positive change in fishing practices over seagrass areas will take more time. Encroachments on the seagrass reserve are still on-going, and its underlying causes (e.g. desperation out of poverty, ignorance of the law, or plain resistance to change) are still to be explored and addressed. The information and education activities on seagrass resources have ended with the project exit, and there are apparently no plans by the local government and the NGOs to continue the IEC interventions. While anecdotal evidence of a physical change in the seagrass resources within the reserve has been acquired by the evaluation, there are no technical studies that would verify this claim. It is nonetheless certain that the seagrass beds within the area will increase because of the protection strategy. The socio-economic impact of the 60-hectare seagrass reserve and the IEC campaign can be expected in terms of increased fish catch, higher incomes by both men and women, and even reduced incidence of income poverty in the area. The constraints faced by the project in this aspect of change are the issues of attribution (i.e. how the BSDS Project can associate this result to itself vis-à-vis other projects and factors), and measurement (i.e. there are apparently no baseline data on these). The local government is aware of the immediate costs and long-run benefits that may accrue to the LGU due to the establishment of the seagrass reserve. It was estimated that around P80,000 (US$1,800) in annual local government revenues were foregone because of the seagrass reserve. This amount came from fees that used to be paid by the fish trap operators who were allowed to put up their facilities in the site. The LGU nonetheless expects to earn from greater taxes to be paid by the fishers in view of increased fish catch in the area. There were however no further details on the matter, there being no cost-benefit analysis done in this aspect. The greatest impact potential of the BSDS Project lies in its replicability as a successful model for good governance over seagrass resources. The key features of partnership between the LGU-academe-civil society and multi-faceted interventions in the aspects of technical assistance, policy advocacy, and actual resource management are the success factors of the project. These are portable features that can be emulated in the other coastal areas of the country. There is nonetheless a challenge as to how the BSDS experience can be effectively promoted to achieve this objective, given the absence of follow-up promotional activities and definite plans for its replication. D. Potential Sustainability Policy support provided by the LGU through Municipal Ordinance Number 2007-02 has made permanent the establishment of the seagrass reserve. This law is being enforced, and there are no threats to its abrogation. This policy is a permanent output of the project, and is also a key factor for the achievement of most project outcomes. Post-project technical support by the UP-MSI through the BML will also likely be made available. The local government has allocated an amount of PhP144,000 (US$3,273) in its 2008 budget for the management of the seagrass reserve. This amount is being used for to pay for the fuel costs and other supplies being incurred by the caretaker in the area. The LGU also said that the costs of seagrass monitoring can be covered by this fund, subject to the scheduled meeting of the Seagrass Management Board in July 2008. After the project exit in December 2007, the LGU also provided a motorized boat for the use of the caretaker in moving around the seagrass reserve. Continued administration of the seagrass reserve and seagrass monitoring are hence likely to be sustained.12 The meetings of the Seagrass Management Board are also expected to continue. There is ongoing interest by the members to convene, and there are minimal costs to be incurred for these activities. The sense of ownership by the local stakeholders on the project concept appeared to have been 11 In November 2007, a barge carrying 8.5 metric tons of coal sank in the area and there are on-going negotiations for

compensation. Around 35 hectares of seagrass beds were estimated to have been damaged, and the local government has included this cost in its claim for damages.

12 In 2007, the LGU appropriated an amount of PhP100,000 (US$2,272) as its counterpart in setting up the seagrass reserve.


highly developed. The approach of working through a separate mechanism (i.e. the Seagrass Management Board) instead of an embedded structure within the LGU (e.g. the Coastal Resource Management Office or CRMO) apparently has an advantage in terms of focus, since the CRMO is also loaded with other concerns on mangroves and coral reefs. The seagrass monitoring work will also go on because of the existence of a monitoring team that has been trained for such purpose. The monitors appeared motivated and have been technically trained for the work to be performed. The basic monitoring equipment have also been turned over to them by the BSDS Project. However, the interventions related to information and education, training, and livelihood are not likely to be continuing activities after the project exit. LGU resources are not enough to cover these costs in view of other commitments for the maintenance of the rest of the Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in Bolinao, as well as other development priorities. Identified funding support from the Small Grants Programme (SGP) of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the local congressional fund have not yet materialized, and it is uncertain if these funds will be used for continued activities of the BSDS Project. E. Other Findings 1. Role of Women in the Project Over time, the UNEP [2006] has acknowledged greater link between gender equality and sustainable development. Women are now believed to have important roles in the management of biodiversity, water, land, and other natural resources; as such, their participation is seen as a critical factor in environmental conservation and sustainable development. In the BSDS Project, women’s participation was evident in the livelihood component. While overall data showed more men participants in the training activities, there were more women than men in the livelihood training course. The recipients of the vacuum sealing equipment that were granted as part of the livelihood intervention were also mostly women [Table 4]. Table 4 Gender Participation in Training and Livelihood Activities.

Men Women Total Training Activities Workshop on Seagrass Taxonomy Training on Seagrass Watch Methods Ecological Solid Waster Management Workshop Training on Alternative and Resource-Based Livelihood Livelihood Activity Recipients of Vacuum Sealing Equipment

41 21 34 15

8

9 7

18 25

20

50 28 52 40

28

Sources: Attendance Sheets and Beneficiary List. 2. Relevance of the Project to Poverty Reduction The current UNEP framework also establishes a link between poverty and the physical environment. Previous studies and discussions on the matter have led the UNEP to mainstream its projects in the overall effort on poverty eradication. While the contribution of the BSDS Project to local poverty eradication has not been elaborated in the project reports, the relationship between seagrass preservation and incomes of fishers and processors were articulated by the informants in the course of the evaluation. It was clear to them that greater fish catch would be (or already is) an effect of the seagrass reserve, and that income increases would occur due to greater product volumes. At present, the prices of raw and dried rabbitfish were also reported to be good. Hence, it was conceptually plausible for livelihood interventions on rabbitfish production and trading to have resulted in immediate income increases and longer-term income poverty reduction.

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 7 Page 12 III. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The findings of this evaluation show that most of the stated objectives of the BSDS Project are being met. The management of seagrass resources is being enhanced through the establishment of a seagrass reserve and the implementation of a management plan. These outputs have been achieved through a comprehensive resource assessment. There is also evidence to show that public awareness on seagrass resources has been increased through the information and communication campaign. Local stakeholder capacity in the management of seagrass resources has been strengthened; this was manifested by the continued operation of the Seagrass Management Board and the seagrass monitoring team. However, the objective of implementing an alternative/supplemental livelihood program will not be met because there have been no results in this aspect of intervention. Most of the expected outcomes have also been achieved or are likely to be achieved, except for the outcome related to the livelihood component. Based on the rating criteria summarized in Table 5, the overall performance of the BSDS Project is good. The project is effective because most results have been achieved or are likely to be achieved. From the purview of results, the project has however been weak in the livelihood component. The management of the project has also been mainly effective; there was remarkable strength in coordination and monitoring, and challenges in service delivery and fund administration. Project efficiency is good, although there are noted problems in the cost efficiency sub-aspect. The impact and sustainability of the project are also rated to be good. There were no serious deficiencies found by the evaluation on the performance of the project.13

Table 5 Summary of Overall Project Performance Rating.

Criteria Raw Score Weighted Score Remarks 1. Effectiveness (25%) 1.1 Attainment of Results (60%) 1.2 Management Effectiveness (40%) 2. Efficiency (25%) 2.1 Input Efficiency (33%) 2.2 Operations Efficiency (33%) 2.3 Cost Efficiency (33%) 3. Impact Prospects (25%) 4. Sustainability (25%) Overall Rating

88% 84%

85% 90% 75%

86%

83%

85%

85%

85%

Good Good Good

Good Good Good

With Problems

Good

Good

Good

While the concern over gender equality has not been addressed clearly by the BSDS Project, the data shows that women have actually been positively discriminated from the livelihood interventions. There are also reasons to believe that the project is contributing to income poverty reduction in the area. Among the project components, the project has demonstrable strengths in the seagrass management planning and capacity-building components, and an obvious weakness in the livelihood component. The BSDS Project has established a working model for good governance over seagrass resources that can be replicated in other coastal areas. In view of the foregoing findings and conclusions, the following recommendations are being forwarded:

13 The rating system applied is as follows: 91%-100% = very good; 81%-90% = good; 71%-80% = with problems; below 71% =

serious deficiencies. Criteria related to the quality of the project design (e.g. the presence or absence of a project logframe) as well as other measures on the development themes (e.g. gender equality) have not been included in this rating system.


1. First and foremost, it will be necessary to design a similar future project along the specifications

set by the UNEP and GEF. The project concept should be built around a logical framework, and the themes of gender equality and poverty reduction ought to be embedded in the project design.

2. The design of a livelihood component for coastal resource management should be included in the

inception phase of succeeding replication or similar modeling projects. The type of livelihood activity to be undertaken and the scope of project interventions should be identified during the inception phase, and an adequate budget for such must be considered in the total project appropriation.

3. An attribution system will need to be developed and adopted in similar projects whose results

would be affected by external factors. The success of future seagrass demonstration projects will have to be verified in relation to other coastal resource management initiatives that have been applied or are currently being implemented in the area. Income increases and effects on local poverty will need to be measured with reference to price factors and other interventions. Baseline data should be established.

4. A separate set of operations policies for similar UNEP/GEF projects should be devised and

adopted by the executing agencies. Improvement of operations systems should be done to enhance input, implementation and cost efficiencies, and increase the chances of attaining results. Administration of project funds should be designed along a least-cost approach, and procurement of goods and services ought to be guided by Quality and Cost-Based System (QCBS) principles.

5. In the current site of Bolinao, the evaluation recommends continued intervention for the livelihood

and IEC activities. A successor project ought to be developed and/or funded for the purposes of fulfilling the livelihood objectives committed under the BSDS Project, and expanding the reach of the IEC component.

6. Available funds under the SCS Project or from other funding possibilities may be accessed for the

promotion of best practices that have been established in the BSDS Project. Promotional activities should be undertaken to enhance the chances of project replication in other areas.

7. The BSDS Project model may be replicated in other areas (e.g. Puerto Galera and Guimaras),

and continued funding support from the UNEP/GEF is being recommended in this regard. Subject to the degree of local government support that would be obtained for the project, replication of the seagrass management planning and capacity-building components could be targeted.


Appendix A - Page 1

Appendix A List of Reviewed Documents and Other References

Araño, Roberto with Joel Beasca and Chris Crossland. “End of Project Evaluation of the Sagip

Lingayen Gulf Project”. March 2008. Bolinao Seagrass Demonstration Site, Marine Environment and Resources Foundation, Inc., Marine

Science Institute, Municipality of Bolinao, and UNEP/GEF SCS Project. “Completion Report Bolinao Seagrass Demonstration Site Project”. Undated Document.

Cruz-Trinidad, Annabelle. “IEC Impact Evaluation of the Bolinao Seagrass Demonstration Site

(BSDS) Project”. February 2008. Cruz-Trinidad, Annabelle. “Socio-Economic Impact Evaluation of the Bolinao Seagrass Demonstration

Site (BSDS) Project”. January 2008. Global Environment Facility Evaluation Office. “The GEF Monitoring and Evaluation Policy”. 2006. Global Environment Facility, United Nations Environment Programme, and UNEP/GEF South China

Sea Project. “Bolinao Demonstration Site Proposal”. Bolinao, Philippines. September 2005. Kaunlaran ng Mangagawang Pilipino, Inc. “Management Planning Workshop for Approved Seagrass

Reserve Report”. November 2007. Marine Environment and Resources Foundation, Inc. “MERF Operations Manual September 2004”. Municipality of Bolinao. “CY 2008 Annual Investment Program (AIP)”. Municipality of Bolinao. “Details of the Annual Investment Plan CY 2007”. Paciencia, Francisco Jr. “Minutes of the Meeting 1st Management Board Meeting”. February 2006. Santiago, Marlin. “Report of Independent Public Accountant”. Various Periods. United Nations Environment Programme Programme Coordination and Management Unit. “UNEP

project manual: formulation, approval, monitoring and evaluation 2005”. 2005.


Appendix B - Page 1

Appendix B List of Informants

1. Mr. Gil Jacinto, Ph.D. - National Technical Focal Point, SCS Project 2. Mr. Miguel Fortes, Ph.D. - National Focal Point for Seagrass, BSDS Project 3. Ms. Tutu Almonte - Demonstration Site Manager, BSDS Project 4. Hon. Alfonso Celeste, M.D. - Municipal Mayor, Municipality of Bolinao 5. Hon. Simon del Ferro - Councilor, Municipality of Bolinao 6. Ms. Carolina Ramirez - Municipal Agriculturist, Municipality of Bolinao 7. Ms. Rosalie Salalila-Asuelo - Coastal Resource Management Officer, Municipality of Bolinao 8, Ms. Loveth Moore Camero - Coastal Resource Management Officer, Municipality of Bolinao 9. Ms. Ma. Corazon Casis - Project Officer, Municipality of Bolinao 10. Mr. Jesem Gabatin - Vice-President, KAISAKA/Seagrass Monitor 11. Ms. Annabelle Echavez - Secretary, KAISAKA/Seagrass Monitor 12. Ms. Shielameh Peralta - Research Assistant, UP-MSI 13. Ms. Margaret Celeste - President, BOMEFFI 14. Mr. Romeo Gatchalian - Caretaker, Seagrass Reserve 15.Ms. Nancy Quisay - Livelihood Program Beneficiary 16. Ms. Benita Osorio - Livelihood Program Beneficiary 17. Ms. Doris Consul - Livelihood Program Beneficiary


Appendix C - Page 1

Appendix C Itinerary of Evaluation Mission

May 28 (Wednesday) AM Interview Ms. Tutu Almonte at UP-MSI June 18 (Wednesday) AM Interview Dr. Miguel Fortes at UP-MSI PM Travel from Manila to Bolinao June 19 (Thursday) AM Interview Mayor Alfonso Celeste and Councilor Simon del Ferro

PM Focus Group Discussion with Members of the Seagrass Management Board

June 20 (Friday) AM On-Site Interview with Caretaker of the Seagrass Reserve and Local Monitor

PM On-Site Focus Group Discussion with Livelihood Beneficiaries Interview Ms. Margaret Celeste

June 21 (Saturday) AM Travel from Bolinao to Manila June 24 (Tuesday) AM Interview Dr. Gil Jacinto at UP-MSI


ANNEX 8

Lessons Learned from the Habitat Demonstration Sites and Pilot Activities LESSON LEARNED - 1

1. PROJECT TITLE

Sustainable conservation framework based government policy at FCG Demonstration Site

2. PROJECT SUMMARY

Encourage the participation of private companies in coping with the environmental issues, manage the resources in the reserve in conformity to national sustainable development strategy, and maintain sound environment through strengthening scientific research and education are three key components of this project. Good practice and lessons from addressing the issues mentioned above while implementing GEF FCG mangrove demo site project will be shared among the region.

3. DESCRIPTION OF ISSUES(S) AND CHALLENGE(S)

In the past, main threats to mangroves in FCG included land reclamation for mariculture and industry, invertebrate digging, and grazing animals in mangroves. These problems usually arose from shortage of funds, inefficient management, and low awareness of public and government on mangroves, and ultimately the neglect of mangrove resources in national and local sustainable development plan. In implementing the UNEP/GEF project, effort has been made to encourage the involvement of private company, to illustrate the significance of the national level reserve in national sustainable development plan, and strengthen scientific research and expertise training, so as to achieve expected outputs and valuable outcomes.

4. EXPERIENCES

Describe practices implemented by the demonstration site project.

4.1 How to maintain FCG urban mangroves during local rapid economic expansion

Urban mangroves along east coastline of FCG are not within the reserve, and were previously planed to reclaim for industry ten years ago. The plan has been altered since a revised mangrove regulation was enforced. The urban mangroves were then entrusted to and managed by Xindi Company, which was consequently compensated with land for conserving the mangroves. Xindi Company has also undertaken some activities of the project funded by GEF. Activities such as the planning for rational use of urban mangroves, replanting mangrove trees in the second growth of urban mangroves, and ecofarming were carried out within the urban mangroves. One year ago, Xindi Company started to apply for a project to construct a mangrove ecopark within the urban mangroves after it finished the planning and economic feasibility analysis

4.2 Financial approaches and associated proposals to promote FCG mangrove conservation, restoration and rational uses

Financial sustainability is crucial for conserving mangroves. Before GEF project was conducted in FCG, financial support for Beilun Estuary Marine Nature Reserve was far beyond expectation. Through implementing the GEF project, the reserve has drew more attention from governments at all levels by conducting public education with technical support from Guangxi Mangrove Research Centre. Since the GEF mangrove domo site project was implemented, the reserve has received funds of about 3.6 million Yuan from local government of FCG and provincial government of Guangxi. And in 2007, a fund of 28.6 million Yuan for wetland conservation and construction from both central government and Guangxi government was allocated to the reserve. All money allocated to the reserve after the demo site project was executed is seventeen times more than the funds the reserve received in fifteen years before the project was implemented. On January of 2008, the reserve was designated as a Ramsar Site, which will definitely improve the sustainability of the reserve.

4.3 Planning and initial actions to startup further regional cooperation on mangrove and coastal ecological research and education

Financial support from government can enable research facilities to regularly carry out research and monitoring on mangroves. Non-profit research facility like Guangxi Mangrove Research Centre was not on the list of key institutes favoured by local government in the past. But the role of GMRC was revalued and appreciated by governments at all levels since it has played a key role in implementing the GEF project and contributed to raise awareness of governments on the significance of mangroves

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 8 Page 2 and coastal wetland system. In 2007, Guangxi Key Lab for Mangrove conservation was approved to install in GMRC to strengthen research into mangroves for improving management of marine ecosystems and training expertise. In Beihai, Guangxi Marine Environment, Resource and Economy School is also going to be found and recruits students on September of 2008. A Plan for exchange of young mangrove researchers and cooperation of education among the region is being prepared for after UNEP/GEF project period.

5. RATIONALE FOR APPROACH TAKEN

5.1 Sound mechanism and financial sustainability are essential for the project outcomes to function

5.2 Fast growing economy in China has caused more and more serious environmental problems. And Chinese government has already realized that resources and environment are important factors that can influence economic sustainability of the nation. To address environmental issues, Chinese government are striving to explore new approaches to establish more effective environment management systems, create appropriate management mechanisms, and improve scientific research and education.

5.3 Typical resources should be used on the basis of sustainable development strategy of the nation; ideas and views of local officials, experts, and stakeholders should be collected at various occasions (conference, forum, etc.) and by different means (news, media etc.) and then suggested to governments for making decisions.

5.4 Scientific issues should be considered comprehensively in proposals with national conditions, administrative structure, and cultural characteristics concerned in order to increase the adoptability of the proposals.

6. PROS AND CONS FOR ADOPTED APPROACH

6.1 FCG government has agreed that mangrove area managed by Xindi Company will be enlarged from 200ha to 333ha. The company has already completed the Xindi Mangrove Ecopark Planning, which was designed by a Hong Kong Based American Company, Edew. The plan feasibility has already been examined and evaluated in an official meeting of FCG government.

6.2 The construction of the education centre in Beilun Estuary Marine Nature Reserve has been completed and mangrove organism specimen has been displayed in the hall. The reserve received a special fund of 28.6 million Yuan from central and provincial government for wetland conservation, and the engineering design for this special project is being carried out.

6.3 China Mangrove Wetland Forum was successfully organized by GMRC in Beihai. Guangxi Key Lab for Mangrove Conservation and Guangxi Marine Environment, Resource and Economy School were also approved by provincial government to establish. GMRC is preparing exchange and cooperation plan to boost mangrove research, expertise training and education in the region. GMRC is planning to sponsor two or three young mangrove researchers in the region to come to China and work in GMRC and FCG Demo Site for two or there months in 2008. GMRC also assists Guangxi Marine Environment, Resource and Economy School to prepare to enrol 100 students on September this year.

7. POTENTIAL FOR REPLICATION

Regional cooperation is appreciated and supported by Chinese government both at central level and provincial level to improve conservation, restoration and rational use of coastal wetland, and to boost education. We believe that our good practice in managing marine ecosystem can be shared by other UNEP/GEF project implementing parties to address similar environmental issues, even if diverse political system and culture exist.

8. REFERENCES

Relevant official documents and meeting summaries are available.

9. CONTACT DETAILS

Guangxi Mangrove Research Center 92 Chang Qing Dong Lu, Beihai 536000 Guangxi, China Email: [email protected] Tel: 0086-779-2055294 Fax: 0086-779-2065609



LESSON LEARNED – 2

1. PROJECT TITLE: Masinloc Coral Reef Demonstration Site (Network of small - scale

sanctuaries in Masinloc, Philippines) 2. PROJECT SUMMARY Masinloc, Zambales has high priority level for marine conservation particularly for mollusks, cetaceans, turtles, whale sharks and corals as published in the Philippine Biodiversity Conservation Priorities: A Second Iteration of the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (Ong, 2002). Hence, it is imperative that the Local Government Unit and all other stakeholders of its coastal resources should play an important role in ensuring its sustainable use both for the marginal fishers and big investors. The Masinloc Coral Reef Demonstration Site was conceptualized to demonstrate sustainable network of small-scale sanctuaries through adaptive co-management. It was able to establish three new sanctuaries to replicate the oldest marine sanctuary in Luzon, the San Salvador Marine Sanctuary. The four sanctuaries were being managed individually by management bodies composed of representatives of fishers, women sector, youth sector, barangay council chairman on environment advised by representatives of the national line agencies and the local government unit (municipal level). The provision of assistance both by the UNEP-GEF South China Sea Project and the Local Government Unit of Masinloc and other stakeholders such as the power plant, fish cage operators and resort owners, has paved the way to the establishment of management system that facilitates enforcement, monitoring and financial sustainability. 3. DESCRIPTION OF ISSUES(S) AND CHALLENGE(S) In terms of biophysical, the issues and challenges faced by the area are rampant incidence of illegal fishing, poaching in the marine protected areas and marine and coastal pollution. In terms of legal and institutional framework, there is a need to integrate the efforts of all the stakeholders to provide a venue for leveraging and complementation of interventions. The financial sustainability needs to be addressed to ensure that all interventions for the coastal resources management could be implemented. 4. EXPERIENCES The experience of the Masinloc Coral Reef Demonstration Site provides a springboard for the sustainability of efforts in Masinloc Coastal Waters.

• Institute arrangement The Masinloc coastal waters has many users and managers. Each has its own interest and objectives in using and benefiting from the coastal waters. Hence, there is a need to synchronize and synergize efforts to make a better resource management. The Masinloc Coral Reef Demonstration Site provided a venue for the stakeholders, both users (fishers, aquaculture operators, resort owners, power plant management, mining firm and ports authority) and managers (LGU, DENR, BFAR) to convene together as the CRM Management Board to function as the overall administration, management, and policy formulation and implementation on the sustainable use of the coastal waters. The board is chaired by the Municipal Mayor and having all the stakeholders as members. Regular quarterly meeting is conducted to update on the interventions and initiatives on the coastal waters of Masinloc.

• Financial sustainability Fund raising efforts are being done by the management councils of the MPAs for the special projects that they deemed necessary for their operations such as fencing of the guarhouse in Bani. Entrance/visitor’s fees, for snorkelers and divers were also collected. Proceeds from the sale of products at the livelihood center and other donations were placed in a CRM Trust Fund. Although these are of minimal amounts, it is necessary that the financial system will be in place prior to the booming of ecotourism in the area wherein income from this would be of great help to the MPAs and the CRM unit as a whole. Fines and penalties on violations of the MPAs and CRM Code are also placed in the trust fund.

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 8 Page 4 Other sources of financial support include an annual budget of P500,000.00 from the 20% Development Fund of the Local Government of Masinloc, 10% of the revenues from the operation of the Power Plant.

• Law enforcement With the network of MPAs, law enforcement was facilitated. There are four guardhouses installed adjacent to the MPAs which are strategically located in the north, south, east and west of the San Salvador Island. In this manner, the Bantay Dagat do not need to conduct frequent patrolling, which would entail a bigger budget for gasoline. Each guardhouse is manned by a team of four law enforcement team members who guards the MPA as well as the adjacent coastal areas from illegal fishing. Blast fishing has been eradicated with the apprehension of one of the blast fishers in late 2007. Court hearing continuously being undertaken. The Coastal Law Enforcement Team led by the Philippine National Police Chief of Police in Masinloc, supported by the Special Action Force of the Philippine Army conducts patrolling and apprehensions with the Bantay Dagat Federation.

• Monitoring As a result of the mid-term evaluation, Participatory Monitoring training was conducted to the MPA monitoring team in each of the MPA council. Two fishers were trained how to list and count fish using local names seen within the five-meter width from the 50-meter transect line; one will list on the left and one on the right of the transect line. Another two fishers will estimate the coral cover using the benthic lifeforms. On the last day of the training data were analysed and translated into information which is useful for management decisions and actions. This is practiced twice a year and results shall be posted in the Barangay Hall and in strategic locations for public information. Aside from participatory monitoring, fish and coral experts were hired by the demonstration site to conduct semi-annual fish and coral monitoring to set the trend on fish abundance, species composition, fish biomass and coral cover.

• Stakeholder involvement Stakeholder involvement has been engendered since the inception of the project. The proposal was conceptualized together with the Local Government Unit, Department of Environment and Natural Resources and Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources. The management board although it was formally created through Executive Order of the Mayor and an ordinance by the Sanguguniang Bayan, has been working together in the implementation of the activities of the Demonstration Site particularly in the formulation of Coastal Resources Management and Zoning Plan, establishment of new marine protected areas and their network, monitoring, law enforcement, information campaign, stock enhancement, coral transplantation and other capability building activities.

• Stress reduction and environment state outcomes To reduce stress from fishing pressure, about 199 hectares of the Masinloc coral reef or about 9% of the 2,200 hectares is placed under strict protection zone as Marine Protected Areas legitimized by barangay ordinance and Sangguniang Bayan Resolutions. In addition to this, 80 hectares are covered as reserved areas where regulated and traditional fishing method is allowed. As a result of the strengthening of the Bantay Dagat and formation of Coastal Law Enforcement Team, a significant reduction in the incidence of illegal fishing has been recorded by the Bantay Dagat Federation.

• Livelihood A test on the potentials of the sea cucumber grow out was undertaken under the demonstration site. However, it was proven that the use of pen was not very profitable because of high capital cost and low growth rate of sea cucumbers that were enclosed in pen. Skills training on novelty items and souviner items was done for the youth and women membersof the MPA council. Their products were displayed in the livelihood center.


Microfinancing was also made available to the fishers and other stewards of reef through the livelihood fund of the local government unit. There were a total of about 200 fishers/constituents of Masinloc benefitted from the microfinancing services and about US$99,067.81 have been released since 2006. 5. RATIONALE FOR APPROACH TAKEN The co-management approach was adopted in the implementation of the demonstration site activities. This approach was adopted in order to ensure sustained interventions through mainstreaming of the coastal and marine environmental program into the government (both local and national) regular programs and become part of its basic services to the constituents. The involvement of the stakeholders not only as participants in the activities but in setting of the directions and in strategizing for a smooth implementation of the demonstration site activities has increased probability of success and replication. 6. PROS AND CONS FOR ADOPTED APPROACH Primarily, the advantage of a co-management approach is the increased involvement of the stakeholders in project implementation, monitoring and evaluation. This approach provides a venue for all stakeholders to share in the collective action towards ecological enhancement and environmental protection and management. On the other hand, since participatory approach necessitates the involvement of many stakeholders, investments must be provided in convening them and must adjust in the availability of each one. Also, many times, deliberations on issues and concerns may take much time. 7. POTENTIAL FOR REPLICATION The establishment of small-sized MPAs and network them through adoptive co-management approach has a very high potential for replication. It is a good practice to involve all stakeholders in the management and protection of coastal and marine environment. Other bays could replicate these strategy of marine conservation which provides for sustainable utilization and at the same time setting aside areas for strict protection for both natural and induced coral reef rehabilitation and enhancement. 8. REFERENCES

1. Approved Proposal on Masinloc Coral Reef Demonstration Site 2. Coastal Resources Management Plan of Masinloc 3. Coastal Resources Management Code of Masinloc 4. Marine Protected Area Management Plan of Panglit, Taclobo, San Salvador and Bani 5. Benchmarking and Monitoring Report

9. CONTACT DETAILS DR. PORFIRIO M. ALINO Professor Marine Science Institute University of the Philippines Diliman Quezon City Philippines Telephone Numbers:+632-981-8500 local 2911 Telefax +632-924-7678


LESSON LEARNED – 3 Integration of habitat and fisheries management through development and management of pilot area and fisheries refugia at Phu Quoc islands, Viet Nam

4.1 Scientific surveys, and habitat and fisheries monitoring for purpose of development of management plan and practice in management of pilot areas and fisheries refugia

• Significance of scientific data and information for development of management plan and management of pilot areas and fisheries refugia.

4.2 Threats to and from fisheries at the site level

• Concrete data and information reflect threats to and from fisheries in Phu Quoc islands 4.3 Mechanism for pilot area management

• Mechanism developed by the demonstration site project in integrating the exiting bodies related to habitat and fisheries management in the islands to ensure sustainable use of coastal habitats

• Introduction of keys issues contained in regulation and guideline for sustainable use of coral reef and seagrass resources.

4.4 Community involvement in development and management of pilot areas and fisheries refugia

• Provision of more detailed information and data indicating responsibility and benefit of local communities through involving in development and management, indicating actual advantages and challenges in practices to involve local communities

• Additional information about concrete activities to reduce impacts from outside and enhancement of benefit to coastal habitat conservation

• Role of local communities in policy making through consultations organised by the demonstration site project and district authorities, and in inventory on spawning and nursery grounds in the Phu Quoc waters



Public Awareness and Education in mangrove conservation and rehabilitation

of the Trat Mangrove Demonstration Site Project 1. PROJECT TITLE: Trat Mangrove Demonstration Site Project: Public Awareness and

Education in mangrove conservation and rehabilitation of the Trat Mangrove Demonstration Site Project

2. PROJECT SUMMARY: The demonstration site is focus on the Thatapoa/ Numchieo conservation forest area of the Trat Province the easternmost area of Thailand. The purpose of the project is to establish a demonstration site for good practice in community participation in mangrove conservation work in Trat Province that can serve as a model for wider application nationally and in the other countries participating in the UNEP GEF SCS Project. Moreover, the project will seek to reverse environmental degradation in the area by developing a management plan involving all stakeholders. The main five activities to approach the goals: Strengthen and expands as appropriate the community based management system for the Trat Province Mangroves. Development and implement a programme for replanting, maintaining and protecting mangrove in Trat Province, particularly Thatapoa/ Numchieo conservation forest area. Develop a business plan for sustainable financing of management of Trat Province. Enhance awareness, education and capacity building in all level of government and civil society. In addition, establish a cooperative framework for resources management in the transboundary water between Thailand and Cambodia. The Department of Marine and Coastal Resources (Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment) which is the main responsibility for management mangrove resource in Thailand, including in Trat Mangrove Demonstration Site. 3. DESCRIPTION OF ISSUES(S) AND CHALLENGE(S): Trat Mangrove forest is diverse with 33 true mangrove species and 36 associated mangrove species. This demonstration site, on the Thatapoa/ Numchieo conservation forest area of the Trat Province that area supports an extensive mangrove forest and some aquaculture activity. Especially, eight villages are located in Thatapoa/ Numchieo conservation forest area while around 21 coastal villages in the province depend on mangrove resources for part o their livelihood and income. The Mangrove forest in this area has for many years been used as a source of charcoal and tannin, extracted under a government concession. Also, Trat Mangrove forests were cut and clear to construct shrimp and fish pond. At present, almost local villagers earn their livings from the mangrove forest through costal fisheries, mud crab and grapsid crab collection. Some use mangrove forest as recreation place and ecotourism. Although a government concession which was terminated in 2001 and investors for shrimp farming were decrease, mangrove resource and biodiversity in this area that has been reversed. The main interested threats that could identify in Trat Mangrove are: Illegal encroachment into mangrove forest areas for human settle and shrimp pond extension purpose. Over fishing by commercial fishing boats and illegal fishing gear impact on local villagers and other marine animals in mangrove ecosystem. And, costal erosion by natural wave occurred and disturbed from fisherman boat at the fringe of mangrove forest. Then all threats problems need to solve that in the same direction with mangrove resources necessary to conserve and rehabilitate. In addition, believed that significantly successful in sustainable management and conservation in mangrove ecosystem should based on local people and cooperation between communities. One of the reasons for this destruction is a lack of understanding and knowledge in mangrove ecosystem and economic benefits provided by mangrove, therefore increase understanding and knowledge in the value of mangroves and strengthen the links between the conservation of mangrove forest and livelihood of local people is very importance. 4. EXPERIENCES: Background of Awareness and education activities in Trat Mangrove Demonstration Site is strength and continues, especially, Pred Nai community. A great background in mangrove conservation come from desired to protect area own land for occupation and animal

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 8 Page 8 resource as food source. Pred Nai people form cooperation group flight and protest mangrove destruction from the investor who extend shrimp farm in this area. After the investors went out from the mangrove area, Pred Nai community implemented reforestation following local traditional knowledge. Next, around 1998, Pred Nai Mangrove Conservation and Development group was established to manage and conserve Pred Nai mangrove forest. Pred Nai Mangrove community established Mangrove management Plan from suggestion of RECOFTC. Moreover, to increase fishery productivity, particular crab population, people form crab group, replanting more and make artificial reef by using cement filled in tired, put on the fringe to be nursery ground for marine juvenile. Pred Nai community also consider the coastal erosion then do research by put this artifical reef and bamboo pole at the fringe to protect fisheries boat come to destroy coastal and mangrove tree. Nowadays, Pred Nai Mangrove forest become the learning ground for community-based forest management.and mangrove ecosystem for school, education institute and others who is interested in Community Forest. Pred Nai Community is the one of eight target villages of Trat Mangrove demonstration site. The Project UNEP GEF SCS project intend to establish a demonstration site for good practice in community participation in mangrove conservation work in Trat Province under Trat Mangrove demonstration site UNEP GEF SCS project, due to a good deal experience, Pred Nai was assumed as a mentor to other community in sustainable mangrove management. Then Pred Nai community distributes education in mangrove conservation and rehabilitation to others. The following cases highlight “Public Awareness and Education in mangrove conservation and rehabilitation” as remain important part of main activity, Establish awareness and enhance education precede learning distribute through various levels and activities. 4.1 Management Strengthen and expands as appropriate the community based management system for the Trat Province Mangroves, Prednai Community Education in database of Trat Mangrove Demonstration Site. At proceed for built comprehensive management plan, Trat mangrove Demonstration Site, these projects survey and collect the data of uses resource and mangrove demonstration site conservation, to study the socio-economic, mangrove biodiversity resources and land uses of habitat community around the mangrove demonstration site to prepare the draft management plan management of demonstration site conservation. Research team of Trat Demonstration Site give education and guide the method, how to survey and recorded the data. This mangrove biodiversity resources survey opens local people community to participate and learn the scientific method from technical working group that direct advantage them in monitoring mangrove resources in the future. Beside UNEP GEP SCS supported, moreover Regional Community Forestry Training Center for Asia and the Pacific (RECOFTC) by Thailand Collaborative Country Support Programme (Thailand CCSP) who is expert in Participatory leaning in resources management process in Thailand was joining to build Management Plan through the participation meetings and learning in 8 villages in Trat Demonstration Site. Resulting from effective management plan then network for joint management Plan was extend to 17 villages of Trat Province. That could say that it is the real power of community participation in mangrove management.

4.2 Mangrove rehabilitation and conservation Development and implement a programme for replanting, maintaining and protecting mangrove in Trat Province, particularly Thatapoa/ Numchieo conservation forest area. Department of Marine and Coastal Resources provide education in mangrove rehabilitation through a Planting technique manual and publish document in evaluate previous experience of mangrove restoration in Thailand and identify appropriate technique for trailing in Trat Province. At community level, UNEP GEF SCS support Pred Nai village to be an adviser and trainer to other villages in establishes a patrol system and undertake community based patrols network 4.3 Business Plan For support a long term sustainable management, need to development and implemented of business plan for sustainable management. Identification of new revenue and opportunities for diversification of income and investigate the feasibility of ecotourism to generate income.


The business plan knowledge was educated though community meeting which subcontact organization who come to do research and consult in Trat Mangrove Demonstration. Increase knowledge in business plan make local people understands how to apply and develop it in the site, in term of sustainable way. 4.4 Education, public awareness and capacity building in all level of government and civil society. Enhance awareness, education and capacity building in Trat Mangrove Demonstration Site. Capacity building is focus on training activities at both the community and government levels. Activity of assessment and monitoring in mangrove resources is necessary need for enhanced public awareness is regarding the status or change in mangrove ecosystem. The method and process of assessment and monitoring in mangrove resources were given to local level through Training course. This activity makes local people feel to be owner of mangrove forest and learning scientific method for approach long term study. Training Course on “Sustainable Mangrove Management” under UNEP GEF South China Sea Project, at Penang Malaysia brings community and education leader in Trat Mangrove Demonstration Site grain new knowledge and share experience in mangrove management with other site and other country, next transfer all knowledge back to community. For educations specifically occur at the level of school children in Trat Province, there are three Youth Camp activities that occurred in Trat Demonstration Site; “Green Power conservation in a small hand”, the second is “Youth Network succeeds in Mangrove Conservation” and the last one is “Youth Mangrove hero”. In the same objective, to consider knowledge in benefits and values of mangrove ecosystems and service, that approach to mangrove conservation and protection of Trat Mangrove Demonstration Site. Whereas enhance public awareness in Trat Mangrove Demonstration Site by distributes fifth issues of quarterly project newsletters for stakeholder and improvement of existing Learning Centre, including develop boardwalk and Mangrove Learing Museum were supported by UNEP GEF SCS. 4.5 Co-operative in transboundary waters. In order to establish a cooperative framework for resources management in the transboundary water between Thailand and Cambodia, Sharing the experience and knowledge to solve threat occurred at the first joint technical workshop between Trat Province (Thailand) and Koh Kong (Cambodia). This workshop was to provide and share a knowledge and experience in technical rehabilitation such as the Mangrove seed production, nursery technique and planting by Thai experts to the partner. In addition, the seconded joint technical workshop, Trat Demonstration Site was set to train Koh Kong partner in assessment and monitoring in resources in Mangrove Ecosystem under agreement in Joint guideline and Policy framework. 5. RATIONALE FOR APPROACH TAKEN: Education is a background in management and conservation that could approach reverse environmental degradation and to establish a demonstration site for good practice in community participation in mangrove conservation. It is a necessary need develop public awareness and education in mangrove conservation and rehabilitation of the Trat Mangrove Demonstration Site. 6. PROS AND CONS FOR ADOPTED APPROACH: 6.1 Advantage for adopted approach

1. Distribute traditional and local knowledge in mangrove conservation and rehabilitation to other community among Trat Province and other areas in Thailand and also, other country.

2. Enhance awareness in mangrove conservation that to decrease environmental degradation in mangrove and coastal ecosystem.

3. Increase new blood in mangrove conservation and rehabilitation, 4. Potential develop network of mangrove conservation among community in Trat Province and

Thailand. 5. Increase mangrove coverage, including increase species diversity and numbers that based

on study on ecology and habitat. 6. Reduced illegal mangrove cutting through provision of alternative sustainable livelihoods 7. Establishment of sustainable use regimes to protect mangrove and fishery resources from

depletion result from human use


8. Increase understanding of the environmental and economic value of mangroves and establish a perception that mangrove conservation areas are a beneficial land use.

9. Developed framework for cooperative management in the transboundary waters.

6.2 Disadvantage for adopted approach is 1. Limited financial support in implement Public Awareness and Education in Trat Mangrove

Demonstration Site. 2. Lack new knowledge and technology involved in management and conservation distribute at

local level. 3. Lack personal resources who to be a leader in transfer education in the long term or future, in

the case youth or people who are interested in mangrove conservation. 4. Need to develop education management because lacking development education system. 5. Although give education is look easy but need long term in monitoring for effective

cooperative network in Public Awareness and Education in others among Trat Province.

7. POTENTIAL FOR REPLICATION: Good practices in Trat Mangrove Demonstration Site were continuing support by Thai Government. Particularly, Comprehensive Management Plan in Trat Mangrove Demonstration Site, was extend and supported by Subdistrict Adminstration Office (Or Bo Tor in Thai) to implement it. Business Plan of Trat Mangrove Demonstration Site will support by Trat Government in the future. Develop mangrove management education in Trat Demonstration Site is continue, Department of Marine and Coastal Resource and Thailand Environment Institute (TEI) do the research, the project title “Studying traditional wisdom in Management Plan in case of Pred Nai Community” to distribute education of traditional wisdom in sustainable management. The Strength community participation in Trat Mangrove Demonstration Site is a great experience in management by local people then Thailand Department of Marine and Coastal Resource will use it as model for other mangrove area that would like to develop to be community forest. 8. REFERENCES:

1. Muktasam, A. 2007. A paper presented in a panel on Rethinking Rural Development in the International Development Studies. Conference on Mainstreaming Human Security: The Asian Contribution, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok 4-5, 2007, 15pp.

2. RECOFTC. 2007. Pred Nai Community Mangrove Forest. M & N Design Printing, Bangkok, 30pp.

3, Regional Community Forestry Training Centre for Asia and the Pacific (RECOFTC). 2007. PredNai Community Mangrove Forest. M and N design printing Publisher, Bangkok, 30pp.

9. CONTACT DETAILS: Department of Marine and Coastal Resources 92 Soi Phaholyothin 7 Paholyothin Road Phayathai, Bangkok 10400 Phone/Fax: (+66)2 298 2166 Mangrove Focal Point: [email protected], [email protected]. Site Manager: [email protected], [email protected]






INTEGRATION OF TRADITIONAL WISDOM TO DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF

CORAL REEF MANAGEMENT PLAN AND LEGISLATION 1. PROJECT TITLE: Selat Nasik Coral Reef Demonstration Site, Belitung, Indonesia 2. PROJECT SUMMARY Selat Nasik Sub-District of the Belitung District, had been selected as Demonstration Site for Coral Reef Component under the UNEP GEF South China Sea project. The objective of this demonstration site is to develop continued coral reef ecosystem management so as to rehabilitate, protect and manage the ecosystem in order to increase community welfare and to reduce poverty. Activities in the demonstration site of Selat Nasik involved various stakeholders. In the District level, the activity was started with establishing a management board. Members of the management board came from various local institutions such as Department of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, Bappeldada, Education Services, Tourism Services and NGOs. The management board organized routine meetings, discussed implementation activities and coordinated the site manager. At the Sub-District and Village levels, activities were to be started with launching activities which were to be carried out in February 2007. Other activities that followed would be promoting community awareness and education, legislation and resource management plan, information strengthening, MCS and alternative livelihood. Public awareness activities were to be implemented by doing several socializations and by distributing some 1000 T-shirts and 400 calendars to the Selat Nasik community. In the field of education the activities were to distribute 1400 guide books of local content ”Pesisir dan laut kita = The Coast and Our Sea” to all the elementary school children in the Selat Nasik Sub-District. In addition was to organize a training for the teachers in using the book. And in coordination with the Education Service of Belitung District to prepare the syllabus. Control of coral reefs was done at a regular basis by 20 coral reef watchers. The reef watcher was equipped with 2 boats and each boat was equipped with a binocular and life jackets. The 20 reef watchers received a training on how to read map, do patrolling, preparing report, etc. Selection of reef watchers was the full responsibility of each village. Apart from that reef watchers were trained to evaluate the coral reefs in a simple way. Activities to strengthen information consist of socio-economic and ecological surveys. Result of socio-economic survey showed that community understanding on the important of coral reefs was quite significant. Apart from that the result of the survey provided information on the activities that could be done in line with alternative income generation. Result of ecological survey showed that coral reef condition in Selat Nasik was still good. The socio-economic survey’ ecological survey and results of previous studies were incorporated into website www.selatnasik.org Alternative livelihood available to the Selat Nasik community was differentiated into 2, namely: improved product quality and introduction to new product. Quality improvement was suggested to crispy home industry and others. Some of them have attained PIRT (18 personnel). To introduce new products, the community was trained to prepare jerked fish (dendeng ikan), durian taffy (dodol durian), and others. Some 135 participants had taken part in the training of alternative livelihood. This activities also provided some equipment to each group of participants. Legislation activities and resource management plan have taken quite a long time. The activities were started with collecting data and organizing meetings with relevant stakeholders, such as: the Law Section of the local government of Belitung, Head of Sub-District, Chief of Village, prominent figures in the community, fishermen, etc. The concept of local government regulation on coral reef and resource management plan were compiled and discussed between the community and the local government of Belitung. 3. DESCRIPTION OF ISSUES AND CHALLENGES Currently the hot issues occurring in the Selat Nasik waters are the followings:

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 8 Page 12 3.1 Coral Mining Coral mining for housing foundation was still practiced by some people. However, according to the information from the reef watchers, the intensity of mining was significantly decreased since the SCS program was started. 3.2 Ornamental fish catching Catching ornamental fish is still being done by fishermen, mostly those from outside Selat Nasik Sub-District. In catching the fish, drug is quite often used. 3.3 The use of fish trap Selat Nasik fishermen still using fish trap (bubu) to catch fish. This case is still difficult to prevent in view of the limited income of the fishermen. A more environmentally friendly fish trap should be developed. 3.4 Mangrove cutting Mangrove cutting to obtain wood fuel still common in Selat Nasik Sub-District. Most commonly it is done by those whose profession is sea cucumber collector. However, the intensity of mangrove cutting was significantly decreased since the SCS program was started. 3.5 The Use of Pukat Kongsi (Trawl) Pukat kongsi (a kind of trawl) is still used in the waters around Selat Nasik waters, This instruments are potentially destructive to coral reefs. Most commonly this instruments are used by fishermen from outside Selat Nasik Sub-District. 4. EXPERIENCE 4.1 Scale of application of traditional wisdom Since 1970 the community of Gersik village of Selat Nasik Sub-District have agreed to protect the marine resources. The agreement takes the form of preventing the use of certain catching instruments. 4.2 Contents of regulation enforced in framework of traditional wisdom The following are the content of the agreement:

1) Whoever want to do fishing in the Gersik waters must use the same instrument as tho ones used by local fisherman;

2) Fisherman who are catching fish in the waters sourrounding the Gersik village are forbidden to use search light.

4.3 Enforcement practices The agreement was started when the community of the Gersik village, who were mostly of Bugis race, live in Gersik village. They mostly speciallise in line-fishing and they catch mackerel, snapper and other pellagic species. Apart from that they also own “weir” in the water nearby their houses. To safeguard the existing fish resources, they agreed that all fishermen that catch fishes in Gersik area must use the same equipment as the ones used by them. They believe if all fishermen follow this rule, their catch will more or less be appropriate. Therefore they will be very angry if someone catching fish using equipment like liftnet and search light. They believe the use of liftnet and search light would affect their catch. Up to the present time 6 quarrels have occurred between the community of Selat Nasik Sub-District and some outside fishermen. Action that had been taken by the Gersik fishermen were;


• Let the outside fishermen know that it is not allowed to fish in the waters surrounding Gersik

village • In case the outside fishermen would not listen , the Gersik people will stone them • The most rude action will be to sink the boat and to drive the outsider away. According to the available information, in 1990s an agreement had been achieved between the Local Government of Belitung District with Local Government of South Bangka. According to the agreement, if the fishermen from South Bangka will catch fish in the waters of Gersik village, they must follow the regulation that have been developed by the Gersik fishermen. To date the agreement that have been made by the Gersik community on the use of fishing equipment have been followed by all fishermen, those from Selat Nasik as well as those from outside Selat Nasik Sub-District, or even from outside Belitung District. Some years later, a disagreement between fishermen of Gersik and Pongok occurred. Then a meeting was convened on April 30, 2003 in Belitung to settle down the dispute between the fishermen of Gersik village , Belitung District, and the fishermen of Pongok village, Bangka District, for the reason that the Pongok fishermen have violated the agreement that have been jointly agreed upon. The meeting agreed to adopt the followings: • All disputes should be settled down in an amicable manner through discussion and not by force. • Weir (rumpon) that is located close to the operational area of purse seine (paying) must be

marked with a pole of 2m high, so that it would be visible to fish trap (bagan) fishermen. • Fish trap (bagan) is not allowed to operate in the area of weir, • Fishermen of fish trap are to report to the Village’s head or to the community chief before doing

fishing • In the west season the waters surrounding Bakau Island, Karang Gading, Karang Air, Karang

Delapan and Karang Berekam are open for the fishermen of paying as well as those of fish trap. • In case violation occurs the actor will be prosecuted according to the existing law Despite that another dispute between the fishermen of Gersik village and those of Lepar Pongok village occurred again in January 9, 2008. Based on the survey’s result of coral reef condition in the waters of Selat Nasik carried out by the Research Center for Oceanography LIPI, it was apparent that the coral reefs in this area was still in good condition. The percentage living coral cover varied from 46,9% to 91.50%; the economically valuable benthic biota such as the Tridacnidae were still plentiful. Based on the above fact, it would be necessary that the agreement of the Selat Nasik community be included in the Resource Management Plan of Selat Nasik Sub-District. It represents an effort to protect existing coral reef. Furthermore, there is the need of Local Regulation to manage coral reefs and related ecosystem in the Belitung District. 4.4 Challenges and perspective 4.5 Process of integration of local wisdom to develop and implement management plan and

legislation To integrate the existing agreement of the Gersik village into the Resource Management Plan of Selat Nasik Sub-District there are some steps to be done. 4.5.1 Identification of Activities The first step is to collect data on socio-economy, ecology, management plan that already existed, and data from other relevant resources. Then a number of meetings should be organized with relevant stakeholders, such as the Village’s Head, Head of the Sub-District, informal leaders and fisherman.

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 8 Page 14 4.5.2 Proposed Draft of Resource Management Plan The second step is to prepare the draft of Resource Management Plan. In the draft the zonation of the Selat Nasik Sub-District was drawn. The red zones represent the areas that are completely protected. The yellow zones represent the limited use zones. While the green zones represent the areas that are open for all kinds of activities. It is on determining these various zones that community’s aspiration are taken into consideration. 4.5.3 Public Consultation The third step is to organize a meeting with the community of the Selat Nasik Sub-District and invite input from them on the draft of management plan that has been developed. 4.5.4 Revision and Consultation with Local Government The fourth step will be to revise the draft, then present it to the local government for comment and discussion. Simultaneously with the development of the Draft of Resource Management Plan, it is also developed the Draft of Local Regulation on Coral Reef Management and other related ecosystems. One draft of the Local Government Regulation concerns with fish catching device. Currently legislation and Resorce Management Plan are still in the process of consultation with the local government of Belitung District point 5.4) 4.6 Effectiveness of coral reef management with involvement of local communities 5. RATIONALE FOR APPROACH TAKEN 6. PROS AND CONS FOR ADOPTED APPROACH 7. POTENTIAL FOR REPLICATION Development of local regulation (Perda) on the management of coral reefs had been done by several other districts in Indonesia. Therefore the potency of replication would be quite high. Nonetheless the phasing and the necessary timing for replication for each locality is quite different. 8. REFERENCES Interviewing some stakeholders 9. CONTACT PERSON



SUSTAINABLE TOURISM BASED ON CORAL REEFS IN

MU KOH CHANG DEMONSTRATION SITE PROJECT Mu Koh Chang, a new tourism destination in Thailand, is geographically located between 11° 56′–12° 16′ N and 102° 25′–102° 61′ E, southern area of Trat Province. It is in the eastern part of the Gulf of Thailand or the west coast of the South China Sea, near the border between Thailand and Cambodia. There are about 60 islands which can be separated into three main island groups, namely Mu Koh Chang, Mu Koh Mak and Mu Koh Kut. Fringing reefs develop around most of the islands and coral communities are also found on off-shore pinnacles. The total coral reef areas are approximately 16 km2 with average live coral coverage around 40%. Over 130 scleractinian coral species have been reported here. Coral reef conditions around Koh Chang and small islands nearby, except the northern part, are poor. The dominant corals are Porites lutea, Pavona decussata, Echinopora lamellosa, Goniopora spp., Pavona spp., Symphyllia spp., Fungia spp. and Astreopora sp. The sponge, Xetospongia sp. is also abundant. Coral reef conditions of a group of small islands north of Koh Chang are fair with abundance of Porites lutea and Symphyllia spp. Coral reef conditions of the Koh Mak group, the largest coral reef area, are poor. The dominant corals are Porites lutea, Diploastrea heliopora, Goniopora spp. and Symphyllia spp. The sponge Xetospongia sp., soft coral Sinularia sp., giant clam Tridacna spp. are also common in the area. Coral reef conditions around Koh Kut groups are fair with abundance of coral Porites lutea, Diploastrea heliopora, Symphyllia spp., and Faviidae, and giant clams Tridacna spp. The severe coral reef bleaching phenomenon in 1998 resulted in coral reef degradation of Mu Koh Chang, however natural recovery is observed. Coral reef fishes of Mu Koh Chang are comparatively high in both abundance and diversity. Over 113 species of fishes are recorded, comprising economically important species such as Lutjanidae, Serranidae and Haemulidae, coral reef indicator species such as Chaetodontidae and common coral reef fishes such as Apogonidae, Labridae and Pomacentridae. Several endangered species, such as sea cows, dolphins, whales, sea turtles (Chelonia mydas and Eretmochelys imbricata) and whalesharks (Rhincodon typus) can be found in the area. In general, the marine organisms found at Mu Koh Chang are of relatively high diversity for the western section of the South China Sea. According to beauty and diversity coral reef in this area, this attracted to tourists and there are quite substantial numbers of visitors snorkeling and SCUBA diving over coral reefs. From data recorded by Tourism Authority of Thailand, number of visitors to Mu Koh Chang was dramatically increased from 246,658 tourists in 2003 to 999,318 tourists in 2007 Coral reefs in Mu Koh Chang have been recognized as a good diving site in Thailand. Since tourism development has grown rapidly there will be a trend of coral reef degradation if appropriate management plans are not immediately implemented. In term of management, Mu Koh Chang Marine National Park was established in 1982, Approximately 30 % of the coral reef in this area are within the area of jurisdiction of Mu Koh Chang National Park. The park has had its own management scheme since 1997. Trat Province also declared Koh Kra-Tein as a fisheries sanctuary in 1991 under the Fisheries Act (1947). The Department of Marine and Coastal Resources has responsibility to conserve and manage coral reef areas and cabinet adopted a national coral reef strategy and action plan in 1992. However, this has not resulted in reversal of coral reef degradation because it has not been operationalised at the local level. The Office of Natural Resources and Environmental Policy and Planning has realized the problem and selected Mu Koh Chang as a pilot study site for coral reef zoning for utilization in the Gulf of Thailand in 2002. Regarding coral reef zoning in Thailand, there are three zone types:

(1) general use zone, areas outside national parks and fisheries sanctuaries were local communities are permitted to fish;

(2) recreation zone (intensive tourism and ecotourism), areas using for sustainable tourism; and,

(3) ecological preservation zones, area where only research is permitted.


Figure 1 Map of Mu Koh Chang Demonstration Site.

Most of the coral reef areas in Mu Koh Chang are categorized as ecotourism zones. From rapidly growth of tourism in the area, The Thai Government approved quite a large budget for urgent development plan for Mu Koh Chang and also selected this area as a model of special administrative zone in 2002. And to support tourism development, Designated of Area for Sustainable Tourism Authority (DASTA) was established to administrate an effective, multiparty joint effort to maintain a balanced interaction between nature conservation and tourism development in Mu Koh Chang and related areas.


In 2005, this area was selected as one of the demonstration sites for coral reef subcomponent under “The UNEP/GEF Project on Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand”. The Mu Koh Chang Demonstration Site (MKCDS), aims to remove or reduce the causes of coral reef degradation in Mu Koh Chang by applying a new model of co-management in the area and restore certain deteriorated areas for education and tourism purposes. The project highlights the importance of coordination among government institutions, private sectors and local communities for sustainable tourism development. In the preparation phase of MKCDS, a set of meetings for consultation with all stakeholders in the area were convened to discover the cause of coral reef degradation in Mu Koh Chang. The major threats are as foldlows:

• Infrastructure development:- This led to soil erosion and resulted in heavy sedimentation and caused degradations of coral reefs and seagrass beds.

• Expansion of tourism business:- Number of tourist is remarkably increasing but carrying capacity of the area is limited. Tourism development plan is required to reduce the impacts.

• Unskilled divers:- Some snorkellers and SCUBA divers have no diving skills. They usually tramp on coral colonies in shallow water, resulting in coral breakage. Diving business management should be improved.

• Lack of awareness of diving operators:- Some diving boat do not use mooring buoys. They anchor on coral reef areas.

• Local communities misunderstanding on marine ecosystem:- Some local people do not realize the importance of marine ecosystem and effects of coral reef degradation on their livelihoods. Garbage and seawage management is urgently needed.

• Illegal fishing:- Some local fishermen and fishermen from outside Mu Koh Chang use illegal fishing gear such as chemicals and certain illegal fishing nets and collecting sea cucumbers and abalone.

• Coral reef bleaching and storm:- The severe coral reef bleaching in the Gulf of Thailand in 1998 resulted in extensive coral reef degradation.

• Failure of coordination among agencies:- Coordination among government institutions, private sectors and local communities should be immediately improved.

• Limited number of officials:- Because of limited budget, number of officials to manage the area is not enough. Therefore law enforcement is not efficiency. Certain powerful local people influence the area management.

The main implementation activities emphasize on immediate objectives as follows.

• Raise public awareness on ecological importance of coral reefs. Building public awareness involves training and seminars for students, tourism operators, government staff and local people in order to raise their understanding on coral reefs and other marine ecosystems and sustainable utilization of marine resources. Activities to encourage and empower volunteer groups for coral reef conservation were taken. They are the key manpower to protect coral reef in long-term management.

• Build networks among government institutions, private sectors and local communities for coral reef management and conservation as well as get approved mechanism for network long – term co-ordination. Encouragement of coordination among government agencies, private sector, NGOs, and local communities during planning, operation and evaluation phases to strengthen co-management of all activities in the area and to reduce any obstacles of project implementation.

• Develop a sustainable ecotourism program for Mu Koh Chang and its vicinity. Tourism development project design, preparation and implementation were carefully conducted in a perfect model. Tourism development projects usually result in significant coral reef deterioration. Studies on carrying capacity of the area are critical for sustainable tourism planning. Socio-economics tools were applied for management of all tourism activities.

• Encourage capacity building in all levels and sectors. The project increases numbers of researchers, site managers and experienced NGOs through research fund raising, training, seminars, and study visits. Site managers could have clear visions for coral reef management and better understanding on modern management approaches.


• Develop alternative income generating program for fishermen. Local fishermen were trained for alternative sustainable livelihoods such as mariculture and diving tour guides in order to reduce impacts from illegal fishing.

• Support for coral reef monitoring and rehabilitation. Demonstration projects for coral reef restoration have been conducted in certain localities. The project raises community awareness on coral reef issues and the role they could play in improved management and benefits that could be derived. The project also includes impact mitigation design to accelerate natural coral reef recovery.

At first, the implementation phase for this project was designed for 3 years from 2005 to 2007. In reality, due to bureaucratic complication and revision of operation plan, the project was postponed to start in June 2005. And after the 18 months assessment, project co-ordinating unit was agreed with an extension of the project to June 2008. In the implementation, the project was designed to co-executed with Mu Koh Chang national Park. To drive for an achievement of MKCDS’s goal in an integrated manner, facilitating co-agency support along the life of the project, arrangement of ‘managing team’ to facilitate coordination, communication and objectivity, including the following

- Management Body which chaired by Governor of Trat Province and consists of relevant government agencies and private sector was established by Trat Province to have authority and responsibility for the conduct of activities at the demonstration site.

- Management advisory group which chaired by Head of Koh Chang District and member by local leaders, coral reef expert and site manager to consider, analyse and provide technical and academic supports for project implementation in the coral reef demonstration site.

The project activities were conducted with emphasis on stakeholder participation plan. Information has disseminated to stakeholders using as wide a range of techniques as possible. Newsletters, networking and consultation are important activities. A high level of public participation is crucial to the success of the project, and the project aims to continue the tradition of successful public participation. The projects concentrate on stakeholder participation in planning, decision making, and execution for all project activities. Moreover certain social and participation issues have been carefully considered throughout the project.

In this paper, we integrate and synthesize experiences gained from project implementation. We aim to identify and understand advantage and disadvantage issues derived from deployment of each activity. Significant issues are explained below:

Figure 2 Meeting of Management Body.


Mechanism for coordination of tourist activities Mu Koh Chang is a prior area for development of sustainable tourism. To support this, Thai Government established the Designated Area for Sustainable Tourism Development Administration (DASTA) as a public organisation in 2002 to administrate an effective, multiparty joint effort to maintain a balanced interaction between nature conservation and tourism development in the area with characterized by special or unique tourism features. Mu Koh Chang and vicinity areas were in responsibility of DASTA Area1. Thai Government allocated a budget through this agency to enhance and support a program for tourism development in this area. The following are some of activity related to development of tourism initiated by DASTA Area1 1) Development of Koh Chang ecotourism network. 2) Development of tourism spots and service centers. 3) Development and conservation of Koh Rang’s Reef for sustainable tourism. 4) Management and Standardization for Koh Chang Ecotourism. 5) Conservation for coastal resources and Management of Tourism Zone in Koh Chang and Related Areas. etc. Mu Koh Chang National Park, is the major agency that takes a responsible for conservation of natural resources in both terrestrial and marine ecosystem. The management of tourism especially in jurisdiction of the national park is also under responsible of the agency. A set of activities for tourism management was initiated and implemented by Mu Koh Chang National Park. Such as,1) Regulation of marine tourism system. 2) Establishment of tourist service stations and development of education media. 3) Encouraging participation of local communities, local administrative offices and private sector for tourism management 4) Supports and development of ecotourism sites. For management of sustainable tourism in Mu Koh Chang, each of agencies responsible to this mission, DASTA Area1 and Mu Koh Chang National Park, was established their own management body, Management board of DASTA Area1, Management board of Mu Koh Chang National Park. Furthermore, Trat Provincial Office also has its own management body to look after this area. Unfortunately, these management bodies have not involved in unique coordination and it resulted in overlapping of activity implementation and scattering of useful information for sustainable tourism development. Management board of the Mu Koh Chang Demonstration Site indicated importance of establishment of coordination mechanism for coral reef based tourism in Mu Koh Chang area and acted an a facilitator to integrate all information by develop an information network for management. This network provided all users to access all information easily. In order to better address increases in both environmental awareness and tourism pressure and keeping with the MKCDS’s objective, the management plan and guideline for sustainable utilization of coral reef resources beyond the MKCDS’s life were prepared through the project. This plan was developed by participation of all related stakeholders from both local and national levels. Meeting with all stakeholders in both formal and informal were organized for completion of this plan. The goal of this plan is to manage reef tourism to prevent unacceptable impact and ensure that the condition of coral reef and related coastal resources are conserved. This plan indicates appropriate activities which were decided by the meeting of all stakeholders that should still be implemented in the area. This plan also provided, by the acceptance of the meeting, in both implemented and funded agencies responsible for each activity. From consultation with related stakeholders, a demonstration site for coral restoration, training courses for natural resources of Mu Koh Chang and training course for local guide are priority in implementation. This plan would be approved by Trat Governor to make it legality and to ensure in operation of activities.


Figure 3 Meeting of all stakeholders for completion of management plan and guideline for

sustainable utilization of coral reef. Community involvement in coral reef based tourism In the framework of the demonstration site project, there are some kinds of involvement of local communities in coral reef based tourism. The project facilitated a centre and office materials for the Local Guide group. This group consists of 26 local fisherman families of Klongson village who would like to increase their incomes by involvement in tourism. For their operation, they use their small fishing boats to do short tours to coral reefs and mangrove areas located near their village. They also show their fishing folkways and demonstrate local fishing methods to their customers. The MKCDS in collaboration with Trat Tour Guide Club and Tourist Authority of Thailand (TAT) organized a training course on local tour guide. Participants from this training received a local tour guide license delivered by TAT. Establishment of this centre resulted in publicized this centre to tourists and increasing of incomes for local fishermen. To sustain this centre beyond the project life, each member have to donate 20 baht of each tourist to the centre. And as planned, this group was involved in coral restoration as a tool for enhancement of public awareness on coral reefs importance and needs of protection of intact coral reefs rather than restoration. Bangbao village, a tourism centre of Koh Chang, is located at southern part of Koh Chang. Almost of tourists who would like to enjoy diving and snorkelling at the popular coral reef sites of Mu Koh Chang have to get on the boat from this village’s pier. At Bangbao, 80% of total 400 villagers are involved in tourism and service. More than 10 tour operators, 5 diving shops and more than 35 boats are available there. In this village, “Kon Rak Bangbao” group, a volunteer group for environmental protection was initiated by villagers. Members of this group particularly are from tourism sector. They participated in training courses for coral reef conservation organised by the MKCDS. They are aware how to avoid damages to coral reefs and always advice their divers and snorkellers concerning environment friendly tourism. Furthermore, diving operators and local people of this village also involved in mooring buoys setting and developing diving trails as eco-tourism guidance. Kon Rak Bangbao group joined coral restoration project implemented by MKCDS. In additional, dive operators and villagers here have supported coral reef clean up activity implemented by MKCDS.


Figure 4 Training course for local tour guide organized by the MKCDS.

Figure 5 Local guide centre at Klongson Village. Salakpetch village, a big fishing village on Koh Chang, is one of the major local communities involved in implementation of MKCDS. There are two groups of stakeholders related to coral reef in this village, fisherman group and tourism group that do a homestay. About 70% of 700 villagers are fishermen. Sixteen homestays were located in this village and more than 20 touring boats are available there. Twenty fishermen participated in training course on alternative livelihood for illegal fishermen. Fishing

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 8 Page 22 gears were provided to every participant of this course. Villagers who related with tourism such as boat drivers, homestay owners or tour leaders participated in training courses for coral reef conservation and eco-tourism organised by the MKCDS. At salakpetch village, a coral reef protection volunteer group was initiated by villagers who have the same ideas in how to protect Koh Chang’s coastal resources from commercial fishing boats and how to reduce the impacts from tourism to coral reef. Members of this group report illegal fishing, operated in coastal area to fisheries patrol unit. The MKCDS supports this group some equipments for patrolling.

A B

Figure 6 Training course for coral reef conservation organized by the MKCDS. A. At Klongson Village

B. At Bangbao Village Furthermore, each of the groups mentioned above was consigned their members to participated in a study visit for coral reef management at Koh Yao Noi, Phangnga Province. This study visit was organized by the MKCDS. The MKCDS also organized a training course on training the trainers for local communities. New seven scuba divers were trained by this course in collaboration with local diving centre.

Figure 7 A study visit to Koh Yaonoi in Phangnga Province.


Regarding to role of communities in policy making, every village on Koh Chang has its own monthly meeting for public hearing. This meeting was participated by all sectors from government agencies, local administrative office, local leaders, NGOs and local people. This meeting aims to discuss on all activities that would implement in the area and each participant has the right to propose issues. If proposed issue is agreed by the meeting, the activities to solve that issue would be implemented. In consultation for completion of management plan and guideline for sustainable tourism, there are set of issues proposed by local communities to government agencies to implement after the end of MKCDS. The issues are following : 1)Promotion of newly tourism model to reduce causes of coral reef degradation in the area 2)Determination for standard of local guide 3)Tourism sectors and local communities should take more part in management of resources for sustainable tourism and 4)Local administration office should pay more attention to issues concerning natural resources.

In addition, To raise community awareness on coral reef issues and the role they could play in improved management and benefits that could be derived. Demonstration site for coral reef restoration was established at Koh Kra with collaboration from Eastern Gulf of Thailand Marine Resource Research and Development Center and local communities. The key ideas in implementation of this demonstration site are 1) limited demonstration areas where they can be easily controlled and managed for the benefit of ecotourism, education, raising public awareness, ecosystem restoration and research 2) Natural coral fragments were used in order to increase the survival of natural coral fragments that might otherwise have had low survival because they were susceptible to being buried. And 3) Techniques and methods used in this project were kept simple, use cheap materials available in local areas and providing hard substrate for coral recruitment. Four method for coral reef restoration were exhibited there, methods are showed as following: 1) additional substrate for coral recruitment by using clusters of cylindrical concretes lay in triangle model 2) attaching branching Acropora spp. with screws to designed PVC pipe frames in the coral nursery area 3) additional substrate for coral recruitment and attaching coral fragments by using clusters of concrete blocks fused in horizontal and vertical directions and 4) attaching branching fragments to dead branching corals by means of plastic straps

A B

C D

Figure 8 Four methods for coral reef restoration at the demonstration site. A. Cylindrical concretes lay in triangle model B. Designed PVC pipe frames C. Clusters of concrete blocks fused in horizontal and vertical directions D. Attachment of branching fragments to dead branching corals by means of plastic straps

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 8 Page 24 Enhancement of public awareness about habitat and sustainable tourism The demonstration site project was involved by a wide range of related stakeholders in implementing activities at the site level. We have considered different target groups for enhancement public awareness, including: primary school students, tour guides and tourism businessmen, local communities, volunteer groups, private sectors, and staff of relevant agencies working for coastal development and conservation. Training courses for each target group were convened with appropriate contents and activities. Three training courses for local students with participated by more than 250 local students and three training courses for tour guide, tourism businessmen and local people on marine ecosystem and its sustainable utilization with attended by more than 400 participants were convened in Mu Koh Chang. In each training course, simple and fun approaches such as VCDs or recreational activities were used for raising awareness. In addition, it is indicated that working with local communities would facilitate better organization skills at local level and accompany them through a process of finding their own solution. An evaluation of effectiveness in raising awareness was conducted by questionnaires and interviewing.

A B

Figure 9 Training course for local students organized by the MKCDS.

A. Working of participated students B. Demonstration of a fishing method by a local fisherman

In each training course, a set of training materials was also supported by collaborated agencies related to conservation of marine and coastal resources. List of them are following:

- Handbook of Marine and Coastal Resources (Department of Marine and Coastal Resources: DMCR)

- Rehabilitation of Marine and Coastal Resources (DMCR) - Manual for Coral reef Cleaning and Rehabilitation (DMCR) - Dangerous and Harmful Marine Organism (DMCR) - Save Our Reefs (Dr.Suraphol Sudara Foundation)

Awareness on coral reef conservation of all local communities was improved through training organised by the project. For verification of changes in public awareness during implementation of project, the demonstration site has developed a set of questionnaires to evaluate knowledge and perception of attendants. From evaluation test, it showed a positive result in improvement of public awareness. The project has developed materials to enhance knowledge concerning conservation of marine and coastal resources for relevant target groups which are: - A manual of information concerning fisheries and coral reef conservation: This manual contained

a basic knowledge and importance of coral reef ecosystem, code of conduct for environmental friendly fishery and laws and regulation concerning fisheries. Target group of this manual is local communities that do fishing in the area.

- Handbook of coral reef and related marine organism in Mu Koh Chang: This book is a guide to common corals and related marine organisms that can easily found in Mu Koh Chang. Pictures of each organism is illustrated in this handbook.


To publicise project activities and enhance public awareness on coral reef conservation, three types of brochures, 2,000 copies of each and 3 types of posters, 1,000 copies of each were produced and distributed to all stakeholders especially local communities and tourists. Their contents mentioned different issues, following are examples: - “Happy Sea” – we have to conserve coral reefs, it is very difficult to restore them; - “Sad Sea” – if we destroy any component of the marine food web, we’ll lost all; do not damage

corals; the nature of food web, if everything out what will we eat?; - “Love coral reefs of Trat province; there are many threats to the sea, so we have to work in

collaboration for marine resource protection;

A total 20 permanent notice boards which illustrated four figures for raising public awareness were set up over Koh Chang area. The content on these boards also explain how important of coral reef and coastal resources of Mu Koh Chang.

Thai Coral Reef Newsletter was produced under the implementation of MKCDS. This newsletter was scheduled to press four issues annually. At this time, 3 issues of this newsletter were distributed to all stakeholders related to coral reef conservation both in Mu Koh Chang and nationwide. Knowledge of coral reef conservation and importance of coastal resources were broadcasted via four local radio stations and television. Homepage to publicise the MKCDS was also constructed namely: www.thaicoralreef.in.th. This homepage provides background of MKCDS project, basic knowledge concerning coral reef and coming event related to coral reef conservation and management.

Figure 10 Homepage of the MKCDS: www.thaicoralreef.in.th.

Figure 11 Thai coral reef newsletter.

http://www.thaicoralreef.in.th/

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 8 Page 26 In addition, to support for management of water activities for sustainable utilization in Koh Rang, hot spot area for diving and snorkeling. A snorkeling trail was set up here to regulate tourism in this area. It was also educated tourists concerns coral reef and its creatures. This trail was consists of ten station from 1 to 0, each station was interpreted specified thing that would be useful for improvement of tourist’s knowledge. A plastic sheet that explained interpreted thing at each station was created and distribute to tourist while they are snorkeling along this trail. A plastic sheet which showed coral, fish and marine benthos that could be found in Mu Koh Chang was also produce.

A B

Figure 12 A snorkeling trail by MKCDS at Koh Yak. A. a plastic sheet showing information at each station B. a snorkeler using the snorkeling trail

Mooring buoy setting and maintenance Nowaday in Mu Koh Chang, watersports activities such as snorkeling, scuba diving, fishing and even boating are main segment of tourism activities in the area. These types of activities take direct and indirect toll on coral reef resources. And, tourism is expected to double in the next decade. Specifically, reef based tourism at Mu Koh Chang attracts a large number of snorkelers and divers per year then mooring buoy setting in coral reef areas used for diving and snorkelling is considered as a priority of tourist management in Mu Koh Chang area. DASTA Area1 and Mu Koh Chang National Park are major agencies whose take responsible to manage and maintain the use of mooring buoy in the area. and also invested to make demarcation by setting mark buoys to prevent small boats anchoring on 4 reef areas. Although these two agencies allocated a large budget to install mooring buoys over the area, a large number of mooring buoys still be required the area. And, from the users such as fishermen, boat driver, tourism operators and tourists’ opinion, a number of mooring buoys and demarcated buoys were destroyed due to inappropriate materials, and lack of enforcement and maintenance.

A B

Figure 13 Mooring buoy installation activity. A. Mooring buoys with “UNEP / GEF /SCS” were used in this activity B. Meeting of mooring committee under the MKCDS project


In the implementation of MKCDS, we are working to address a development of sustainable ecotourism program for Mu Koh Chang and its vicinity. Ten additional mooring buoys were installed at Hin rarb, Hin Lukbart, Hin Kradueng, Koh Songpinong, Adventure reef and Hin Kuekmah under project implementation by co-operation of Mu Koh Chang National Park, local diving operators, local fishermen, related universities and NGOs. A consultation with local government agencies, tourism businessmen and local fishermen for comments and advices concerning materials, location and proper techniques were convened before implementing this task. The project also established mooring buoy committee, with consists of all stakeholders, to decide the plan for setting and maintaining mooring buoy system for long term uses. To give this committee legality authorized, MKCDS collaborated with Mu Koh Chang National Park to assign this committee as a sub-committee under the Mu Koh Chang National Park Committee. Artificial reefs An artificial reef is defined as any materials purposefully place in the marine to influence physical, biological or socio-economics processes related to living marine resources. The most prominent use of artificial reefs has been for the enhancement of fishing and diving; however, their application also serve for enhanced commercial and artisanal fishery harvest, aquaculture production, habitat and coastal protection, research and mitigation of habitat damage and loss. By implementation of the project, a total of 142 artificial reefs, a concrete square frames with a size of 1.5m in each dimension, were installed at Koh Klum and Koh Rayang. Koh Chang Tai local administrative office, Trat Provincial office of Fisheries and DASTA Area1 were collaborated in this activity. The purpose of installation is to protect the coastal marine resources from commercial trawling boats which occasionally fished in near shore area. Aside from this, artificial reefs acted as a fish attractive device and would benefit for local fishermen in increasing of income. For tourism purpose artificial reefs, this was to reduce the damage, to lowered the density of the diving activities along the natural coral reefs, to enhance the number of visiting divers and to encourage the growth and diversity of natural resources and marine organisms. Diving in artificial reef areas would be a good conservation and recovery strategies of coral reefs. It is directly reduce number of diver in natural coral reefs. If these artificial reefs are popular for diving activity, coral reef ecosystem should receive lower human impact, This is just practiced in some places in The Andaman Sea and would be promoted in Koh Chang in the future.

A B

Figure 14 Establishment of new artificial reef site. A. Artificial reef, a square frame of concrete with a size of 1.5 metre in each dimension B. Installation of artificial reef in the sea


Figure 15 Map of mooring buoys settled by the MKCDS and new artificial reef sites. Financial sustainability Given the fact that the government has strong support for development of tourism in Koh Chang, a number of activities of natural conservation have been funded and implemented through DASTA, Mu Koh Chang national park and Trat province office. Aside from this, volunteer groups also received supports from government agencies to implement activities concerning conservation of natural


resources. However, most community groups raised the concerns how to sustain their activities for long term in order to get more benefits from tourism and maintain good condition of coastal habitats. In fiscal years of B.E. 2549-2550, Trat province office established a task force for solving the problem of coral degradation in Trat Province. This task force played a major role in planning and developing activities to mitigate coral degradation in Trat Province. This task force consists of all stakeholders related to coral reef, MKCDS also participated in this task force. DASTA Area1 allocated a total of 3,800,800 Thai Baht for implementation of activities endorsed by this task force concerning the regulation for coastal resources and coral reef utilization.

About Mu Koh Chang National Park, almost of budget allocated from central government are monetary for officers and maintenace expense for infrastructures. Entrance fee from tourists is a solution to get more funds for natural conservation. In theory, government policy allows to collect 400 baht/foreigner and 20baht/thais as rates of tourist fee for enter the national park. In practice, there is no mechanism to implement this policy and no fee has been paid by tourists yet. The demonstration site project is carrying out a study on tourist fee. In this study, a Contingent Valuation Method was employed to determine an entrance fee for visiting reef sites at Mu Koh Chang National Park. This Method is a technique that allows the value of environmental goods and services to be estimated by asking people directly. The data set used in this study was collected through questionnaires to acquire information on socio-economic and willingness to pay. The questionnaire was divided into the following sections:

1) The first section was devoted to the collection of socio-economic data. It is assumed here that age, education, income, profession, number of family members, and so on, are important determinants in visitors’ behaviour towards visits to Koh Chang.

2) The second section consisted of questions aimed at investigating the environmental concern and awareness of visitors. It is assumed that the higher the awareness of environmental problems, the higher the perception of the coral reef’s recreational value will be. This section also contained the scenario presentation and the WTP elicitation questions.

The hypothetical market of this study is stated as follows:

“Coral reefs are dominant coastal ecosystems in Mu Koh Chang National Park. Currently, they are diminishing due to urban and tourism development. A coastal management plan prepared for Mu Koh Chang National Park will protect coral reefs and recreation areas. Examples of the projects proposed include improving recreational facilities for tourists, planting mangroves and coastal plants to reduce the impacts of run-off, and establishing monitoring of fish, plant life and mangroves. The Park plans to increase its entrance fee to finance the improvement of tourist facilities and monitoring coral reefs at Mu Koh Chang National Park.” The elicitation format chosen in this study was the dichotomous choice format. This means that respondents were asked whether they were willing or not to pay a pre-determined entrance fee:

“If the Park increases its entrance fee to _______ Baht per visit, would you still choose to come to Ko Chang?”

300 Thai respondents were asked whether they would pay a higher entrance fee to improve tourist facilities and monitor coral reefs. At the sample means, a visitor’s willingness to pay the entrance fee was estimated as 161.52 Baht per visit.

Determining an appropriate user fee for Mu Koh Chang is quite straightforward, as the value that people obtain from visiting Mu Koh Chang’s coral reef has been established as 161.52 Baht per visit. Therefore, based on this figure, this study also suggests a basic entrance fee of 40 Baht per person per visit for Mu Koh Chang ; that is, twice as much as the current rate of 20 Baht per visit. Supplementary user charges should also be levied when visitors receive additional services from the variety of recreational sites on offer at Mu Koh Chang. It would seem reasonable for the Park to impose charges for tourists visiting certain special and environmentally vulnerable recreational sites. For instance, after having charged the basic entrance fee of 40 Baht, the park could impose an extra fee of 100 Baht per person per visit if the visitor chose to visit environmentally vulnerable reef sites. This user charge would help raise additional revenue for the park by transferring surpluses from high-end consumers to gains, while leaving the low-income visitors unaffected. At the same time, charging an additional fee for particular reef sites would assist in reducing the number of visitors. This additional fee could be more expensive during periods when the marine environment is more sensitive to disturbance, thus providing an incentive for tourists to visit at other times. Both these measures could help relieve the negative pressure on the delicate marine environment.

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 8 Page 30 According to the national park’s procedure, the park have to separate total of tourist fee collected each year into four sums as stated as follows: 1) The park have to transfer fifty percent of the total to the department of national park, wildlife and plant. This money is priority for collector, but the park has to develop a plan to use with this money. 2) Ten percent of the total would allocate to facilitate the operation of the park. 3) Five percent of the total would allocate to nearby local administrative office. And 4) The remaining money would transfer to the department of national park, wildlife and plant, this sum of money would allocate for as a supports for other national parks that small of the total are collected.

Regarding contributions from beneficiary, members of the Local Guide Centre are requested to donate 30 baht per tourist in order to maintain office of the centre beyond the MKCDS project. Meanwhile, a mechanism to get contributions from hotels, resorts and tour centres that use natural resources for their businesses was addressed in management plan and guideline which were developed by the MKCDS project. Forthcoming activities of volunteer groups and other stakeholders would also include in the management plan. This supports fund raising from government and other donors for conservation activities. Waste management

There has been a significant increase in wastewater discharge in Mu Koh Chang. This is largely because of rapid growth of tourism in the area and expansion of local communities. According to the law, all hotels and resorts located by the sea must have a water treatment system to better its wastewater before discharge outside. Local administrative office is a major agency responsible to inspect and enforce each hotel to construct and operate their own treatment systems. But wastewater from local communities located in coastal area was discharged directly to the sea without any treatment excluding lavatory waste that are treated before discharging. This resulted in decline of nearshore water quality. Other coastal ecosystem such as sandy beaches, mangroves and coral reefs were also affected by this matter. Wastewater systems are planned to construct in the area by implementation of Trat Provincial Office and DASTA Area1.

In addition, in coral reef area for tourism, all touring boats are requested to provide sufficient garbage collectors on board and bring all garbage to manage on mainland of Koh Chang. The serious problem of these touring boats is organic waste from human activities. This waste was discharged directly to tourism area without treatments, this can consequence in degradation of marine ecosystem. To mitigate this problem, a campaign for installation to collect human waste in every boats should be initiated and enforced by related and authorized agencies. Surveys on carrying capacity As mentioned above that Mu Koh Chang in this time is a new tourism destination of Thailand. Most of tourists who visit Mu Koh Chang are involved in water activities such as snorkelling and SCUBA diving. Trends of coral reef degradation would happen if there are no implementation of appropriate activities for sustainable utilisation of coral reefs. By support of Kasetsart University, a study of carrying capacity in coral reef area of Mu Koh Chang was implemented. The objectives of carrying capacity study are: - To assess the carrying capacity of coral reef in Mu Koh Chang including indicator species and

standard criteria by using a principal of Limit of Acceptable Change (LAC) and Recreational Opportunity Spectrum (ROS)

- To provide guideline and measure to control number of tourists in order to prevent damage of tourism resources and providing maximum benefit according to the objectives of marine national park and development of sustainable tourism

Four categories of carrying capacity were determined in this study namely: ecological carrying capacity, physical carrying capacity, facility carrying capacity, psychological carrying capacity and. For the ecological carrying capacity (ECC), the researchers identified the national park conservation targets (CTs) for suggestion of relative impact indicators, analyzed the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) by GIS technique, and surveyed visitor use information at each recreation site related to the existing ecological impacts upon the CTs indicators. The standards of these indicators were then set to determine the acceptable impact levels.


The physical carrying capacity (PCC) was determined by the impact of an available space on recreation. Recreation space was measured together with the space required by a visitor for each recreation activity at different ROS zones. Then the visitor number at each recreation site was recorded to determine the impact of available space on recreation.

The facility carrying capacity (FCC) was concerned with the facility impacts. It was determined if the existing facilities were able to accommodate existing visitor uses. The survey of existing facilities against the rate of uses or rate of occupancy was carried out.

Finally, the psychological carrying capacity (PsCC) was determined by visitor perceptions on visitor crowding at each recreation site by the questionnaire survey. The crowding scale was set from 1 to 9 where 1 means not at all crowded and 9 means extremely crowded. The standard of visitor crowding impact was also set to determine the existing level of social impact. ROS was also employed here to identify the desired visitor experiences against their actual experiences.

After the four carrying capacities were investigated, the result of physical carrying capacity, facility carrying capacity and psychological carrying capacity was 128, 212 and 204 tourists at one time respectively. For ecological carrying capacity, limit of acceptable change were used to determine the result of this category. A long-term monitoring program is needed for completion of this category.

The study identified the carrying capacity type that limited the recreation use of each site. The levels of impacts related to carrying capacity were classified into 3 levels: exceeding capacity/extreme impacts, approaching or at capacity/moderate impacts, and below capacity/low impacts. Finally the overall capacity of the area was identified as the final output. Database and information exchange for tourist promotion

Mu Koh Chang National Park owned two Visiting Centres, one is at Tarnmayom Waterfall Park Ranger Station and another one is at Klongplu Waterfall Park Ranger Station. By acceptance of the 8th meeting of Regional Scientific and Technical Committee and the 7th Project Steering Committee, an additional activity namely “Implementation of management plan for coral reef sustainable tourism for Koh Chang” will implement in the area. One activity proposed in this plan is support four knowledge centers for coral reef conservation at Tarnmayom Waterfall Park Ranger Station, Klongplu Waterfall Park Ranger Station, Bangbao pier and Salakpetch village. All of this knowledge centre would provide information concerning coral reef conservation. Materials for public awareness are also available at each centre.

Another visiting centre is planned to build at Koh Rang, the most popular site for water activities, to provide tourists and tour operators with information and knowledge regarding marine conservation and environment friendly tourism. This visiting centre also support for management of coral reef based tourism in this area because of in the plan all boat visits to this site have to had a registration at this centre and all tourists would instructed by national park officers concerning code of practice for snorkelling and diving prior to enter reef sites. The MKCDS will provide materials for public awareness and education for this centre.

Koh Chang National Park is also developing a website to deliver GIS data on biodiversity, legislation, institutional network with technical support from Rajamangkala University of Technology Bangkok. All information and data obtained by MKCDS will be included in this website. Linkage with the South China Sea Project website will be helpful for all users.

In addition, the South China Sea website (www.unepscs.org) with Koh Chang demonstration site page (www.thaicoralreef.in.th) provide an opportunity in promoting activities of the project and attracting more visitors to Koh Chang. Activities related to coral reef and also coastal resources conservation of the Local Guide Center, volunteer groups should promote via these website to publicise in the South China Sea website. Rationale for approach taken

By the years 1982, Mu Koh Chang National Park was established with covering an area of coral reef approximately 5 km2. This agency is responsible to regulate and manage to sustain tourism in the area along with conservation of natural resources. But, due to inadequate number of operative officers and small budget allocated from central government, this resulted in appropriate management could not be implemented completely.

http://www.unepscs.org/

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 8 Page 32 DASTA Area1, a public organization which was established in 2002 to administrate an effective, multiparty joint effort to maintain a balanced interaction between nature conservation and tourism development in Mu Koh Chang and related areas, A relatively large amount of funding has been spent for infrastructure development and establishing new development and management schemes through this agencies. DASTA Area1 also acted as supportor and enhancer for programs or activities related with sustainable tourism. However, in this time, local community was involved only in implementation phase of each activity deployed by these two agencies, participation and discussion during preparation of activities by local communities should be initiated. As mentioned above that Mu Koh Chang’s tourism, especially coral reef based tourism is consider as a significant problem effected in degradation of coastal resources, if no appropriate plans and activities attempted to undertake in the area. MKCDS, the aim of this project is to remove or reduce causes of coral reef degradation trend in the area by using a new model of co-management in the area, this means all stakeholders are invited to participate in management of coral reef for sustainable utilization in all processes. During the preparation of MKCDS proposal, several meetings for discussion and public hearing concerns appropriate activities at Koh Chang with involved by all stakeholders were organized. Therefore NGOs, community-based organizations, local and central governmental agencies and other stakeholders understand the processes of project participation. Most of activities were completed between 2005-2006, the due to the favorable circumstances that occurred during the course of the project. The following is a highlight of the achievements of the MKCDS project.

• Raise public awareness on ecological importance of coral reefs. Numbers of training courses in collaboration with related agencies, Mu Koh Chang National Park, DASTA Area1, DMCR and university concerns importance of marine resources were organized with participation of all level stakeholders such as local fishermen, tourism operators, local tour guides, students etc; local communities realized the importance of marine resources. Thai Coral Reef Newsletter was produced and distributed and webpage to publicize the project was constructed and regularly updated.

• Build networks among government institutions, private sectors and local communities for coral reef management and conservation. Establishment of networks for coordination among existed NGOs in the area and between local communities and local government agencies. Mooring buoys committee was established by recommendation of local communities.

• Develop a sustainable ecotourism program for Mu Koh Chang and its vicinity. Local guide centre with supported of some infrastructures was established in May 2006. This centre particularly supports in increasing of incomes for local fishermen. A study on carrying capacity for tourism and a study on tourism fee was completely done; this two studies provide useful information for coral reef management. A diving trail was set up and additional mooring buoys were installed in proper diving sites. Training courses for coral reef management and conservation for ecotourism for local communities and private sector were organized. Coral reef clean up activity were held with participation of local government agencies, local people, diving operators and NGOs.

• Encourage capacity building in all levels and sectors. Training courses for coral reef protection volunteer groups and for training the trainers for local communities were organized. And a study visit for coral reef management with involvement of local government officers, NGOs, local people and researchers.

• Develop alternative income generating program for fishermen. Training courses of alternative livelihood for illegal fishermen with supports of fishing gears was organized. Two new artificial reef sites were established, this would benefit for local communities in protection of coastal fishery resources and also serve as fish attractive devices for fishing.

• Support for coral reef monitoring and rehabilitation. Monitoring programs of coral reef in both ecological and socio-economics aspects were implemented in selected sites. Development of a GIS-based database with mapped an additional reef area were carried out. Demonstration project of coral reef restoration with collaboration of related stakeholders for education and tourism were established in appropriate sites. Monitor and control land-based pollution program was undertaken in the area.


The following provides an indicative set of lessons learned from implementation of MKCDS.

Six of general issues were primary important to describe here. Project design Problem in project design can lead to difficulties in implementation of the project. To mitigate this problem, set of meetings with all related stakeholders were organized to design project in a realistic assessment of available capacity and infrastructure for completion of proposal proposed to Project Steering Committee (PSC) and to ensure that project is marketable to all sectors. After the approval of project by PSC, a meeting for introduction of the MKCDS was organized with participation of all related stakeholders from all sectors to publicize the project in act local level. And, as the MKCDS is an external donor funded project, to maintain an implementation of significant activities, management plan and guideline for sustainable utilization of coral reef in the area are developed. This plan would be approved and endorsed by Trat’s Governor to make it legality and ensure that proposed activities in the plan will be implemented by responsible agencies named in the plan. Project management It is essential to establish an effective coordination mechanism including adequate management structures and operating system. Trat Province Office established a Management Body to authorize and responsible for the conduct of activities at the demonstration site. Aside from this, Management advisory group was also established to consider, analyse and provide technical and academic supports for project implementation in the coral reef demonstration site. These two management structures were chaired by Trat’s governor and Head of Koh Chang District respectively. Engagement of these two persons is important for achieving effective implementation. In financial aspect, funding was allocated prior to implementation of any activities. Project coordinating unit who is responsible for audition of the MKCDS is flexible in the allocation of the funds. Thus, reallocation and shifting of funding in any activities are able to do with proper reasons. After eighteen months since the beginning of implementation phase of the MKCDS, evaluation of implementation was done by Project Coordinating Unit’s staff to monitor the progress of the project. This evaluation indicated some weak points of implementation of the project. Recommendation from evaluator would be useful in improvement of project implementation. Stakeholder partnership and community participation The natural resource management in Thailand is centralized management by government agency. The most serious limitation of centralized management are associated with how stakeholder groups will respond to policies that will affect them but for which they do not feel responsible. One of new concepts that has been introduced to Koh Chang by MKCDS is a new model of co-management between all stakeholders related to coral reef utilization in the area, This means that all processes of project from preparation phase to evaluation phase at the end of the project was participated by all stakeholders. Local community is one of the most important stakeholders who plays major roles in utilization of the resources. Suggestion from the community in each meeting was considered as a bottom-up. Co-management, as a compromise between bottom-up and centralized management, potential represent the best of both models, engaging resource users and government officials in and equitable and transparent planning process that is formally recognized and sanctioned. There are various advantages to bottom-up strategies. They tend to engage resource users more effectively than top-down strategies since they lead a sense of trust, collaboration and ownership among participants. These strategies are also responsive to local condition that resource users know intimately from regular interaction. Due to local communities are responsible to manage their own resources, define their needs and making decision affecting their well-being. Local people have to have innate capacity to understand and solve their own problems. New model of co-management would provide the community thinks and allows community to develop their own management strategy. Collaborative management is a range of mechanism and activities through which stakeholder discuss, and work together towards understanding, the needs related to the management of the particular

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 8 Page 34 resource with the aim of ultimately negotiating and agreeing on how roles, rights and responsibilities for such management can be shared. Objective need to be clearly defined and understood because of local’s expectation can be very diverse and needed to be clearly understood, otherwise they can cause problems later. Perception is an important factor in getting and maintaining support from the community. Building familiarity and trust are also necessary in implementation of the project The participation of local community in the process is a key factor in success. Increasing of collaboration between the MKCDS and stakeholders would led to less conflict and developed mechanism that assist in the smooth moving of project implementation. In the MKCDS, we used existing local groups / associations as focus group participated implemented activities. Empowering the resource users to get the point across that the user hold the future of their resource in their hand was also facilitated by the MKCDS through various training courses. Aside from this, where there is unsustainable use or management, measures to provide alternative source of income are essential. Ecosystem based management Until now, the majority of coral reef management project have focused only on immediate local threats. Effort to achieve the goal of sustainable management must consider not only the resources but also ecological, social, economic and political aspects that involve all stakeholders. A key component of such a strategy would be promotion of healthy coral reef ecosystem by ensuring that economic development is managed in ways that maintain biodiversity and long-term productivity for sustained use of these systems. Like in the MKCDS, aside from remove or reduce the causes of coral reef degradation in the by applying a new model of co-management, we also emphasize on restore certain deteriorated areas for education and tourism purposes. The highlights are the importance of coordination among government institutions, private sectors and local communities for sustainable tourism development. Management regime of the MKCDS designed to meet local community goals, using of coral reef as a fishing ground for local fishermen and as a tourism aspect, along with for natural conservation. Activities are designed to handle with these different goals by discussion with all stakeholders. Management of coral reefs in Mu Koh Chang area is not only addressed in coral reefs. Activities of such as monitor land based pollution and training course for particular staff from relevant agencies to research on coastal development were implemented in the area to support and control a threat from related ecosystem and land use According to the management plan and guide that would completely be developed prior to the end of the MKCDS. Proposed activities that will continue implement in the area should be based on locally perceived threats and sound data on resource status. Monitoring and evaluation of coral reef management The use of resource in unsustainable way and human impacts are considered as a greatest problem existed in coral reef ecosystems. The purpose of monitoring and evaluating coral reef is to assess the performance of management to mitigate and reverse the degradation of coral reef. Knowledge is important in empowering communities in managing resources. Participatory research and monitoring plays an important role in empowering the community. Local communities and resource users need to be involved in monitoring activities. This will resulted in increasing of understanding in ecosystem and improvement of their ownership for natural resource. Linkage of socioeconomic information with biophysical information, including traditional knowledge are an essential part of ecosystem-based management From implementation of the MKCDS, monitoring activity was undertaken by scientists from certain universities. Training courses for improvement of capacity of local volunteer group which consist of fishermen, boatmen and staff from tourism sector would be organized with appropriate methodologies to monitor and evaluate coral reef ecosystem. Development of quick, simple, inexpensive tools that allow local communities to monitor their own resources is immediately required.


Capacity, education and knowledge management Success of coral reef management system requires a high degree of capacity depending on the complexity of the management program. Education of all stakeholders is critical to management success. In addition, make all stakeholders aware of the ecological and economic benefits of the ecosystem and the need for its sustainable use and improving of capacity concerns natural resources conservation and utilization would benefit for local community after the end of the project. In the planning process of the MKCDS, listening and understanding all points of view in an ecosystem management raised by participant is priority. By implementation of the MKCDS, we identify the target group and establish clear and measurable objectives, target each group at an appropriate level with specific/relevant approaches. Many capacity-building efforts focus only on government agencies, thus local communities need to be empowered/enabled to manage their own environment and develop a sense of ownership. In the area, there is a lack of well-trained local level trainer or manager and institutions with sufficient management capacity because of limitation in accessibility to scientific information and difficult communication. The outputs of activities implemented by the MKCDS were distributed to these people to improve their capacity. Furthermore, expert advisory group can help and support of capacity and program management. Community engagement in management and monitoring build effective management capacity and confidence of project staff. Potential in replication In 2007, MKCDS was visited by several study groups which consist of officers, researchers, site managers, scientists, mayor and governor from this region. The most important objective of those study tour group was to learn and share experiences gained from implementation of the demonstration site. In Koh Chang area, Coral reef is considered as a top priority in management of natural resources. The MKCDS attempted to use a new model of co-management to implement in this area. This would provide an opportunity to all stakeholders to involve in management of their own resources. The success of management model in Mu Koh Chang can be applied to other areas which have similar problems in Thailand and other countries in the South China Sea. The present coral reef site has also high potential for transboundary management with Cambodia. Development of sustainable tourism based on coral reefs by implementation of MKCDS with collaboration with all related stakeholders is considered as a good practice to be documented for adaptive management in other areas of the region where tourism based on coral reefs is priority in development plan of local governments. References Bunce LL. Who Uses What, and Why?-Incorporating Socioeconomic Assessments into Tropical

Marine Ecosystem Management. In: Proceedings of the first ITMEMS.Australia.1998:398-401. Chatthai, B. and Yeemin, T. 2006. Recruitment of scleractinian corals in Mu Koh Chang, Gulf of

Thailand. Paper presented at 1st Asian Pacific Coral Reef Symposium, 18 – 24 June, 2006. University of Hong Kong, China.

Christie P. and White AT. Best practices for improved governance of coral reef marine protected areas. Coral Reefs. 2007.26:1047-1056

Colwell S. Building Public Awareness about Coral Reefs. In:Proceedings of the first ITMEMS.Australia.1998:394-397.

Designated Area for Sustainable Tourism Administration. Mu Koh Chang and Related Area of Trat Coastline: The Most Easterly Tropical Rainforest Island Chain in the Gulf of Thailand. Swichan Press. Bangkok. 2007

Espeut P. Stakeholder Partnerships and Community Participation. In:Proceedings of the first ITMEMS.Australia.1998:386-393.

Gjertsen H. Can Habitat Protection Lead to Improvements in Human Well-Being? Evidence from Marine Protected Areas in the Philippines. World Development. 2005;33(2):199-217.

Idechong N. Stakeholder Partnerships and Community Participation. In:Proceedings of the first ITMEMS.Australia.1998:383-386.

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 8 Page 36 Kritsada Homsud. Master Plan of Mu Ko Chang National Park of year 2006-2009. 2006 McClanahan TR, Marnane MJ, Cinner JE, Kiene WE. A Comparison of Marine Protected Areas and

Alternative Approaches to Coral-Reef Management. Current Biology. 2006;16:1408-1413. Meyer KD. Making Tourism Work for the Bonaire Marine Park. In:Proceedings of the first ITMEMS.

Australia.1998:251-252. Perera N. Alternative Livelihoods Through Income Diversification:an option for sustainable coral reef

and other coastal ecosystem management in Sri Lanka. Poster presented in the second ITMEMS.Philippines.2003.

Petrosillo I, Zurlini G, Corliano ME, Zaccarelli N, Dadamo M. Tourist perception of recreational environment and management in a marine protected area. Landscape and Urban Planning. 2007;79:29-37.

Reef Check Foundation. Enhancing tourism competitiveness in the Dominican republic. Poster present in the second ITMEMS.Philippines.2003.

Ruengsawang, N., Yeemin, T., Somkleeb, N. and Sutthacheep, M. A management model to reduce impacts on coral reefs of Mu Koh Chang National Park, Gulf of Thailand. Paper presented at 1st Asian Pacific Coral Reef Symposium, 18 – 24 June, 2006. University of Hong Kong, China. 2006

Sambunruang, D. and Yeemin, T. Coral communities on pinnacle in the Eastern Gulf of Thailand. Paper presented at 1st Asian Pacific Coral Reef Symposium, 18 – 24 June, 2006. University of Hong Kong, China. 2006.

Sambunruang, D., Yeemin, T. Change of Coral Communities on Pinnacle in a Tourism Area of the Gulf of Thailand. Paper presented at 21st Pacific Science Congress, June 12 – 18, 2007, Okinawa, JAPAN. 2007.

Somkleeb, N., Ruengsawang, N., Sutthacheep, M. and T. Yeemin. Coral reef management and restoration in Mu Koh Chang National Park, Thailand. Paper presented at The East Asian Seas Congress, 12 – 16 December 2006. Haikou City, Hainan Province, PR China. 2006.

Somkleeb, N., Yeemin. T. 2007. Sustainable tourism in a marine protected area: Koh Chang, Thailand. Paper presented at 21st Pacific Science Congress, June 12 – 18, 2007, Okinawa, JAPAN. 2007.

Songploy, S., Yeemin, T. and M. Sutthacheep. Installation of mooring buoys in Thailand: lessons learned for coral reef tourism management. Paper presented at The East Asian Seas Congress, 12 – 16 December 2006. Haikou City, Hainan Province, PR China. 2006.

Sutthacheep, M., Yeemin, T. Education and capacity building programs for sustainable programs for sustainable tourism in coral reefs of Mu Koh Chang, THAILAND. Paper presented at Eco Summit. May 22-27, 2007 Beijing, PR China. 2007.

Sutthacheep, M., Yeemin, T. Awareness and Education Programs for Coral Reefs Conservation in Mu Koh Chang National Park, Thailand. Paper presented at 21st Pacific Science Congress, June 12 – 18, 2007, Okinawa, JAPAN. 2007.

Sutthacheep, M., Yeemin, T., Somkleeb, N., Songploy, S. Lochaya C., Pengsakun, S. Improvement of a local guide center and ecotourism in Koh Chang, Thailand. Paper presented at PACON 2007 International: The Pacific Congress on Marine Science and Technology, June 24-27, 2007, Ala Moana Hotel, Honolulu, Hawaii. 2007.

Sutthacheep, M., Yeemin, T., Somkleeb, N . Demonstration Site for Coral Reef Management at Mu Koh Chang, Trat Province. Paper presented at the 33rd Congress Science and Technology of Thailand (STT 33). 18 – 20 October 2007, Walailak University, Nakhon Sri Thammarat, Thailand. 2007.

Sutton SG,Bushnell SL.Socio-economic aspects of artifical reefs:Considerations for the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park.Ocean&Coastal Management. 2007;50:829-846.

Tongson E. ICM as strategy to enable MPA management: the case of Balayan bay. Poster presented in the second ITMEMS.Philippines.2003.

Trono RR,Ledesma GL,Lizaris J,Comley J,Harding SP,Solandt J-L,Raines PS. The Mabini-Tingloy marine biodiversity conservation project-a collaborative approach to marine environmental protection. Postered present in the second ITMEMS. Philippines.2003.

Tupper M, Lessons learned and best practices in the management of coral reef. (personal communication) 2008.


Watson K, Skeat H, and Barnett B. Tourism Management in the Great Barrier Reef,Australia.

In:Proceedings of the first ITMEMS.Australia.1998:253-258. White AT, Eisma-Osori R-L, and Green SJ. Integrated coastal management and marine protected

areas:Complementarity in the Philippines.Ocean&Coastal Management. 2005;48:948-971. Wilson AM. The GEF Egyptian Red Sea Coastal and Marine Resource Management Project-A

Decade Of Effort, Experience and Trade-Offs Required to Achieve Marine Tourism and Conservation Goals. In:Proceedings of the first ITMEMS. Australia.1998:239-250.

Woodley JD.Establishment of Coastal Ecosystem Monitoring Programs:Lessons Learned by CARICOMP. In:Proceedings of the first ITMEMS.Australia.1998:327-328.

Yeemin, T. Coral reef demonstration sites. Paper presented at Second Regional Working Group for the Coral Reefs Sub-component on the Project of Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand. 14 – 16 November, 2005. Amari Watergate Hotel, Bangkok, Thailand. 2005.

Yeemin, T. Somkleeb, N., Kraipanond N. and Sutthacheep M. Better co-ordination between all parties to reduce impacts on coral reefs of Mu Koh Chang, Thailand. Paper presented at EMECS 7 / ECSA 40 Conference 9 – 12 May 2006. Caen, France. 2006

Yeemin, T., Somkleeb, N. and M. Sutthacheep. Coral reef ecosystem management for sustainable tourism in Mu Koh Chang, Thailand. Paper presented at 3rd International Tropical Marine Environmental Management, 16 – 20 October 2006, Cozumel, Mexico. 2006.

Yeemin, T., Somkleeb, N., Sutthacheep, M. and S. Songploy. Participation of local fishermen for implementation of coral reef Management Plan at Mu Koh Chang, Thailand. Paper presented at Global Environmental Change: Regional Challenges - An Earth System Science Partnership (ESSP) Global Environmental Change Open Science Conference, 9 – 12 November 2006, Beijing, PR China. 2006

Yeemin, T., Sutthacheep, M., Buareung, J., Saenghaisuk. C. Coral reef restoration in demonstration sites for ecotourism and raising public awareness in Thailand. Paper presented at Eco Summit. May 22-27, 2007 Beijing, PR China. 2007.

Yeemin, T., Lawang, B., Ruengsawang, N., Somkleeb, N., Sutthacheep, M. GIS-Based coral reef maps in tourism areas of Thailand. Paper presented at PACON 2007 International: The Pacific Congress on Marine Science and Technology, June 24-27, 2007, Ala Moana Hotel, Honolulu, Hawaii. 2007.

Contact Details Dr. Thamasak Yeemin Marine Biodiversity Research Group, Department of Biology, Faculty of Science Ramkhamhaeng University, Huamark, Bangkok 10240 THAILAND Tel/Fax: (66 2) 310 8415 Mobile: (66 81) 8423056 E-mail: [email protected]




Transboundary Water Management between Kampot (Cambodia) and Kien Giang (Viet Nam) Importance of coastal ecosystems and resources in the trans-waters of Kampot and Kien

Giang Provinces

The transboundary waters between two provinces have favourable physical conditions for development of tropical shallow water ecosystems such as seagrass beds, coral reefs and mangroves and, as the result, provide abundant living resources.

Based on initial assessments, the seagrass area in these transboundary waters is more than 27,000ha including 12,000ha in Kien Giang and more than 25,000ha in Kampot Province, making them the most extensive in the South China Sea. The seagrass meadows in Kampot are located in parallel to the coastline of Prek Ampil, which extends 150-300m from the shoreline being widest in front of Bokor National Park. The area has a gentle slope with seagrass occurring at depths from 1 – 4m. Seagrass beds in Kien Giang Province are mainly distributed in shallow coastal waters of the archipelagos of Hai Tac, Ba Lua and Phu Quoc.

Based on recent taxonomic surveys (Vibol, 2006, Nguyen Xuan Hoa et al., 2006) 10 seagrass species have been identified in the trasboundary waters, including: Enhalus acoroides, Halophila decipiens, Halophila minor, Halophila ovalis, Thalassia hemprichii, Cymodocea rotundata, Cymodocea serrulata, Halodule pinifolia, Halodule uninervis, Syringodium isoetifolium. The data collected in Quoc Quoc indicates that richness of associated species of the seagrass beds is high having: 113 species of macro-algae; 71 species of mollusc; 26 species of crustaceans; 19 species of Annnelids; and 15 species of echinoderms. The preliminary surveys in Kampot have recorded 10 crustaceans, 100 gastropods, 7 sea urchins and 16 seaweed species.

Based on research conducted by Cambodia Fisheries Administration (FiA) staff in 2002 the toal coral reefs area in Kampot occupies an area of 953 ha and they forms a flat fringing reef with two areas connecting to the seagrass meadow. The first is located in front of Prek Kdat, which has about 31 ha and the second extends from Prek Kdat to the east to Prek Koh Torch. The average live coral cover for the whole coastline was estimated to be 23% to 58%, consisting of 17 species. The reefs are generally reported to be in poor health, with low species diversity dominated by massive forms (Mam, 2001).

Based on survey conducted by Vibol (2006) about 520 tonnes per month or 6,240 tonnes per year of marine product are harvested from the seagrass beds in Kampot province. In conversion to US$ it would be equal to US$7,500,000 per year. Based on direct communication with fishing household the catch per unit effort is declining from year to year especially from 2000 due to an increase in the number of fishermen and use of illegal fishing gear. However, the total catch in Kampot is not significantly different, ranking around 6,000 – 8,000 tones per year.

Remote sensing and ground truthing using manta-tows indicates that the total coral reef area in Phu Quoc waters is more than 470ha, of which 360ha (76%) is located in the southern An Thoi islands. Live coral cover averages 44.5%. A total of 260 species in 49 genera of reef-building corals are recorded in Phu Quoc waters. The list of coral reef fish includes 152 species in 71 genera. The coral reefs of Phu Quoc are very diverse in terms of species of grouper but less diverse in butterfly fishes when compared with other locations in Viet Nam. Recent surveys found 48 species of macro-molluscs, 25 species of echinoderms, including 18 species of holothurians and 53 species of macro-algae.

Phu Quoc is an important landing area and fishing grounds of Kien Giang Province. Total fisheries yield increased from 30,969 tons in 1993 to 50,000 tons in 2000 and 60,246 tons in 2006 (Phu Quoc Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 2006). Together with Nam Du and Tho Chu islands, some large fishing grounds are formed in the area. The main fishing grounds are south of Phu Quoc. The areas of An Thoi and east of Phu Quoc island are important squids and crab spawning ground. The peak fishing season in Phu Quoc region is from November to March.

Finfish are the main contributors to the total fisheries production landed. At least, 67 species of teleost fish are caught in the area, of which representatives from the families Carangidae, Scombridae, Hemirhamphidae, Serranidae, Lutjanidae, Lethrinidae and Synodontidae. Many trevallies, jacks such as Canrangoides ferdau, Caranx sexfasciatus, Selaroides leptolepis and Atule kalla, mackerels


Rastrelliger kanagurta and Scomberomorus commersonii, scad Decapterus and anchovies Stolephorus are the representatives in pelagic fisheries. A total of mackerels and anchovies landed in 2001 was about 3,500 and 12,500 tons respectively (Data from Phu Quoc Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 2001).

The most important endangered species found in the transboundary waters is the Dugong (Dugon dugong) which is frequently encountered in the north and north-east of Phu Quoc island, and also in Kampot coastal areas. According to reports of the Kien Giang Department of Fisheries (2004 – 2005) 5 species of dolphins were recorded in the waters of Kien Giang, including: Orcaella brevirostris, Tursiops aduncus, Sousa chinensis, Stenella longirostris, Stenella coeruleoalba. However, appearance and movement of dolphins herds in transboundary waters are not well known.In addition, 3 sea turtle species have been recorded from the area, including: Green Turtle (Chelonia mydas), Hawksbill (Eretmochelys impricata) and leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea), of which Green Turtle and hawksbill are more common. Recent surveys in Phu Quoc showed that sea turtles are becoming fewer and that only five nesting beaches are still in use in the Phu Quoc archipelago.

• Transboundary problems in environment management

Increase in the number of fishing boats and better fishing gear causes increasing pressure on the resources and habitats that could lead to decline in fish stocks and yields.

Trawling, which is not allowed in the near shore waters as regulation of Cambodia and Viet Nam, commonly occurs on seagrass beds and shallow waters of both Kampot and Kien Giang provinces. This is one of the greatest sources of damage to seagrass habitats and biodiversity particularly young seagrass shoots, small juvenile fauna, and endangered species. Trans-boundary fishing activities happen everyday as Viet Nam’s fishing boats illegally enter and fish on seagrass beds or coral reef areas near-shore. Fishing using toxins and electricity are still recorded in the waters of both provinces.

Fishermen in both provinces Kien Giang and Kampot still catch and trade endangered animals in transboundary waters, making endangered species such as dugong, sea turtles at risk of local extinction in the near future. Corals are also exploited for handicrafts and sold to tourists in Phu Quoc island.

Tourism development contributes for development by providing jobs and improving livelihood for local inhabitants. Anchoring on coral reefs, waste discharge from hotels and tourist boats and sediments from construction have negative impacts on the marine environment and cause habitat damage.

Littering, waste dumping, land clearing, road building, coastal construction and poor agricultural practices are considered factors lead to pollution, increase soil erosion and sedimentation, and cause the degradation of seagrass beds and coral reef areas in the transboundary waters. It is noted that waste from fishing boats, including oil discharge is a serious problems in fisheries piers in Phu Quoc archipelagos.

• Challenges and perspectives in organisation of joint activities

o Challenges

Lack of coordination in fisheries management in the transboundary waters

Marine resources in the trasboundary waters are exploited by fishermen of both provinces without definition of fishing boundary. Trading of marine products occurs daily between the two provinces. The coordination for joint management of fisheries has not yet developed and implemented effectively for this large marine area.

Lack of balance between economic development and environment management for sustainable development

Recently, many development projects have occurred in the coastal waters of both provinces in order to meet development plan with respect to increase income for local government and communities. Given that poverty alleviation is the first priority of the Governments, environmental management for sustainable development has not been adequately considered in planning and practices.

Lack of awareness of local communities on sustainable use and law enforcement

Through the execution of the demonstration site projects public awareness of the local communities have improved. However, their knowledge on sustainable use of resources is still limited, and local

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 8 Page 40 people concentrate on securing direct but not long-term benefits. Law enforcement is not effective enough due to weak capacities of both provinces.

o Perspectives

Two sites management groups of Kampot (Cambodia) and Kien Giang (Vietnam) have been working closely to solve the problem related to reduction of the illegal trade and illegal fishing, prepare guideline for assessment and monitoring, discuss how to join GIS database and discuss how to provide training and share information between both sides.

So far training on assessment, monitoring and transplantation of seagrass was provided from Phuquoc side to Kampot side. The study between both sides was arranged among both communities and local authorities. Moreover, both sides agreed to have software for joint GIS database and agreed to sign on the Memorandum of Agreement on Framework for Cooperation in the Management of Coastal Ecosystem and Natural Resources between the Province of Kampot (Cambodia) and Kien Giang (Vietnam) on 28 March 2008. More perspectives to be gained from the joint management of transboundary water would be as below:

– Reduction of illegal trade and illegal fishing – Sustainable stock and utilization in both sides – Sustainable stock of endangered species – Technical staff fully built with skill on monitoring and assessment of biodiversity within

seagrass bed – Community fully involved in management of the resources – More support (technical and financial support) from funding agencies

• Process in development of coordination mechanism and cooperative framework

Local government of Kampot and Kieng Giang Provinces is under a friendship alliance since 1980s. In year 2003 the cooperative mechanisms and administrative management between local government was established, jointly agreement has been signed and yearly consultative meeting between both province for improving bilateral cooperation is properly conducted.

In year 2005, under the framework of UNEP/GEF–SCS project, the trans-boundary collaborative Mechanisms supporting in natural resources and habitat management has been established.Joint Meetings between the Management Teams of the Kampot and Phu Quoc Demonstration Sites have been conducted three times to discuss the different cooperation area such as reduction of illegal trade, illegal fishing ,preparation of guideline for assessment and monitoring, preparation of guideline for policy and cooperation framework, joining GIS for both side and sharing information and exchange of experience.

• Contents of cooperative framework and priorities in joint management

Goals To enhance and strengthen cooperation between the two provinces in the fields of biodiversity conservation, reversing environment degradation trends, and sustainable use of resources, in order to improve the livelihood of local communities Objectives 1. To strengthen institutional arrangements for management of natural resources and marine

environment in the transboundary waters between the two provinces of Kien Giang and Kampot.

2. To improve the management capacity for natural resources and marine environment in transboundary marine zone between two provinces Kien Giang and Kampot.

3. To enhance awareness of managers and local communities regarding the importance of conservation in the transboundary marine zone between two provinces Kien Giang and Kampot.

4. To develop cooperative research programmes and exchange information, including sharing of data and databases.

5. To maintain financial sustainability for long term management, conservation of natural resources and marine environment in transboundary waters between two provinces of Kien Giang and Kampot.


Programmes and actions

Programme 1. Strengthening institutional arrangements for management of coastal resources and environment and integration to development policy of two provinces

Action 1. Review of existing legal documents of both provinces regarding management resources and environment

Action 2. Integration of resource and environment management to cooperative agreement between two provinces and conduct of joint meetings of the Management Board/Steering Committee once or twice a year

Programme 2. Improvement of management effectiveness for resource and environment

management in the transboudary waters

Action 1. Additional inventory of biodiversity and resources for management purpose

Action 2. Capacity building for scientific research, resource assessment and monitoring, management skill, and transferring knowledge and information to local communities

Action 3. Study tour and workshop/seminars for local people, managers and policy makers for experience exchange in resource and environment management between two provinces and others in the region

Action 4. Strengthening information exchanges and sharing between two provinces and maintenance of the joint GIS database for uses in management of resources and environment

Action 5. Joint management and control of illegal trade, exploitation activities of resources in the transboundary waters; and to stop catching rare and endangered species

Programme 3. Enhancement of public awareness on marine conservation and sustainable

resource use

Action 1. Strengthening education capacity, communication system and establishment of network of communication and volunteers for enhancement of public awareness on marine resource sustainable use

Action 2. Development and distribution of public awareness materials and implementation of communication programmes regarding ecosystem importance and sustainable use of coastal resources

Action 3. Orgnisation of exchanges programme for natural resources conservation and environment protection for youths and students of Kien Giang and Kampot

Programme 4. Development and execution of joint projects with supports from International

Organisations

Action 1. Project for development and management of transboundary fisheries refugia belonging the two provinces

Action 2. Project for migratory and endangered species conservation

Programme 5. Financial sustainability for long - term management and livelihood alternatives

Action 1. Development of programmes for livelihood alternatives, including technical supports for aquaculture, fisheries processing, tourism, animal raising and integrated farming system

Action 2. Development of models for community-based resource management

Action 3. Promotion for development of tourism in the transboundary waters

Action 4. Fund raising from international organisations for livelihood, and resource and environment management

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 8 Page 42 • Implementation of the policy and framework INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT Focal agencies

The provincial leaders of each Province shall appoint an appropriate agency as the focal point to coordinate activities under the policy and framework, including:

- Department of Natural Resources and Environment of Kien Giang province, and - Fisheries Cantonment of Kampot Province

Cambodian related institutions and responsibilities in implementing the policy and framework

INSTITUTION RESPONSIBILITIES Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries and Ministry of Environment

Provision of technical and financial supports, development of international cooperation,

Fisheries Administration Provision of technical and financial supports, development of international cooperation, and assign responsibility for: coordination and facilitation of activities under the policy and framework

Kampot Provincial Authorities Development and management of the projects regarding coastal resources and environment at the provincial level, including preparing proposals for funding support

Kampot Department of Agriculture, Kampot Department of Environment, Kampot Department of Land Management, Kampot Department of Tourism, Kampot Department of Rural Development, Kampot Department of Women Affair, Kampot Department of Planning, Kampot Department of Public works and Transport, Kampot Department of Mine and Industry, Kampot Department of Water and Meteorology, Kampot Provincial Police Commission,

Support in implementing activities under the policy and framework for cooperation

Kampot District Authority Facilitating participation of local people in implementing activities under the policy and framework for cooperation

Commune councils of Prek Tnot, Koh Toch, Boeung Touk.Chum Kreal, Trabiang Sangke, Kaun Sat, kampong Samrong.

Direct involvement in implementation of projects under the policy and framework for cooperation at the local level

Viet Nam related institutions and responsibilities in implementing the policy and framework

INSTITUTIONS RESPONSIBILITIES Department of Agriculture and Rural Development Marine resource management, forest

protection and rural livelihood alternatives. Department of Science and Technology

Technical and financial support for development of projects related to research and application of new models in sustainable use of resources

Department of Finance Allocation of fund for coastal resource management

Phuquoc National Park and the Management Board of Protection Forests in Phu Quoc district

Protection of forest and re-forestation in Phu Quoc archipelago

Provincial Women Association Development and implementation of the alternative livelihood

Border Army Support for enforcement practices Phuquoc District Office of Agriculture, Forestry & Fisheries Executing activities regarding training and

public awareness Business sector (Veranda Co., Saigon-Phuquoc Resort) Sustainable use of habitats for tourist business People's Committee of thee communes Encouragement of participation of local

communities in habitat management and sustainable use of coastal resources



Wetland Management at Con Chim Area of Thi Nai Lagoon, South Central Viet Nam

1. PROJECT TITLE: Rehabilitation of habitats and sustainable use of fisheries resources in

Con Chim Area, Thi Nai Lagoon

2. PROJECT SUMMARY:

2.1 Project area description

Thi Nai Lagoon with an area of 5,060ha is a major wetland ecosystem for the Binh Dinh province. The significant habitats of mangroves and seagrass beds being pivotal to the viability of local fisheries. The level of unregulated exploitation of resources has lead to the ecosystem functions being under threat.

Con Chim Marine Sanctuary, with a total area of 480ha, has been developed by the Binh Dinh Fisheries Dept. to address this predicament. The local coastal communes whose livelihoods heavily rely on the marine resources, were eager to collaborate in this pilot model of wetland ecological rehabilitation.

2.2 Project objective:

2.2.1 Long term objective

To stabilize the ecosystem of Thi Nai Lagoon in contribution to sustainable economic development, based on the appropriate use of the natural resources.

2.2.2 Immediate objective

To establish a zone of ecological rehabilitation and natural resource conservation in Con Chim and the neighboring areas, where the ecosystems of the mangrove forest and sea-grass beds will be rehabilitated and protected. The natural resources will be conserved and appropriately used in the context of economic and ecological sustainability. 3. DESCRIPTION OF ISSUESS AND CHALLENGES:

Thi Nai Lagoon, with a total area of 5,060ha, is where there is an abundance of mangrove forest resources. The mangrove forest used to cover 1,000ha and sea-grass beds 200ha (Pham Huu Tri, Nguyen Huu Dai, Nguyen Xuan Hoa and Nguyen Xuan Vi, 2003). These ecosystems ensured a high biodiversity and provided favorable conditions for the abundance of aquatic species and maintaining the environmental condition and the livelihood of the human communities inhabiting around the lagoon, especially the population of Quy Nhon City.

Unfortunately, the mangrove forest has degraded drastically, which is reflected by as much as one-third of the lagoon area being converted into aquafarming. What is more, Quy Nhon seaport, the wastes discharged from the city and neighboring areas have also expedited the environmental deterioration. It is pointed out that such a problem has resulted in a marked economic loss for the locality. It is quite evident from the recorded facts that the lagoon bottom and navigable channels have become shallow, that the aquaculture industry is faced with more disease outbreaks, and that the lagoon landscape is ruined, resulting in abandoned bird "sanctuaries"; thus doing away with the potentialities for the development of ecotourism viewed as a big income-generating industry for most of Central provinces (Fisheries Department of Binh Dinh, 2005).

The ecological and economic problems require the provincial authorities to find out feasible solutions with a view to partly rehabilitating depleted natural resources and also sustaining economic benefits, and conserving naturally endowed resources for the province. The project on rehabilitation and sustainable use of the aquatic resources in Con Chim, Thi Nai lagoon is expected to be one of the best solutions for natural conservation. 4. DESCRIBE PRACTICES IMPLEMENTED BY THE DEMONSTRATION SITE PROJECT:

4.1 Zoning and strategy of resource uses in Con Chim Marine Sanctuary

A zoning map for future strategy of resource uses in Con Chim has been established (Vo Si Tuan, Nguyen Xuan Hoa, Tong Phuoc Hoang Son, 2005).


Local oyster species being trialled through rack or ground culture methods by participating local aquaculture families on site within Thi Nai Sanctuary.

4.3 Rehabilitate the significant habitats Community based planting schemes for intensive

and integrated mangrove zones Manage and promote community based protection

efforts for young mangrove forests Diversify species of mangrove seedlings by

establishing nurseries Increase awareness of the vulnerability of

seagrass areas to destructive fishing to aid in the protection of core areas

Community based mangrove planting and protection programmes

4.2 Establish sustainable aquaculture Practices and local livelihood assistance • Identify environmentally and economically sound species

that can be employed by local aquaculturists. • Trial and assess integrated species models and instil

best practices system amongst local aquaculturists • Develop a co-management model which can transfer the

efforts of Destructive Fishers into areas of sustainable aquaculture production

• Initial funding, seed and technical assistance

4.4 Conduct community education Develop community awareness of conservation

issues and sustainable practices for local communities.

Education presentations at local schools Community involvement in small scale tourism trips

planned for Con Chim Marine Sanctuary Education posters, pamphlets and displays on

environments and species and activities shown in the Con Chim information centre

Raising community awareness on conservation and fisheries issues through education programmes, pamphlets and posters.

7

4

4

2

2

53

6

8

1

1

9

8

Con Chim Marine Sanctuary Zoning Map

1. Zone of seagrass and resource protection (15ha)

2. Zone of environmental friendly aquaculture plus re-planted mangroves (25.1ha)

3. Zone of bird protection and office site (9.4ha) 4. Zone of concentrated mangroves (38.7ha) 5. Zone of integrated mangroves (along the

embankments – 10ha) 6. Zone for experimental research and fisheries

resource recovery (26.2ha) 7. Zone for sustainable aquaculture extension (in

Con Gia – 33.4ha) 8. Zone for mollusc farming (11.6ha) 9. Zone for reasonable fishing (310ha)


Experiences:

It is essential to have determination and to accept challenges (due to so many difficulties when designing an agreeable plan and effective implementation in a complicated area of coastal lagoons).

It is also necessary to achieve a thorough agreement from provincial levels to grass-root levels.

It is necessary to have a high understanding and community participation The links and co-coperation from all sectors, especially between fisheries sector and forestry

sector is also indispensable. It is very important to have support and expertise from scientists, institutes and relevant

organizations (especially a confidential link between different scientists). It is also necessary to disversify investments (from central levels to grass-root levels,

international organizations and other businesses). 5. RATIONALE FOR APPROACH TAKEN:

Distribution and characteristics of ecosystems in Con chim Area (mangroves left insignificantly, seagrass beds covering 50ha and the soft sediments)

The topography and characteristics of the soft sediments (changes due to aquaculture) Natural fisheries resources (consist of around 36 tonnes of fish, 75 tonnes of crustacean and

600 tonnes of molluscs) Larval source of aquatic species (abundant of crab and molluscs larvas) Bird species and migratory seasons (37 species of water-birds and migratory birds, 10

species of jungle birds). Quality of water and sedimentary environment (microorganism pollution and 2 separated

freshwater supplies) Status of fisheries exploitation (overfishing and destructive fishing) Trials of planting mangrove species (which show that the environment is still favorable for

mangrove rehabilitation) 6. PROS AND CONS FOR ADOPTED APPROACH:

Advantages - To have support in terms of favourable policies and finance from the provincial People’s

Committee, domestic as well as oversea organizations. Especially, the Project has gained international expertise in mangrove recovery and coastal fisheries conservation.

- To achieve agreement between local fisheries management team and fisheries workers as well as project performers even during difficulties.

- To gain initial outcomes in terms of mangrove recovery and environment friendly aquaculture (such as models of shrimp farming and oyster rearing plus mangrove re-planting, shrimp and tilapia farming, oyster rearing, etc).

- To initially attract interests from tourists. This is a potential to develop eco-tourism while recovering significant habitats of mangroves and seagrass and improve local livelihoods.

Disadvantages and remaining problems - However this effort is only the first stage of the rehabilitation of significant habitats and

protection of fisheries resources in Con Chim Marine Sanctuary and Thi Nai lagoon. Education to raise local awareness is only at its beginning stage. Shrimp diseases are still happening at a high frequency. Local lives are still difficult for local aquaculturists and fishing communities.

- Lack of a reasonable budget (since budgets from the provincial People’s Committee were terminated late 2006 and recently, Binh Dinh DoFi are still using every form of financial support so that this implementation will not be interrupted).

- Lack of relevant expertise and practical skills in terms of the rehabilitation of these significant habitats and fisheries conservation.

UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.9/9 Annex 8 Page 46 7. POTENTIAL FOR REPLICATION:

Thi Nai Sanctuary have support in terms of favourable policies and finance from the provincial People’s Committee, domestic as well as oversea organizations. Especially, the Project has gained international expertise in mangrove recovery and coastal fisheries conservation. That is an ongoing project designed to support the aquatic ecosystem and improve the living standards of local communities that depend on the marine resources of Thi Nai Lagoon. 8. REFERENCES Binh Dinh Department of Fisheries, 2005. The status of coastal aquaculture in Binh Dinh in 2005.

Review. 16 pp. .

Vo Si Tuan, Nguyen Xuan Hoa, Tong Phuoc Hoang Son, 2005. Zoning for mult-purpose use of Con Chim Marine Sanctuary, Thi Nai lagoon. Study report. 9pp.

Pham Huu Tri, Nguyen Huu Dai, Nguyen Xuan Hoa, Nguyen Xuan Vi, 2003. A survey on the status of the floral system of Binh Dinh. Study report. 5 – 7.

9. CONTACT DETAILS: Fisheries Department of Binh Dinh Province 110 Tran Hung Dao Str, Quy Nhon, Binh Dinh, Viet Nam Ph: (84) 56 892919, Fax: 056.892579 Email: [email protected], [email protected] Management Board of Con Chim Marine Sanctuary – Thi Nai Lagoon 238 Tran Hung Dao Str., Quy Nhon, Binh Dinh, Vietnam Ph: (84) 56 821586 Email: [email protected]




ACHIEVEMENTS AND LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE ...

Documents

Transcript of ACHIEVEMENTS AND LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE ...