A8 IREW Workshop report final - ACP Fish IIacpfish2-eu.org/uploads/projects/id282/A8_IREW... · ACP-Fish II Programme Evaluation of the regional information and knowledge interventions

ANNEX VIII

!

!!"#$%&'#(%&)&'*+),(%$)%,*-.&.'%/%&#*)&*012*

134&#$)%,!*********************************************************

*

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!()*+,-.%/012,2%34%.5,%#0)*6,71%819*1:%!

“This publication has been produced with the assistance of the European Union. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of IBF Consulting

“The content of this document does not necessarily reflect the views of the concerned governments.”

!

"#$%&'!%(!')#!*+'#&,"#-.%+/0!12/03/'.%+!4%&56)%$!7*"148!

9&366#06:!9#0-.3;:!<=,>?!@A'%B#&!<C?<!%

ACP-Fish II Programme Evaluation of the regional information and knowledge interventions for fisheries

management and trade funded by the ACP Fish II Programme %

()*+,-.%),;:%"<%=>&?@:A?BAC%!

DE.5%"*F,G3,)%DHIA%%

!JJ9K1G,1.%34L%%

'M/%'1.,)17.9*17N%O*1J0N.91K!

%

P03-*1.)7-.*)%%

%

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

%

Evaluation of regional information & knowledge sharing interventions for the fisheries management & trade funded by the ACP Fish II Programme – IREW report

Project Funded by the European Union pg. 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 OPENING.................................................................................................................... 5

2 PRESENTATION OF THE PROJECTS .............................................................................. 5 2.1 Presentation results of Technical Assistance for Capacity Building of SRFC (WA-‐5.1-‐B23) 5 2.2 Presentation results of Strengthening the capacity of LVFO and its member states in Regional Information Sharing and Communication for the sustainable management of the Lake Victoria fisheries.................................................................................................................................................................. 6 2.3 Presentation results of Building capacity of ACP member states of the Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC) in information sharing and communication for fisheries management (PAC 5.1 B19)........................................................................................................................................................................ 8 2.4 Presentation results of Technical assistance for capacity building of COREP: information management for sustainable fisheries and trade of fishery products in the sub-‐region of Central Africa (CA 5.1 B19) .......................................................................................................................................................... 10 2.5 Presentation results of Technical Assistance for Capacity Building of FCWC (WA-‐5.1-‐B24) 10 2.6 Presentation results of Strengthening the capacity of CRFM and its member states for information and knowledge sharing on sustainable management of fisheries in the Caribbean region (CAR 5.1 B22) ...................................................................................................................................................... 11 2.7 Presentation results of Development of an online database for the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC) Conservation and Management Measures (EA 5.2 B22)....................................... 13

3 C5 PROJECTS IMPLEMENTATION EXPERIENCE: SUCCESSES, LEARNING, CHALLENGES.14

4 INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENTS IN FISHERIES MANAGEMENT INFORMATION & KNOWLEDGE-‐SHARING .....................................................................................................14 4.1 Fishery Resources Monitoring System (FIRMS................................................................................... 14 4.2 Development of Pan African Fisheries Policy Framework and Reform Strategy................. 14 4.3 WIOFISH DATABASE ...................................................................................................................................... 15

5 PRESENTATION OF COMPONENT 5 EVALUATION FINDINGS.......................................15

6 INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENTS: HOW CAN THE ACP REGIONS BUILD UPON COMPONENT 5 PROJECTS? ...............................................................................................18

7 BREAK-‐OUT GROUPS IDEAS FOR SUSTAINABILITY STRATEGIES & ACTIONS ................19

8 PRESENTATION WORLD BANK ...................................................................................24

9 PRESENTATION SARNISSA .........................................................................................24

10 FOLLOW UP ACTIONS FOR EACH RFB.........................................................................25 10.1 Follow up actions LVFO................................................................................................................................. 25 10.1.1 Sustainability ................................................................................................................................................ 25 10.1.2 Increase support to fisheries management - Fishing Working Groups .............................. 25 10.1.3 Availability of Data..................................................................................................................................... 25 10.1.4 Regional information systems/ exchange of info.......................................................................... 26 10.1.5 Capacity building ........................................................................................................................................ 26 10.1.6 Strengthen exchange of info between RFBs and RECs................................................................ 26

10.2 Follow up actions FCWC................................................................................................................................ 27 10.2.1 Sustainability ................................................................................................................................................ 27 10.2.2 Increase support to fisheries management - Fishing Working Groups .............................. 27



10.2.3 Availability of Data..................................................................................................................................... 27 10.2.4 Regional information systems/ exchange of info.......................................................................... 27 10.2.5 Capacity building ........................................................................................................................................ 28

10.3 Follow up actions COREP.............................................................................................................................. 28 10.3.1 Sustainability ................................................................................................................................................ 28 10.3.2 Increase support to fisheries management - Fishing Working Groups .............................. 28 10.3.3 Availability of Data..................................................................................................................................... 28 10.3.4 Regional information systems/ exchange of info.......................................................................... 28 10.3.5 Capacity building ........................................................................................................................................ 29 10.3.6 Strengthen exchange of info between RFBs and RECs................................................................ 29

10.4 Follow up actions SPC .................................................................................................................................... 29 10.4.1 Sustainability ................................................................................................................................................ 29 10.4.2 Availability of Data..................................................................................................................................... 29 10.4.3 Regional information systems/ exchange of info.......................................................................... 29 10.4.4 Capacity building ........................................................................................................................................ 29

10.5 Follow up actions SFRC.................................................................................................................................. 30 10.5.1 Sustainability ................................................................................................................................................ 30 10.5.2 Increase support to fisheries management - Fishing Working Groups .............................. 30 10.5.3 Availability of Data..................................................................................................................................... 30 10.5.4 Regional information systems/ exchange of info.......................................................................... 30 10.5.5 Capacity building ........................................................................................................................................ 30 10.5.6 Strengthen data analyses ........................................................................................................................ 31

10.6 Follow up actions SWIOFC ........................................................................................................................... 31 10.6.1 Sustainability ................................................................................................................................................ 31 10.6.2 Increase support to fisheries management - Fishing Working Groups .............................. 31 10.6.3 Availability of Data..................................................................................................................................... 31 10.6.4 Regional information systems/ exchange of info.......................................................................... 31 10.6.5 Capacity building ........................................................................................................................................ 32 10.6.6 Strengthen exchange of info between RFBs and RECs................................................................ 32

10.7 Follow up actions IOTC.................................................................................................................................. 32 10.7.1 Sustainability ................................................................................................................................................ 32 10.7.2 Capacity building ........................................................................................................................................ 32 10.7.3 Strengthen exchange of info between RFBs and RECs................................................................ 32 10.7.4 Future needs .................................................................................................................................................. 32

10.8 Follow up actions CRFM................................................................................................................................ 33 10.8.1 Sustainability ................................................................................................................................................ 33 10.8.2 Increase support to fisheries management - Fishing Working Groups .............................. 33 10.8.3 Availability of Data..................................................................................................................................... 33 10.8.4 Regional information systems/ exchange of info.......................................................................... 34 10.8.5 Capacity building ........................................................................................................................................ 34 10.8.6 Strengthen exchange of info between RFBs and RECs................................................................ 34 ! Integrate fisheries in regional /national economic & social development policies:................. 34 ! Include linkages to other RFBs & organizations related to fisheries .............................................. 34 ! Linked to CARICOM and other regional institutions to improve coordination........................... 34 ! Strengthen and position CRFM as competent technical arm of CARICOM on fisheries and related issues....................................................................................................................................................................... 34

11 Closure of the Meeting ..............................................................................................34



1 OPENING

Inter-‐Regional Evaluation Workshop (IREW) to validate and build on the results of the evaluation undertaken in Phase 1, was held at the NH-‐Hotel du Grand Sablon (Brussels, Belgium) from 29 to 31 October, 2013 and organised by the evaluation team. The IREW was attended by 29 participants from Africa, the Pacific, the Caribbean, ACPfish2 and International organisations. The list of participants is given in Appendix A.

Mr John Purvis of the ACPFish2 Coordination Unit welcomed all participants to Brussels on behalf of ACPFish2. Mr Antonio Recca, Head of Section Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries, DG DEVCO, European Commission, welcomed the participants on behalf of DG DEVCO and officially opened the Workshop.

Mr Sean Burke presented the objectives of the workshop and the agenda of the meeting (Appendix B)

2 PRESENTATION OF THE PROJECTS

During the first session, the project managers or the ACPFish 2 Focal points in the Regional Fisheries Organisations (RFOs) presented the results of their projects. 2.1 Presentation results of Technical Assistance for Capacity Building of SRFC

(WA-‐5.1-‐B23)

Mr Hamady Diop presented the results of the technical Assistance for capacity building in SRFC. The project focussed on the support of the regional Shark observatory and regional exchange of information on Sharks. SRFC has implemented 8 years project on sharks. One of the key issues is the harmonisation of the data; however this is very difficult as all the countries store Shark data in 82 different files. Therefore ACPFish2 was requested to support the harmonisation and data exchange process. The project achieved the following:

! A status update on data collection for sharks is available for each country; ! A standard method for data types and their collection as well as the a work plan

is available; ! A web based application is available and will be made consistent with the

dashboard in development; ! Focal points were trained on the utilisation of the system.

The implementation project experience indicated:



Good Points ! A data warehouse on access and a web based application existed for Senegal; This application was retained and accepted at the regional level; ! SRFC is developing a larger web application though the West African Regional

Fisheries Program ! A Convention on Access was signed by Member States last year and standard

data collection and methods were agreed on Negative points ! Data were in different formats (82 files were available before the expertise) and

contained different data types ! Challenges in visiting four countries (GI, GN, Senegal and SL) in a short time

period Key Lessons learned were:

! Develop synergies with other initiatives ! Improving data collection systems improves the reliability of the data ! With the success of enlisting many shark species to the CITES appendices, a close

monitoring of the harvests and sales of shark is important Example of good practice / learning and innovation of this project indicated;

! Keep the systems simple as cost increases with data collection, ! Develop a good integration and sharing systems among the States

For sustainability after the project the following observation were provided;

! Integrate the shark observatory into the dashboard ! Allow country focal point to enter data ! Incorporate shark data into the national data collection systems ! Make some of the data publically available ! Funding is a recurring concerns ! Address the information systems needs with the on-‐going initiatives

After the presentation the question was raised when the Dashboard for Sharks would become operational and the participants were informed that the activities initiated by ACPFish2 were continued with support of the West African Regional Fisheries Project (WARP) of the World Bank and put in to a broader context. 2.2 Presentation results of Strengthening the capacity of LVFO and its

member states in Regional Information Sharing and Communication for the sustainable management of the Lake Victoria fisheries

Mrs Oliva Mkumbo presented the results of the project “Strengthening the capacity of LVFO and its member states in Regional Information Sharing and Communication for the sustainable management of the Lake Victoria fisheries”.



The project achieved the following: ! Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Strategy for LVFO prepared

and validated; ! LVFO CMS website with online interaction tools expanded and operational ! with a digital bandwidth of at least 1 Mbps activated; ! licence of not less than 24 months; and manuals prepared ! LVFO Webmaster trained (on-‐the-‐job) in system maintenance and Two LVFO

Regional Working Groups trained in online information sharing and collaboration at the regional level using the new LVFO website

The implementation project experience indicated: Good Points

! Payment for an optimal bandwidth of at least 1Mbps and associated software licence for at least 24 Months;

! Relatively advanced technical level of the participants – the training had to included aspects not foreseen in the TORs including elements of website development and configuration; and

! Established ICT/Database WG in LVFO Institutions but with a lot of other responsibilities

Negative points ! Delays in the administrative procedure to purchase the required internet

connection -‐ the deadline of project was extended; ! Structures for data collection exist but IT Departments have one Staff or none; ! Some institutions of Partner States had their internet connectivity disconnected

due to lack of financial resources to pay for the service; and ! Lack of direct resources to the benefiting institution to allow for smooth

coordination Key Lessons learned were:

! Need for a dedicated and trained Information and Communication Team, e.g. recruiting Information Manager, Database and GIS Specialists, IT and Website Specialist;

! Provide hardware and software or connecting to Cloud Computing Service Provider

! Designing and developing database systems; Assess existing data in detail and compile metadata

! Processing data, generate the required management and policy information, package and disseminate, Migrate/enter relevant data, Process/Tabulate meaningful findings, Package the information for different stakeholders

! Involving Stakeholders/Collaborate among institutions and with related organizations to avoid duplicating efforts in collecting and storing the same data and for effective utilization of resources.

Example of good practice / learning and innovation of this project indicated;

! The training workshop on use of the new website for regional information sharing including elements of website development and configuration; 21



participants were trained for 3 days; but then there should have been a monitoring program with clear TORs for follow-‐up and task them to deliver accordingly.

! The provision of software & license to ensure the website and the interactive tools are operational; However, there are sustainability issues and the project could have factored such issues during the planning phase;

! The production of the ICT Strategy linked to the Website facilities and the different user manuals, the packaging and dissemination-‐ use of such outputs; The work-‐plans included in the ICT Strategy, human capacity issues for the website management and outreach


! The outputs; the ICT Strategy and the New Website are to be presented to the LVFO Council of Ministers for Partner States to commit to supporting;

! LVFO Secretariat is sourcing for funding to recruit an IT Administrator and an ICO to focus on Information management and sharing;

! The ICT Strategy identifies the need to collect market information and traceability using BMUs and Fish Processors and a framework is to be developed;

! Follow-‐up on Fish Levy Fund to ensure sustainability of funding to implement the action plan proposed in the ICT strategy;

! While frameworks for the collection of biological data and MCS exists; LVFO is preparing to develop other modules for socio-‐economic and aquaculture data capture using producers and traders.

After the presentation a question was raised about the establishment of a fish market information system and if LVFO was aware of the on-‐going FAO TCP project on this topic. 2.3 Presentation results of Building capacity of ACP member states of the

Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC) in information sharing and communication for fisheries management (PAC 5.1 B19)

Mr Aymeric Desurmont (SPC) presented the results of the project building capacity of ACP member states of the Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC) in information sharing and communication for fisheries management The project achieved the following:

! Website Evaluation (Part fishing) SPC (interview more than 100 people) www.spc.int / FAME, www.spc.int / oceanfish, www.spc.int / coastfish

! Recommendations for improving the site. ! Draft a strategy to help the SPC to improve the dissemination of information

relating to fisheries through new communication technologies.



! Training workshop on the use of Joomla to create websites for 12 officers Fisheries Region (5 days). Monitoring and development of new websites in 3 of the 12 countries


! Sufficient flexibility was provided by the ACP Fish CU and the EC to discuss and accept the adaptation of the original ToR to better reflected the issues of different technology levels in the SPC member countries, as well as the dual assessment of the visited countries in terms of both the ICT and fisheries dimension.

! Field survey carried out on the use of the website SPC-‐FAME ! 12 fisheries officers in the region have seen the relative ease with which one can

build a basic website.

Negative points ! The elapsed time between conception and actual implementation of this project

was rather long (10 months) due to discussion on the adaptation of the ToR1. ! The activities had to be modified to make the project feasible in two months,

probably with reduced impact in the end than originally could have been foreseen

! No technical assistance to the SPC at the use of new technologies for the dissemination of information was considered.

! Significant investment by the SPC (HQ) required for the project to be realized. Key Lessons learned were:

! Many people unfamiliar with the resources offered by the SPC web site ! Slow Internet connections in many countries do not allow them access to rich

resources offered by some websites (including the SPC) ! Defined by the study as the best way for fisheries departments to improve the

dissemination of information in some of their "clients"; ! Creating relatively simple sites easy. But their maintenance and development

will, in most cases, a continuous external technical assistance


! Using the evaluation of the SPC /FAME website for the evaluation of the overall

SPC website currently on-‐going

1 The delay was generated due to several different factors the first one the need to adapt the original ToR in order to better suit the SPC member needs and characteristics; the second one was the approval of the ToR adaptation by DEVCO, then the tendering process which was only launch in December 2012, with the actual implementation only strating in March 2013 and then delayed by the replacement of the experts



! Support (remote) for the maintenance and development of national sites ... depending on our availability. On-‐going assessment of the opportunity to use new communication tools (social networks, etc.).

! Strengthening (or shift) resources SPC monitoring and development of national websites.

! Evaluation of the possibility of setting up an information system from all regional sites (regional organizations, fisheries departments, NGOs, etc.). (Type 360 News) aggregation system

After the presentation clarification was sought about the role of the website to support fisheries management for shared stocks. Regional shared Tuna stocks are managed through the Tuna bodies and data is shared through the mechanisms of the Tuna bodies. The coastal stocks are mainly managed at national level as they are not shared. 2.4 Presentation results of Technical assistance for capacity building of

COREP: information management for sustainable fisheries and trade of fishery products in the sub-‐region of Central Africa (CA 5.1 B19)

Mr Emile Essema (COREP) presented the results of Technical assistance for capacity building of COREP: information management for sustainable fisheries and trade of fishery products in the sub-‐region of Central Africa. First an overview of COREP was presented The project achieved the following:

! Development of an information and communication strategy; ! Design of an operational and friendly to the COREP website; ! Organizing a training workshop: ! identification of priority areas for action over the coming years;

Lessons learned and good or negative points could not be provided as this project is not yet finalised. 2.5 Presentation results of Technical Assistance for Capacity Building of

FCWC (WA-‐5.1-‐B24)

Mr Seraphin Dedi Nadje (FCWC) presented the results of Technical Assistance for Capacity Building of FCWC The project achieved the following:

! Adaptation and / or improving the FCWC's website for interactivity and regular

sharing of information online in an appropriate format was developed. ! The staff of the Secretariat and Member States Committees are trained to

access and manage a website for sharing information and research online



The implementation project experience indicated: Negative points ! Work initially not implemented according to the TOR; ! Poor planning activities by the consultant; ! The consultant had to be changed ! De-‐motivation of regional staff who have been trained in the use of tools;

Key Lessons learned were:

! Role of Focal Points in terms of identifying needs, formulating the Terms of Reference and project monitoring determines the outcome of the project;

! Diligence and flexibility of project coordination support to achieve the objectives is essential,

! New tools and the online site in both languages have increased the number of visitors;

! Continued technical assistance beyond the intervention period to find answers to new problems observed is essential


! Training of focal point now that the tools are online; ! Periodic evaluation of the website ! Create links with other websites and foster collaboration with other web site

managers; ! Convention on the sharing of information and data in the fisheries sector in the

FCWC area will be needed 2.6 Presentation2 results of Strengthening the capacity of CRFM and its

member states for information and knowledge sharing on sustainable management of fisheries in the Caribbean region (CAR 5.1 B22)

Mr Milton Haughton (CRFM), Presented the results of strengthening the capacity of CRFM and its member states for information and knowledge sharing on sustainable management of fisheries in the Caribbean region The project achieved the following:

! National consultations – assessed KES, ICT usage/needs ! Technical & political endorsement: -‐ NEW Communication & ICT Strategy ! New website designed and implemented ! Training (CRFM staff on the job, March 2013) ! Manuals for webmaster, content managers and end users developed, reviewed

and endorsed ! National representatives 16 countries trained in using new website and online

interactive tools (Mar 2013).

2 Actually presented at the morning of day 2




! Good communication and partnership between consultants & CRFM ! Knowledgeable & experienced Experts ! Good appreciation of needs, constraints and objectives in region ! Genuine interest helping region advance ! Flexibility & adjustment

Negative points ! Hugh amount of work ! Time constraints (regional training workshop) ! Inadequate internet service ! Some tools not being fully utilized ! Limited capacity to use system/ tools ! No equipment Organising regional workshops


! New tools – significant benefits ! increase knowledge management, information sharing and communication; ! Strengthen facilitation capacity of the CRFM; ! Tools being used actively in the region; ! Developing & disseminating content, facilitating & organizing a growing flow of

communication, catalyzing online collaboration with partners and stakeholders; ! Not all stakeholders onboard ! High priority activity / High demand ! Overcame many obstacles working together ! Quality and attitude of consultants & experts ! Partnership between Experts & recipients ! Good communication and exchange ! Need resources -‐ equipment and material ! CRFM invested its own resources to fill gaps ! Need more time ! Close collaboration with consultants at all stages of the development process ! Mainstream KES in organisation’s work ! Invest in training & capacity development ! Involve policy makers ! Consider internet connectivity and equipment requirements ! Consider need for on-‐going technical support


! Further support needed to fully realize potential of website and collaboration tools

! Upgrading internet connectivity & basic equipment e.g. computer, camera, headset

! Training staff at CRFM to maintain and manage system, staff in countries to use D-‐groups & other tools



! Continue to expand & demonstrate benefits, e.g. Live streaming of workshops and events

In the discussion after the presentation Mr Haughton informed the participant of the meeting that Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA) will provide further support for follow up actions. 2.7 Presentation3 results of Development of an online database for the

Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC) Conservation and Management Measures (EA 5.2 B22).

Mr David Wilson (IOTC) presented the results Development of an online database for the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC) Conservation and Management Measures. Mr Wilson first presented the background of the activities implemented with the support of ACPFish2.

The project achieved the following:

! Created a database of all IOTC CMMs; ! Defined a list of keywords that would be used to characterise each CMM (e.g.

tuna, billfish, by catch, statistics, IUU); ! Made provisions in the database for indexing the contents of CMM in the system

so as to facilitate search of content by users; ! Populate the database with IOTC CMM adopted since 1998; ! Design and create user-‐friendly interfaces integrated into the (new) IOTC

website for easy online access to the CMMs; ! Developed a manual for adding and updating CMMs to the database


! Need to have a clear project outline, prior to the engagement of a consultant. ! As a result of not having a clear project outline, the consultant spent longer in

pre-‐development discussions figuring out exactly what the IOTC wanted/needed.

For sustainability after the project the following observation were provided; ! Stakeholder awareness and outreach (demonstrations; case studies/examples of

utility); ! Continued refinement and updating of the CMM database; ! Revision and modernization of the CMMs

3 Actually presented at the morning of day 2



3 C5 PROJECTS IMPLEMENTATION EXPERIENCE: SUCCESSES, LEARNING, CHALLENGES

After the presentations Mr de Graaf facilitated a plenary session on the discussion of the experiences, successes, learning and challenges of the different projects. A major point of discussion was how to reach the Fisheries working groups involved in the development of management plans. The participants indicated that the websites are a tool for the dissemination of all sorts of information. Data and information to support fisheries management is one type of information to be shared, through data bases linked to the website. The management plans, itself with the objectives, rules and supporting documents is another type of information which should be shared with a large stakeholders group through the website.

4 INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENTS IN FISHERIES MANAGEMENT INFORMATION & KNOWLEDGE-‐SHARING

4.1 Fishery Resources Monitoring System (FIRMS

Mr Marc Taconet (FAO) presented the Fishery Resources Monitoring System (FIRMS) FIRMS was launched in 2004, with as primary aim of the Fishery Resources Monitoring System (FIRMS) is to provide access to a wide range of high-‐quality information on the global monitoring and management of fishery marine resources. FIRMS cover both Tuna and non-‐Tuna resources. FIRMS is a partnership of a large number of RFBs, who share information on the fisheries resources. Sharing of information is done through strict protocols of exchange of information. Analyses of data and dissemination of the information is standardised and agreed upon by all partners. All information is provided to the public domain through fact sheet on the status of the resources and the characteristics of the fisheries 4.2 Development of Pan African Fisheries Policy Framework and Reform

Strategy

Dr Mohamed Seisay (AU IBAR) presented the development of the Pan African Fisheries Policy and Reform strategy. A broad understanding must be developed of the value/benefits of fisheries and resources prior to implementing fisheries reforms. Livelihood and food security benefits are paramount in many places and reforms must be undertaken within the context of such considerations. Within the frame work of the reform strategy a Pan African strategy for fisheries and aquaculture data collection, analyses and dissemination is being developed.



This Pan African strategy will be presented at CAMFA 2 next year and the strategy encompass;

! A conceptual framework and guiding principles; ! A list of core indicators/variables to be collected at the national level; ! The institutional setting on the exchange of information; ! Fisheries and aquaculture statistics and its incorporation into National Statistical

Systems and the National Strategy for the Development of Statistics (NSDS); ! Capacity building; ! An action plan for implementation including considerations for a funding

strategy 4.3 WIOFISH DATABASE

Mrs Bernadine Everett prepared a presentation on the WIOFISH Data base. WIOFish is a database that provides an annotated inventory of fisheries of the western Indian Ocean. WIOFISH started in 1999 and is intended to supplement regional initiatives of the South West Indian Ocean Fisheries Commission (SWIOFC) by providing an information service to fishery resource managers, donors, researchers, including those with specific environmental concerns. Presently WIOFISH covers 8 countries and collaborates with 22 organisations. The most important activity of WIOFISH is the national workshops held once a year in each country. The National Nodes pull together the group of people they feel are most appropriate to contribute towards the fisheries profiles of their respective countries. These people, along with the Regional Coordinator, spend two to four days together reviewing and updating the information in the database. This is done online so that there is no delay between the workshop and making the data available. The group also add any additional fisheries profiles as appropriate. The Regional Coordinator reviews each updated or added fishery profile before the end of the workshop to ensure that the information is standardised and consistent. This minimises the time after the workshop to correct any mistakes or omissions. The information entered in WIOFISH is standardised and agreed upon by al contributing countries.

5 PRESENTATION OF COMPONENT 5 EVALUATION FINDINGS

Mr Sean Burke (Team leader of the evaluation team) presented the preliminary evaluation findings. At the C5 (sub-‐) programme level the biggest single impact on progress and implementation was the necessity to reconsider the initial strategy approach foreseen for programme implementation via one ACP-‐wide institution a revised approach based on support to the RFBs. A structured and evidence-‐based approach to providing a roadmap for this revised regional approach was provided by the ACP Fish II Programme Coordination Unit (CU) through an assessment of information-‐sharing conditions, organisation and training in 8



RFBs (i.e. Activity 1 in the table above)4. This report thus provided the basis for the Activity 2-‐level projects supported by C5. This revised approach was agreed and supported by all stakeholders including the EU. While the need to revise the approach was well managed by the ACP Fish CU, it did of course mean that a significantly reduced timeframe was available to achieve the C5 objectives, and this meant short timeframes for the 8 C5 projects that were contracted and implemented. The evaluation findings generally a show a relatively efficient implementation process at the level of the beneficiary C5 project intervention -‐ the short projects implementation timeframe has the important benefit of ensuring a significant project focus on ‘getting the job done’ and most projects managed to accomplish significant work outputs within a very short space of time. Not surprisingly, some delays were experienced or implementation time frames had to be reviewed and extended. Regarding achievement of C5 project objectives, the level of attainment of project results is relatively high, in particular when the short implementation timeframe is factored in. In the case of the LVFO project, for example, the three results were targeted by the project in order to achieve its overall objective of strengthening the capacity of the LVFO Secretariat as an information “hub” supporting the management of Lake Victoria fisheries in LVFO Member States have all been achieved. Similarly, the CRFM project results include a comprehensive CRFM website (and complete intranet) has been developed, 15 CRFM virtual Communities have been launched on dgroups.org, a number of data sharing tools have been made available online, and numerous capacity building sessions delivered. At the time of project end, CRFM staff and partners were already actively using the web site, the intranet and tools such as the CRFM dgroups.org communities. Another example of high achievement of target results is the IOTC project which has met both of its two targeted results focussed on securing its overall objective of building the capacity of the IOTC Secretariat to support Member States in complying with the agreed Conservation and Management Measures, (with these results being development of an online database and producing a manual for database management and updating5). Other projects, such as the “Technical Assistance for Capacity Building of the SRFC” show partial achievement of its (4) target results. While good progress has been made on discussion between member country representatives on data harmonisation, approval and take-‐up of a proposed data collation format is still required, and a deadline of early 2014 has been given for this. Much of the capacity building and guidance manual development has been done, although the project had not launched a database at the time of completion of the C5 project. In the case of the SPC project, the evaluation consultation work showed that

4 Report ‘Technical Assistance to the RFU managers in the assessment of information management systems in 8 Regional Fisheries Bodies’ (RPR/006/07, 9 ACP RPR128). 5 The only area that is not clear is whether the database has been populated with IOTC CMM adopted since 1998.



that the project had to make some operational adjustments to reflect its ICT strategy for SPC Fame and to take account of the time elapsed since the ToR was developed. The project activities therefore focussed on the support to national fisheries authorities to develop and host their own websites, whereby sharing of information focussed on sharing of documents, legislation etc. and not on sharing of information to support fisheries management. The capacity development work has been done and draft websites developed by member country participants, and now additional support will be required to support the member countries in making their websites operational, support which is not budgeted for in the SPC FAME work plan. Regarding the CPCO project “Assistance technique pour le renforcement des capacités du CPCO (Comité des Pêches du Centre-‐Ouest du Golfe de Guinée”, this project has made significant progress in reaching the five relatively specific and technical results targeted. The work results include improved an improved website with enhanced visual aspects and improved information and communication capabilities for users, while the targeted capacity building has been done for the webmaster. The project did experience some implementation challenges and some of the website improvement work has to be redone. Key work remaining includes completing a French-‐language version of the website and training national fisheries administration staff in the use of the website. For the COREP and the regional West Africa workshop, these projects are currently being implemented and it is too early to make any assessment of progress and outcomes. Stakeholder feedback shows a generally high level of appreciation of the C5 project support and that project results are in many cases significant given the complexity of regional coverage, multiple actors and the short timeframe. Not surprising, the evaluation showed that in at least some cases projects that targeted more specific technical results (e.g. LVFO, IOTC) had higher results attainment levels against their objectives, while projects that required intra-‐ regional discussion and consensus making (e.g. SRFC and agreement on data harmonisation formats) experienced more challenges in achieving the results within a timeframe that was less adapted for this kind of work. In this respect, this evaluation cannot be seen as a final assessment of these projects results, as in some cases projects are still operational while in a number of cases projects that have formally ‘completed’ their C5 projects are either working to compete results that were not possible in the formal implementation time frame or are pursuing other actions to improve the longer sustainability of the project results. Thus, as per the evaluation ToR, it is important the evaluation findings are interpreted in a forward-‐looking and dynamic perspective. Regarding stakeholder awareness and use levels, most projects see significant scope to increase awareness of their improved websites and/or other facilities and services and to increase user uptake of same. Again, this is not surprising as this is one of the follow up



actions of a number of projects given that it was not possible to consider promotion and awareness-‐raising during the implementation timeframe, either due to lack of time or due to the improved website, database etc. not yet being fully operational. Regarding data and information sharing practise and tools, the evaluation findings show that work groups across the ACP regions are working with varying levels of data collation and exchange and are using a variety of tools to do so. However, there is an over-‐reliance on Ms Excel and while use of databases will increase (and partly thanks to the C5 projects) this remains a constraint for effective information sharing given the limitations of Excel. However, it is also not clear that for some regions that information sharing in fisheries management is also a top priority. Regarding sustainability, a significant number of the projects have some way to go in order to reach a sustainable footing. A number of partners have shown excellent initiative in continuing to work to complete outstanding actions and secure their project’s longer-‐terms sustainability. In the case of the SRFC project, for example, the remaining activities are being implemented with support of the West Africa Regional Fisheries Program (WARFP) of the World Bank. Another example is the CRFM project, where a series of actions are being undertaken by CRFM to follow up on the C5-‐supported work results. The overall findings of the Evaluation team were endorsed by the participants of the meeting and the participants will elaborate on the recommendations of the evaluation team

6 INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENTS: HOW CAN THE ACP REGIONS BUILD UPON COMPONENT 5 PROJECTS?

Mr Gertjan de Graaf (Evaluation team) presented major issues to be considered in exchange of information to support fisheries management and some international and regional developments which could be important for future developments. In his presentation de Graaf stressed the importance of the availability of data to support fisheries management and that information should cover;

! the biological and ecological aspects of fishing; ! the economic aspects of fishing ! the social economic aspect of fishing ! Ability to achieve fisheries management objectives

Data is collected at national level and therefore the starting point of information sharing will be at national level and extended to regional and global sharing of information whereby the mechanisms of exchange becomes more complex. However, Irrespective of the complexity, sharing is based on two principles:



! The data/information to be shared is clearly defined in terms of; definition, timeliness, format and statistical quality;

! Sharing, access and use of data is described in an agreed “protocol of exchange of data”.

The mandatory management function of the RFB can influence data sharing

• RFBs with a mandatory management function: IOTC, ICCAT, NAFO, GFCM have more power to organise sharing of a set of well-‐defined indicators in a fixed format

• RFBs with and advisory function such as FCWC, COREP, CECAF, CRFM, SPC and SWIOFC, have less power and need agreements with national fisheries administrations of Fishing Working groups

The following regional and global developments were presented

! FAO strategies on improvement of information on status and trends in capture fisheries (FAO STF)

! Global Strategy for Improving Agricultural and Rural Statistics ! ACP Fisheries Mechanism Strategic Plan of Action for Fisheries and Aquaculture 2012-‐

2016 ! The draft pan-‐African strategy on improvement of fisheries data collection, analyses

and dissemination ! CARIFIS for CRFM ! EA FISH for LVFO ! SPC FAME Strategic Plan 2013

7 BREAK-‐OUT GROUPS IDEAS FOR SUSTAINABILITY STRATEGIES & ACTIONS

For the discussion on flow up actions two breakout groups were formed English group French group Gunilla Greig Seraphin Dedi Nadje Milton Haughton Marc Taconet Edward Kimami Emile Essema Oliva Mkumbo Aymeric Desurmont Godfrey Monor Hamady Diop Mohamed Seisay Emanuel Sabuni Kasereka David Wilson Aurélien Mofouma Each working group discussed recommendations for follow up action related to the following issues;

! Sustainability ! Increase support to fisheries management -‐ Fishing Working Groups ! Availability of Data



! Strengthening data analyses ! Regional information systems/ exchange of info\ ! Capacity building

Each group first discussed general activities and then the representatives of each RFB formulated specific actions to be undertaken as follow up of the ACPFish2 component 5 activities The results of the discussions of the two groups are presented in the table below



Overview Reports from Workshop Break-‐Out Groups

Element Issue General Follow-‐up Action English-‐Language Break-‐Out Group General Follow-‐up Action French-‐Language Break-‐Out

Group

Short term Long term

Awareness raising in order to strengthen use of website -‐ a strategy required on how to go about this

Strengthen use of website

Websites need to be mainstreamed to be an integral part of the work of the RFB

Inform member states about the availability of the site

Sensitise politicians of the importance of ICT in order for them to allocate enough financial resources, e.g. to ensure sufficient bandwidth (and to pay for licences post project funding)

Develop a communication and information strategy accounting for the website

Websites need to be managed -‐ human resources required

developper le systeme de veille communicationnelle (monitor the visits, etc.)

Websites need to be continuously updated to be attractive and useful

availability of financial and human resources (webmaster)

Track utilisation of website develop a business model (internally co-‐share the financing)

SUSTAIN-‐ABILITY

Showcase information on fisheries management measures

participatory workflow (post documents)

Stratify information on website according to target group, including policy makers

add regional data base to the website with various level access (Cf. availability of data)

Include lists of "black-‐listed" vessels/illegal fishing operations

make available management rules and regulations

Use website for stakeholder consultations on proposals for new legislation/management regimes

Post management plans and other documents (policy, scientific advices, management plans frameworks, EAF documents, legislations, etc.)

INCREASE/ STRENGTHEN SUPPORT TO FISHERIES MANAGEMENT

Use website to announce fisheries-‐management measures in simple wording and in relevant languages



Encourage fisher organisations to create their own websites and link with these

Make use of mobile phones for exchanging information, including to improve MCS

Provide information for market access (e.g. The EU IUU regulation)

Compliance with data-‐reporting requirements / providing the information required

link regional data base to the website with various level of access

Elaborate national strategies and action plans for sustainable data collection, analysis and dissemination.

Ensure the provision of timely, accurate and useful for management purposes -‐ ensure sufficient human and institutional capacity for collection and analysis. Political support and commitment a necessity.

develop (project opportunities) or build on existing mechanism (building on third parties meeting opportunities) reliable databases

Elaborate (sub-‐)regional strategies for the provision of harmonised/comparable data, based on minimum requirements/standards

develop synergies with on-‐going initiatives

Provide incentives for data collection. Put pressure on stakeholders to provide data, in return for the right to fish.

Develop a mechanism to keep databases up to date (meeting, site visits, focal points, etc.)

The source of information displayed needs to be included so that a visitor to a website can obtain more detailed information

Templates required so that data provided in a coherent and comparable manner

AVAILABILITY OF DATA

Make use of mobile phones to collect data, particularly for marketing information

CAPACITY BUILDING

Webmasters required -‐ to work on layout and structure

regional and national webmasters, data managers, focal points



Focal points (professionals) in each country required to ensure material is transmitted for inclusion on website

through the website, strengthen working group (training, training kits, online training, use available training kits developed by international organisations such FAO (EAF tools for example), etc.)

Strengthen and improve the communication between fishery professionals and website technicians -‐ develop teamwork

Develop manuals for different categories of users

REGIONAL INFO SYSTEMS

Country-‐specific and regional information to be included in a regional site/system

develop information sharing systems (Example of SPC experience with the training of webmasters and creation of national websites with links to regional databases)

Ensure that the plethora of information available at the national level is collected and analysed at the sub-‐regional/regional level

Use web services for information sharing and exchange

-‐ Separate platforms needed for (a) databases and (b) information systems? Separate what will be in the public domain (mostly information) and what for internal use (data and possibly also some information)

use international standards and protocols for data exchange

-‐ Develop/strengthen fishery-‐specific databases, primarily for the Working Groups. The data needed will depend on the fishery in question and the management regimes

STRENGTHEN EXCHANGE OF INFO BETWEEN RFBS & RECS

Include linkages to other relevant sites where similar information for other regions can be accessed, not just fisheries organisations

build on FAO strategy to mainstream flow for example from RFBs to RECs

-‐ The website/ information of each RFB will be linked to the relevant REC(s) and the AU

identify information needs (indicators developed by RECs) and develop protocols for exchange



-‐ Establishing RFBs as technical arms of RECs

8 PRESENTATION WORLD BANK

Mr Xavier Vincent presented the proposed SWIOfish activities supported by World Bank. SWIOFish is a regional program to improving fishery statistics. SWIOfish is an inter-‐linked phased national projects coordinated at the regional level

! Programmatic approach: 15-‐year Program to establish financing, coordinating and knowledge exchange mechanism to generate a suite of mutually supporting country-‐level and regional activities over the medium/ long term.

! Follow SWIOFP model of country-‐led implementation, regional coordination, with a broadening and enrichment of approach (new themes, new partners)

! Program and each project in the subsequent phases with four components common to all countries: 3 operational components and a fourth Project management component.

9 PRESENTATION SARNISSA

Mr William Leschen presented Sustainable Aquaculture Research Networks in Sub Saharan Africa (SARNISSA) SARNISSA’s primary functions include: initiating and nurturing collaborations between the various stakeholders (researchers, commercial and market sectors, government agencies, NGOs, and others); providing a multi-‐lingual point of contact and access to an expanding online information resource that builds on an existing knowledge resource base and exchange platform (The Aquaculture Compendium); and assisting Sub Saharan African aquaculture to develop in a sustainable way and so fulfill its potential to help increase farmers’ incomes and increase food security. The Institute of Aquaculture at Stirling has an overall co-‐ordination role for the project, represented by Dave Little and William Leschen. The project has a total of eight partners from Africa, Europe and beyond, including three not-‐for-‐profit organizations: WorldFish Center (WFC), an international research organization based in Egypt that works to reduce poverty, hunger, and malnutrition in developing countries by making fish more readily available for food and income; CABI, a legally constituted intergovernmental organization headquartered in the United Kingdom whose mission is to improve people’s lives by providing information and applying scientific expertise to solve problems in agriculture and the environment; and ETC Foundation, a Dutch organization whose work encompasses developing projects and undertaking assignments in ecological agriculture, participatory agricultural innovation, sustainable management, renewable energy, public health management and food security, in combination with institutional and human resource development, policy lobbying and gender mainstreaming.



10 FOLLOW UP ACTIONS FOR EACH RFB

Each RFB formulated follow up action of the ACPfish2 Component 5 activities, based on the discussion in the two break out groups during the second day of the workshop 10.1 Follow up actions LVFO

10.1.1 Sustainability

! Awareness raising to keep stakeholders informed of the facilities o Present the Website with the different tools to different policy/technical

meetings o Emails to User Groups; o In-‐house exposure meetings at National or

Institutional level; ! The website to be streamlined to daily organization activities

o Interactive Exchanges using the respective web-‐pages o Monitoring of performance

! Management of website and update of information o Recruit/contract/train Webmaster/System administrators (National and

Regional) o Train/recruit/assign Content Managers/Focal Persons

! Budget allocations for the upgrading and licensing

10.1.2 Increase support to fisheries management -‐ Fishing Working Groups

! Creating pages for structured information to different key stakeholders include policy makers and fishers;

-‐ Need to design web-‐pages for different Partner States and Stakeholder Groups;

-‐ Upload relevant information accordingly (short-‐term – need for a consultancy to assist);

! Create a site for fisheries management measures and upload related documents –translated to the common local languages;

! Design a framework to receiving market information and updating it (explore the use of mobile phones);

! Provide updates on MCS activities and performance of different BMUs as an incentive to compliance;

10.1.3 Availability of Data

! Resources/finances to implement the Action plan of the ICT Strategy for the identified data needs;



! Finalize module development in the EA –Fish database; ! Involve the National and Regional WGs to input data in the EA-‐Fish modules and

generate the harmonized indicators – Technical WG Sessions ! Provide active links for the Regional level and national level databases – resources

required for hardware and soft-‐ware; ! Prepare templates for data on catches, marketing and Aquaculture to be delivered

through the National pages or through mobiles – communicate during licensing as a condition

10.1.4 Regional information systems/ exchange of info

! Synthesized data/information on regional nature to be accessed at regional level Information system and Country specific information to be accessed in national systems – Stock Assessment RWG to be facilitated to update indicators and provide status reports;

! Detailed data/EA Fish Database and related national databases be accessible to respective WGs only with limited access to other WGs.

! Data to other public individuals/institutions should be through the Chairpersons of the Technical WGs ( Revise Data and Information sharing Policy)

10.1.5 Capacity building

! Training and hands-‐on for Webmasters and IT technicians at regional and National level;

! Content managers/focal persons need orientation/training on timely delivering of information and updates;

! Recruit an ICO personnel for proper packaging/dissemination for information to different categories of stakeholders;

! Building team work between focal persons/fishery professional and IT personnel; ! Introducing the manuals prepared for different categories and assess their practical

use, and update them accordingly

10.1.6 Strengthen exchange of info between RFBs and RECs

! Create links with EAC and all the other Institutions and Organs of EAC; and other RECs as COMESA; etc.

! Create links with other regional bodies/organizations as Lake Tanganyika Authority; ! Link with other websites of Regional and national nature for institutions dealing with

fisheries, environment; research and training institutions ! Identify other Regional Bodies within Africa and beyond and provide links



10.2 Follow up actions FCWC


1. Short term • Formation des membres à l’usage des outils interactifs • Financement perenne • Formaliser le partage des informations et donnees par une convention

2. Medium term • Staff techniques webmaster et communication • Developper une strategie de communication et un Systeme de veille

communicationelle


1. Short term • Partager les documents de base et plans d’amenagement 2. Medium term • Integer les systeme d’information des programmes regionaux et partenaires: FIRM,

ACP FISH, AEF-‐Nansen • Recrutement d’un Expert chargé de l’amenagement


1. Short term • Intégrer les résultats de FIRM, AEF-‐Nansen, FAO; COPACE

2. Medium term • Projet d’appui à la collecte des données de la pêches artisanale au niveau national et

synsthèse regionale (suite Travaux de FAO Fish Code); • Mise en place ou Renforcer les Comités nationaux de collecte et analyse des données

3. Long term • Projet d’appui à l’évaluation des stocks et compilation des resultats au niveau

national et synsthèse regionale


• Short term • Intégrer les résultats de FIRM, AEF-‐Nansen, FAO; COPACE

2. Medium term • Projet d’appui à la collecte des données de la pêches artisanale au niveau national et

synsthèse regionale (suite Travaux de FQO Fish Code) 3. Long term

• Projet d’appui à l’évaluation des stocks et compilation des resultats au niveau national et synsthèse regionale,

• Formaliser la collaboration entre les OERs et le CPCO




Medium term • Appui au Group de travail du CPCO et Comité nationaux des statistiques; • Projet de partanriat avec des universités pour le renforcement des capacités y

compris la collecte et l’analyse des données de la pêches artisanales au niveau national et synthèse régionale

10.3 Follow up actions COREP


! Utilisation des supports appropriés (ex: dépliants, annonces dans les journaux, spots publicitaires à la télévision, etc.) pour la sensibilisation d’un très large public sur l’existence du site web de la COREP;

! Création d’une ligne budgétaire pour garantir le fonctionnement normal du site web de la COREP;

! Création d’une page spéciale pour les acteurs indépendants du secteur des pêches et de l’aquaculture (ex: annonces, publications, etc.), en vue de rendre le site attractif à un large éventail d’acteurs.


! Création et mise en ligne des bases de données; ! Mise à disposition de la documentation relative à la gestion des pêcheries (ex: textes

légaux et réglementaires, documents-‐cadres de politique sectorielle, plans d’aménagement, résultats des travaux de recherche et des groupes de travail, etc.);


! Définition et adoption par la COREP (Conseil des Ministres) des formats standard des données/informations devant être fournies périodiquement par les Points Focaux de la COREP;

! Mise à profit de toutes les opportunités (réunions, missions, etc.) pour la mise à jour des bases de données;

! Institutionnalisation des rencontres périodiques périodiques des Points Focaux pour l’évaluation de la gestion du site.


! Mise au point des modalités pratiques d’échange et de partage de données/informations entre le site web de la COREP et le site web de la CEEAC (Direction de l’Agriculture);

! Appui à la création des sites web nationaux et développement des liens entre les sites de la sous-‐région (Ministères en charge des Pêches, programmes/projets de pêche, etc.).




! Formation/perfectionnement (périodique) du webmaster de la COREP, des cadres de la COREP et des Points Focaux;

! Élaboration et diffusion de manuels d’utilisation du site web


! Détermination des besoins en données/informations par la CEEAC (Direction de l’Agriculture) à fournir périodiquement par la COREP;

! Appui multiforme de la CEEAC pour le fonctionnement optimum du site de la COREP ! Institutionnalisation des rencontres périodiques des CERs et des ORPs pour

l’évaluation des systèmes d’échange et de partage de données/informations. 10.4 Follow up actions SPC


! Strengthen use of SPC/FAME website ! SPC needs support to develop a communication campaign to raise awareness about

its existence and the wide range of resources it offers.


! SPC ACP countries need more support to review their artisanal fisheries data sampling design


! To ease the distribution of relevant information to his stakeholders, SPC needs assistance to develop a web-‐based "crawling" system (type News 360) that will gather relevant fisheries-‐related information from all online available sources, to which individuals will be able to subscribe, choosing the topics they are most interested in


! Organise in-‐country one-‐on-‐one training for the new national "webmasters", to finalise the setting up of their websites and plan future developments.

! Further build the capacity of SPC ACP countries fisheries staff to analyse data collected from artisanal fisheries.



10.5 Follow up actions SFRC


! Assistance in developing a business model on cost sharing for the financing of the website

! Assistance in imbedding sharks data collection in the national data protocols with the idea of reducing cost

! Implement the communication strategy


! Develop management training kits on sharks and make them available through the website

! Make the Sharks data available online with various levels of access ! Make management rules and regulations available online ! Post management plans and other documents on the website (policy, scientific

advices, management plans frameworks, EAF documents, legislations, etc.)


! Support the development of the regional shark database ! Validate the regional data collection protocols ! Improve overall capacity in data collection ! Incorporate the shark initiative into a wider information sharing (Dashboard)

initiative in development at the SRFC ! Make available the documents required for the implementation of the CITES

decisions on Sharks conservation taken during the COP16.


! Improve website by developing web based application (web based conferencing, social media, etc.)

! Identify data need for exchange ! Build on FAO strategy to mainstream flow from countries to the regional database

o Assistance needed to develop protocols on data and information sharing and exchange based on international standards from countries to the sub region

o Assistance needed to develop protocols on data and information sharing and exchange based on international standards from sub region to other international organisations


! Train national and regional Webmaster on using new information technologies (web based conferences, social network, etc…)



! Through the website, strengthen working group (training, training kits, online training, use available training kits developed by international organisations such FAO (EAF tools for example), etc.)

10.5.6 Strengthen data analyses

! Train focal points in data analyses and policy formulation ! Make training kits available for the training of trainer ! Visit countries to cross check the implementation of data collection protocols ! Organize two regional meetings

o First meeting to review protocols, update countries on the web based application for the shark observatory

o Second meeting is set for the collation of data at the regional level, the formulation of management options and recommendations to be submitted to the Ministerial Conference

10.6 Follow up actions SWIOFC


! Short term-‐sensitization of politicians on use of ICT to allocate required financial and human resources

! Long term-‐mainstream the data and information sharing into the core activities of RFO


! Capacity building in fisheries data handling and analysis ! Continued support to regional fisheries working groups activities ! Streamline the support of fisheries working groups into the activities of the RFOs


! Strengthening fisheries and socioeconomic (trade) data collection systems (including mobile phones) reporting system in the region

! Establish minimum standards for fisheries landing statistics ! Establish minimum list for fisheries indicators ! Develop/adopt appropriate fisheries data bases for regional fisheries


! Upgrade SWIOFP web site to include existing fisheries management/regulations information

! Expand the SWIOFP data base to serve as intermediary between FAO data (Total catches) and disaggregated landing statistics

! Separate public domain (information) and restricted domain (data and some information)




! Increase ICT physical and human capacity ! Separation of the duties of website manager and web site content manager ! Establish and mainstream national fisheries data and information focal points


! Short term-‐Development of web linkages between relevant web sites ! Long term-‐establish RFO as technical advisors of RECs

10.7 Follow up actions IOTC


! Outreach: Communicate through all possible means to ensure stakeholders are aware of the new website and the CMM database.

! Availability of financial and human resources to keep the CMM database up to date and relevant to all CPCs.

! Increase the utility of the CMM database by including interpretative notes of all relevant rules, regulations and obligations contained within the CMMs. Would need to be drafted by a legal advisor


! Ensure that all stakeholders are familiar with the CMM database and understand how to extract the information necessary to meet their needs.

! Ensure enough explanatory information is available to ensure CPCs may move more readily towards full compliance with IOTC CMMs.


! Identify information needs of all CPCs so that processes may be developed to ensure they are able to obtain relevant information (CMMs) and more importantly are able to interpret IOTC CMMs accurately.

! Expanded CMM database so that CPCs are able to build their own Compendium of CMMs or parts of CMMs, relevant to their needs (science, observers, compliance officers, policy makers etc.).

! Increase understanding of how to draft CMMs based on rigorous scientific advice and data.

10.7.4 Future needs

! Design and deploy a catch and effort spatial database using the data provided to the IOTC Secretariat, including:



! A Nominal Catch table, including best estimates of total catches of all IOTC and other impacted species (i.e. sharks) by fleet, fishing mode, IOTC Area, species and year;

! A Catch-‐and-‐Effort table, including data on levels of effort and catches by IOTC grid (one degree square for surface fisheries; five degrees square for longline fisheries), by year, month, fishing mode, and species, as derived from flag country reports

! Implementation of procedures to standardise the catch-‐and-‐effort data available, including:

! Selection of catch units and effort units to be used for each fishery. ! Scaling of catches and effort to account for all catches in the nominal catch file,

where required (i.e. for countries that reported non-‐raised catch-‐and-‐effort data, as derived from logbooks).

10.8 Follow up actions CRFM


! Awareness raising to improve use of website ! Websites need to be mainstreamed to be an integral part of the work of the CRFM ! Sensitize politician re value to secure resources ! Commit human resources to manage ! Maintain & continuously update to be attractive, relevant and useful ! Track utilisation of website and make changes ! Showcase successes & best practices ! Promote value, importance & potential of fisheries & aquaculture


! Stratify information on website according to target group, including policy makers ! Use for stakeholder consultations, e.g. for new legislation/management regimes ! Use to announce fisheries-‐management measures in simple wording & languages ! Provide information re marketing opportunities ! Include lists of "black-‐listed" vessels ! Encourage fisher organisations to create their own websites and link with these ! Use mobile phones for exchanging information, including to improve MCS


! Elaborate national strategies and action plans for sustainable data collection, analysis, and dissemination.

! Elaborate regional strategies for harmonised/comparable data, based on minimum requirements/standards

! Provide incentives for data collection. Put more responsibility on stakeholders to provide data in return for the right to fish

! Templates required so that data provided in a coherent and comparable manner ! Upgrade the CARIFIS Programme & provide training in its use ! Make use of mobile phones to collect data, particularly for marketing information




! Country-‐specific and regional information to be included in a regional system ! Ensure that relevant information available at the national level is collected and analyzed

at the sub-‐regional/regional level ! Develop/strengthen regional databases, primarily for scientific / technical Working

Groups. ! The data needed will depend on the fishery in question and the management objectives

& regimes


! Trained webmasters -‐ to manage, maintain & upgrade website e.g. layout and structure

! Train & equip fisheries professionals in RFB ! Train fisheries officers & stakeholders in countries to provide content & use tools ! Improve communication between fishery professionals & website technicians -‐

develop teamwork ! Update user manuals for different categories of users


! Integrate fisheries in regional /national economic & social development policies:

! Include linkages to other RFBs & organizations related to fisheries

! Linked to CARICOM and other regional institutions to improve coordination

! Strengthen and position CRFM as competent technical arm of CARICOM on fisheries and related issues

11 CLOSURE OF THE MEETING

Mr Gustavo Miranda officially closed the meeting on behalf of ACPFish 2



APPENDIX A: LIST OF WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS No. Title Name First Name Organisation

1 Mr RECCA Antonio European Commission DG DEVCO

2

Mr

POP

Iustinian

European Commission DG DEVCO

3

Mr

DU RIETZ

Kristofer

European Commission - DG Mare

4

Mr

MIRANDA

Gustavo

ACP Fish II Unit

5

Mr

PURVIS

John

ACP Fish II Unit

6

Ms

VALERIO

Loreta

ACP Fish II Unit

7

Ms

MIZZONI

Anna

IBF Consulting

8

Mr

BURKE

Sean J.

New Frontier Services / IBF

9

Dr

CARDENAS

Bernardita


10

Mr

DE GRAAF

Gertjan


11

Ms

SICA

Augusta


12

Ms

BOTO

Isolina

Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation

13

Mr

DEDI NADJE

Seraphine

Fisheries Committee for the West-Central Gulf of Guinea (FCWC)

14

Mr

DESURMONT

Maurice dit Aymeric

Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC)

15

Mr

DIOP

Hamady

Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission (CSRP)

16

Mr

ESSEMA

Emile

Regional Fisheries Committee for the Gulf of Guinea (COREP)

17

Mr

SABUNI KASEREKA

Emmanuel

Regional Fisheries Committee for the Gulf of Guinea (COREP)

18

Ms

GREIG

Gunilla

Food And Agriculture Organisation (FAO)

19

Mr

TACONET

Marc

Food And Agriculture Organisation (FAO)

20

Mr

HAUGHTON

Milton

Caribbean Regional Fisheries Mechanism (CRFM Secretariat)



No. Title Name First Name Organisation 21

Mr

KIMANI

Edward

Southwest Indian Ocean Fisheries Commission (SWIOFC)

22

Mr

LESCHEN

William

Sustainable Aquaculture Research Networks for Sub-Saharan Africa (SARNISSA)

23

Dr

MKUMBO

Oliva C.

Lake Victoria Fisheries Organisation (LVFO)

24

Mr

MONOR

Godfrey Vincent

Lake Victoria Fisheries Organisation (LVFO)

25

M

MOFOUMA

Aurélien

Economic Community of Central Africa States (ECCAS)

26

Dr

SEISAY

Mohamed Batu Duramany

African Union – Inter-African Bureau for African Resources (AU IBAR)

27

Dr

SLOANS

Chimatiro

NPCA

28

Mr

VINCENT

Xavier

World Bank

29

Dr

WILSON

David Troy

Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC)



APPENDIX B: AGENDA OF THE MEETING This is included in the Evaluation Report .

Documents

A8 IREW Workshop report final - ACP Fish IIacpfish2-eu.org/uploads/projects/id282/A8_IREW... · ACP-Fish II Programme Evaluation of the regional information and knowledge interventions