Final Technical Report - ACP Fish II · Final Technical Report. REVISION OF NATIONAL POLICY FOR FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE IN MALAWI AND NATIONAL FISHERIES POLICY IN SWAZILAND . Project

"Strengthening Fisheries Management in

ACP Countries"

Project Funded by the European Union.

Final Technical Report

REVISION OF NATIONAL POLICY FOR FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE IN MALAWI AND NATIONAL FISHERIES

POLICY IN SWAZILAND

Project ref. N° CU/PE1/MZ/10/001

Malawi and Swaziland

May 2011

“The content of this publication are the sole responsibility of the author and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union”.


ACP Countries"



REVISION OF NATIONAL POLICY FOR FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE IN MALAWI AND NATIONAL FISHERIES

POLICY IN SWAZILAND

Project ref. N° CU/PE1/MZ/10/001

Malawi and Swaziland

This assignment was implemented by Megapesca Lda, Portugal Key Expert 1: Robert Lindley Key expert 2: Hara Mafaniso Key expert 3: Shaheen Moolla

Team Leader:.Robert Lindley


ACP Countries"



Table of Contents

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..........................................................................................................0

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS .................................................................................0

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...........................................................................................................0

1 BACKGROUND ..........................................................................................................................0

2 APPROACH TO THE ASSIGNMENT..............................................................................0

3 COMMENTS ON THE TERMS OF REFERENCE.....................................................0

4 ORGANISATION AND METHODOLOGY ...................................................................0

4.1 DELIVERY OF TERMS OF REFERENCE (TABLE AS BELOW) ....................................0 4.2 CONDUCT OF ASSIGNMENT/DETAILS OF THE ASSIGNMENT ...................................0

5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...........................................................0

ANNEXES ...........................................................................................................................................0

ANNEX 1: TERMS OF REFERENCE. .......................................................................................0 ANNEX 2: INCEPTION REPORT ..............................................................................................0 ANNEX 3: MALAWI: LIST OF DOCUMENTS CONSULTED AND INTERNATIONAL

AGREEMENTS PERTINENT TO FISHERIES...................................................................0 ANNEX 4: MALAWI: LIST OF SIGNIFICANT PEOPLE MET OR INTERVIEWED..........0 ANNEX 5: MALAWI: STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION WORKSHOPS .........................0 ANNEX 6: MALAWI: REPORT ON LIWONDE VALIDATION WORKSHOP ...................0 ANNEX 7: MALAWI: DRAFT NATIONAL POLICY FOR FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE IN

MALAWI ...............................................................................................................................0 ANNEX 8: MALAWI: REVIEW OF EXISTING POLICY IN MALAWI...............................0 ANNEX 9: SWAZILAND: FINAL DRAFT POLICY ON THE MANAGEMENT AND GROWTH OF

FRESH WATER FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE IN SWAZILAND ........................0 ANNEX 10: SWAZILAND: POLICY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ........................................0 ANNEX 11: SWAZILAND: FISHERIES POLICY FRAMEWORK .........................................0 ANNEX 12: SWAZILAND: SWOT ANALYSIS......................................................................0 ANNEX 13: SWAZILAND: POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND REVIEW PROCESSES ........0 ANNEX 14: SWAZILAND: LIST OF SIGNIFICANT PERSONS AND ORGANISATIONS

CONSULTED..........................................................................................................................0 ANNEX 15: SWAZILAND: REFERENCES ...............................................................................0 ANNEX 16: SWAZILAND: VALIDATION MEETING REPORT ..........................................0


ACP Countries"

Project Funded by the European Union. Page 0


Acknowledgements

The consultants would like to record their thanks to the staff of the Fisheries Department in Malawi and the Fisheries Section, Ministry of Agriculture, in Swaziland.

In Malawi the Focal Point for ACP II, Mr Friday Njaya and the Technical Team made up of Mr Maurice Makuwila and Mrs Chikondi Pasani, and in Swaziland Mr Freddy Magagula , Senior Agricultural Officer - Fisheries and the Focal Point for ACP II, and the other members of the Technical Team, Mr Johannes Msibi, Aquaculture Officer, and Mr Boy R Mavuso, Assistant Fisheries Officer, who all provided very valuable assistance and support throughout the period of the reviews in Swaziland and Malawi.

In addition the Regional Manager Southern Africa ACP Fish II, Mr Leone Tarabusi, was most supportive of the work of the consultants and was able to visit both Swaziland and Malawi during the review revision process, providing much helpful advice and assistance to the Technical Teams & consultants. It was also extremely pertinent that Mr Tarabusi was able to attend one of the Stakeholder Workshops and the Validation workshop in Malawi.


ACP Countries"



Abbreviations and acronyms ACP African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States ADB African Development Bank BVC Beach Village Committee COP Code of Practice DAD Department of Agriculture Development Demersal [Fish] associated with or living near the bottom DFO District Fisheries Officer DoF Department of Fisheries DWA Department of Water Affairs E Emalangeni (the currency of Swaziland. 1E = 1 SA rand) EAS Environmental Authority of Swaziland EIA's Environmental Impact Assessments EU European Union FAO Food and Agriculture Organisation (of the UN) FCR Food Conversion Ratio FP Fisheries Policy FPO Fisheries Protection Officer FRU Fisheries Research Unit (Monkey Bay) GIFT Genetically Improved Farmed Tilapia GMP Good Management Practice GOM Government of Malawi HACCP Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point HIV and AIDS Human Immunodeficiency Virus and Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome IT Information Technology IUU Illegal, unreported and unregulated [fishing] KE1 Key Expert 1 KE2 Key Expert 2 KE3 Key Expert 3 KOBWA Komati Basin Water Authority (Swaziland) Lacustrine To do with lakes LMAFDP Lake Malawi Artisanal Fisheries Development Programme MALDECO An aquaculture and commercial fishing company in Malawi MBS Malawi Bureau of Statistics MEPD Ministry of Economic Planning and Development (Swaziland) MFC Malawi Fisheries College MK Malawi Kwacha


ACP Countries"



MNFAP Malawi Fisheries and Aquaculture Policy MNR Ministry Natural Resources (and Energy) (Swaziland) MOA Ministry of Agriculture (Swaziland) MSY Maximum Sustainable Yield mt Metric tonnes NAC National Aids Commission (Malawi) NAC (Domasi)

National Aquaculture Centre (Domasi). “Domasi” added to differentiate NAC (Domasi) from NAC (National Aids Commission) in Malawi

NERCHA National Emergency Response Council on HIV and AIDS (Swaziland) NGO Non Governmental Organisation OPC Office of the President and Cabinet (Malawi) Pelagic [Fish] living in the water column PIAD Presidents Initiative on Aquaculture Development (Malawi) PLHIV People Living with HIV/AIDS PPCU Public Policy Coordination Unit (Swaziland) QC Quality Control Riparian To do with rivers SA South Africa (the Country) SACU Southern African Customs Union SADC South African Development Community SBIA Swaziland Broadcasting and Information Services SOF DP Small scale Offshore Fishery Development Project SFP Swaziland Fisheries Policy SMART Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant and Time bound SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats TA Technical Assistance TA Technical Assistant (in Malawi) TO Technical Officer ToR Terms of Reference UNIMA University of Malawi UNISWA University of Swaziland US Under Secretary USA United States of America VNRMCs Village Natural Resources Management Committees


ACP Countries"



Executive Summary

In both Malawi and Swaziland, the Fisheries and Aquaculture Policies have been undergoing internal revision both by the Department of Fisheries in the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security and the Fisheries Section in the Ministry of Agriculture.

Subsequent to a request to the ACP Fish II Strengthening Fisheries Management in ACP States project, in 2010, Technical Assistance in the form of three experts, a Senior Inland Fisheries Policy Expert (KE1), an Inland Fisheries and Aquaculture Expert (for Malawi), KE2, and an Inland Fisheries Policy Expert (for Swaziland), KE3, were provided by the project to Malawi and Swaziland in March, April and May 2011 to support the Malawi and Swaziland Technical Teams working on Policy Revision.

The specific objectives of the mission were:

• In Malawi – to support the Malawi DoF in revising the Malawi Fisheries and Aquaculture Policy (MNFAP)

• In Swaziland – to support the Swaziland FS in devising and validating the final version of the Swaziland Fisheries Policy (SFP)

In each county the experts provided by ACP Fish II assisted the Technical Teams already working on the revisions of the existing policies. The revision of the policies involved a literature search and subsequent participatory process with stakeholders, Government Departments and Ministries, NGOs, and (in Swaziland only) Sport Fishing representatives. This enabled the Technical Teams to confirm and identify problems, objectives and alternatives and ultimately suggest strategies that could be included to improve the existing policy, so that it better reflects the needs of the sector.

Stakeholder Workshops were held in four locations in Malawi which were chosen to reflect different geographic areas, with participating stakeholders from the fisheries and aquaculture sectors. A report on these workshops can be found in Annex 5. To validate the revised Fisheries Policy a two day validation workshop was held at the Liwonde Hippo Lodge in Central Malawi on 9th and 10th May 2011, to which participants from Government, the Department of Fisheries, Aquaculture Industry and NGOs were invited. The two days of the workshop concentrated on prioritisation and scheduling of policies in the light of scarce resources and the conclusions from the workshop were included in the Draft Fisheries Policy. A report on the workshop can be found in Annex 6

In Swaziland to validate the revised version of the Fisheries Policy, a Validation Workshop was held on 7th April 2011 at the Happy Valley Resort, Ezulwini,, attended by a broad selection of stakeholders. The improvements derived from observations made at that workshop, on the early draft fisheries policy, were incorporated into the draft final Fisheries Policy provided to the Swaziland Government. A report on this workshop can be found in Annex 16.

Lists of people met and documents consulted in both countries are in the Annexes to this report.

The output of the mission is this report containing, inter alia, in its Annexes

• Annex 7 – the “Draft Malawi National Fishery and Aquaculture Policy 2011”. This draft Policy is a revision of the 2001 Malawi National Fishery and Aquaculture Policy, and was revised in the light of considerable changes that have occurred in Malawi, both internally and with regard to external relations, over the 10 years since the last policy was written.

• Annex 9 - the “Draft Policy on the Management and Growth of Swaziland’s Freshwater Fisheries and Aquaculture Sectors”. The Draft Policy is derived directly from the existing


ACP Countries"



draft policy, which was under revision prior to the mission, and its format is that provided to the Technical Team by the Public Policy Coordination Office in the Cabinet Office in Swaziland.

Other Annexes, relevant to the Swaziland policy, were specifically requested to be provided separate from the Fisheries Policy itself, by the Public Policy Coordination Office of Swaziland. These are an Implementation Plan for the Fisheries Policy (Annex 10), and a Policy Framework, (Annex 11), covering all the policy strategies and proposed activities, with indicators, constraints, areas of responsibility and possible timelines for each activity. Annex 13 of this report covers future Policy Development and Review Processes for the Swaziland Fisheries Policy.

There are two recommendations derived from the preparation of the draft Fisheries Policies for Swaziland and Malawi

RECOMMENDATION 1: It is recommended that both the Fisheries Department of Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security in Malawi and the Fisheries Section of the MOA in Swaziland each draft a new fisheries act and new regulations to support the newly revised Fisheries Policies.

RECOMMENDATION 2: It is recommended that both the Fisheries Department of Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security in Malawi and the Fisheries Section of the MOA in Swaziland regularly revise their fisheries policies in line with the guidelines provided to them (5 years for both Swaziland and Malawi). The process for reviewing the activities that are being carried out to achieve the objectives should be undertaken annually at the same time as the budget revision process, so as to ensure their continued relevance.


ACP Countries"



1 Background

This report describes the initial activities and findings of a mission to Malawi and Swaziland by the Senior Inland Fisheries Policy Expert (KE1), the Inland Fisheries and Aquaculture Expert (KE2, Malawi only) and the Inland Fisheries Policy Expert (KE3, Swaziland only). The mission took place during March, April and May 2011 and was carried out under the EU funded Strengthening Fisheries Management in ACP States project (9ACP RPR 128) programme implemented by ACP Fish II. The overall objective of the project is to contribute to the sustainable and equitable management of fisheries in the ACP regions.

ACP Fish II. The ACP Fish II programme in Southern Africa operates through the Regional Facilitation Unit in Maputo and covers Angola, Botswana, Comoros, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Swaziland, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. The overall objective of the ACP FishII Programme is to contribute to the sustainable and equitable management of fisheries in ACP regions, thus leading to poverty alleviation and improving food security in ACP States.

ACP Fish II aims to foster improved institutional capacity for fisheries and aquatic resources management. It specifically addresses knowledge requirements for sustainable management in ACP countries at all levels of decision making.

One of the priorities in the region, from a needs assessment workshop in 2010 in Maputo, was policy elaboration and fisheries management plan implementation; specifically

“to formulate/update national fisheries polices and Fisheries management plans, and strengthen national fisheries legislation”

In line with the objectives of the ACP Fish II Programme, the specific objective of this mission was to produce final drafts of the Malawi Fisheries and Aquaculture Policy and the Swaziland Fisheries Policy. In addition the policies were validated in a participatory manner, so as to ensure both ownership and that the participatory process has taken into consideration the views and opinions of the stakeholders in both countries

MALAWI: Malawi has a population of more than 15 million people (2009) and is among the world's least developed countries.

The country is landlocked and has a total area of 118,484 km2, of which 23% is covered by water. The largest water body is Lake Malawi with a surface area of about 29,000 km2, and a length of about 700 km. Other water bodies include Lakes Malombe, Chilwa and Chiuta and several large rivers and wetland areas. The fisheries sector contribution to the national economy is estimated to be 4% of GDP. More than 59,000 (2010) persons are employed in the sector and this number is increasing with time, with increasing numbers of gears and fishing vessels. Ancillary industries, processing, wholesaling, transport and retailing of aquatic products brings the total employment in the sector to more than 300,000. Production in 2010 was 78,000 tonnes from the capture fisheries of the country and another 2,000 tonnes from aquaculture.

In Malawi commercially valuable fish species in shallow inshore waters are fully or over exploited and no further increase in yield can be expected. There is a resource of in excess of 33,000 tonnes in the deeper offshore waters but it has proved to be difficult to exploit this resource. The major management theme is co-management through local management institutions in communities but this has only been partially successful. The fisheries are open access and there is no control of effort, except in a small industrial fishery on Lake Malawi. A licensing system for gears exists but this is


ACP Countries"



mainly a revenue collection activity, though statistical data is also gathered. Annual frame surveys of gears are undertaken and catch statistics are collected.

The current Fisheries Policy dates from 2001. Since this date the Department of Fisheries has moved from the Ministry of Natural Resources to the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security. In addition the decentralization policy has been implemented and there has been a change in emphasis away from capture fisheries (which was the broad thrust of the 2001 policy), towards Aquaculture, the improvement of fish quality and a reduction in post harvest losses. The legislation and supporting regulations are also acknowledged to have shortcomings.

There have been considerable changes in the fisheries itself since 2001, with over-fishing of the wild resources becoming more prevalent, the development of cage culture in Lake Malawi, greater emphasis on small scale aquaculture in villages for nutrition and small scale commercial aquaculture operations starting in many parts of the country. Future exports of aquaculture products from Malawi to neighbouring countries, is a distinct possibility and the regulation of fish quality is becoming more of a priority.

Additionally there are many international agreements and conventions under which Malawi is obliged to act, including the SADC Protocol on Fisheries, the Convention on Biodiversity and the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, all of which are becoming more important as time moves on.

The purpose of the project in Malawi therefore is to revise the FP, validate the revised version with stakeholders so that it better reflects the needs of the sector in Malawi and to provide guidelines for future regular revisions.

THE KINGDOM OF SWAZILAND: Swaziland is a small landlocked country in southern Africa, with an area of 17,364 km2, bordering with South Africa and Mozambique. The country has a population of 1,185,000 million and is a medium income developing country with a GDP per capita of more than $US 4,500 (PPP) in 2010.

The Fisheries Sector in Swaziland is wholly inland and is relatively small and not well developed. There are no lakes of significance and only dams provide wild capture fisheries. Commercial fisheries are non existent and although sport fishing is important, the numbers participating are small. The only fishing gears allowed are rod and line. Sport fishing provides some tourism income, mostly from South Africa.

Aquaculture is not well developed but a government run fish hatchery is under construction and will be completed by the end of 2011. There are some 30 or 40 commercial small scale ponds stocked with tilapia. The aquaculture sector has great potential for expansion, since the country is well supplied with water and there are many suitable sites for aquaculture.

The fisheries administration is under the authority of the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives and is divided into two units, the Fisheries Management Unit (FMU) and the Fish Farming Unit (FFU). The department employs a total of 7 staff, including 4 field officers each working in a different region of Swaziland (Lubombo, Hhohho, Shysilweny and Manzini). The mandate of the Fisheries Section is to ensure an optimal and sustainable exploitation of the country's fisheries resources and to promote the consumption of fish at both household and national levels in order to enhance national food security.

In 2009 the Fisheries Section began a project for developing a national fisheries policy with its own limited resources. A first draft had been prepared but it still needed to be turned into a definitive version and to be validated by local stakeholders.


ACP Countries"



The fisheries legislative framework is out of date: the main parts are the Freshwater Fisheries Act and the Freshwater Fisheries Regulation from the year 1937. Other legislation relevant to fisheries is the Environmental Management Act of 2002 and the Water Act of 2003.

The purpose of the project in Swaziland therefore was to develop the draft Fisheries Policy already prepared by the Fisheries Section and validate this version with stakeholders so that it provides a sound policy background for the future.

2 Approach to the assignment

The Technical teams used a multi-sectoral evaluation of the fishery sector and its current and future environment to provide a background against which to revise the Fisheries Policies in Malawi and Swaziland.

Key characteristics of the fisheries sector were looked at, including the existing policy framework (food security, poverty reduction and growth policy), legal framework, institutional framework and the budgetary position of fisheries section/department, in conjunction with the Technical Team in both countries.

In addition the trade and tariff position were examined, regarding fisheries products (including imports from neighbouring countries and elsewhere).

With a relatively high prevalence of HIV and AIDS in the region, the applicability of small scale aquaculture to the improvement of nutrition in rural situation, amongst PLHIV, was examined. In Malawi this has been a standard intervention in HIV and AIDS support in rural areas for some years and the possibility of working with NGOs active in the mitigation of the effects of HIV and AIDS was expected to provide a good basis for moving forward in Swaziland as well, though the practice is less developed there.

This policy intervention logic was then used as the basis for individual consultations with stakeholders, institutional , private sector, and at grass roots level.

In Malawi, which has a larger fisheries sector than Swaziland, and more of the population directly dependent on fish production for livelihoods, four stakeholder workshops, were held in different parts of the country. These were used to garner opinion regarding the problems being encountered in the fisheries sector, and the objectives that the communities felt should be pursued or prioritised in the revision of the Fisheries Policy, from the grass roots level. Using these sources of information draft policies were prepared which were validated at a workshop (in Liwonde on 9/10th May, report in Annex 6), which widened the scope of the stakeholder consultation and provided feedback on the draft policy documents which were, by then, taking shape.

No stakeholder workshops were undertaken in Swaziland but a validation workshop was held on 7th April, 2011 at the Happy Valley Resort Ezulwini, (report in Annex 15).

SWOT analysis was used to identify the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats in the various policy areas under consideration. The Malawi SWOT analysis looked at the Institutional Framework, Capture Fisheries, Aquaculture, Processing and Resources and Environment. In Swaziland the analysis covered both Capture Fisheries and Aquaculture. The results of the Malawi SWOT analysis are provided in the Inception Report (Annex 2) and the Swaziland SWOT analysis is in Annex 12.

Throughout the assignment, the policy review team applied the logical framework approach to ensure a structured and comprehensive consideration of all elements of the policy.


ACP Countries"



After the Validation Workshops in Swaziland and Malawi the results of the workshops were discussed with the Technical Teams and agreed changes made, as appropriate, to the draft fisheries policies resulting in:

• for Swaziland a “Draft Policy on the Management and Growth of Swaziland’s Freshwater Fisheries and Aquaculture Sectors”, which is in Annex 9

• for Malawi a “Draft National Fisheries and Aquaculture Policy” which is in Annex 7.

Both of these are draft documents, liable to further revision and change before they are finally adopted by their respective Fisheries Administrations.

MALAWI: The Inland Fisheries and Aquaculture Expert (KE2) arrived in Lilongwe on March 8th and began consultations with the Technical Team and Focal Point of the arrangements for the rest of the mission. The Senior Inland Fisheries Policy Expert (KE1) joined the KE2 on the 14th March and a long round of consultations within the Fisheries Department and with other bodies within Government were made. A field visit to Lake Malawi was undertaken which encompassed the Fisheries Research Unit at Monkey Bay, MALDECO Fisheries and the Mangochi District Fisheries Office. On 26th March KE2 left Malawi, the KE1 remained, continuing the consultations, and making further field visits to Salima and Senga Bay on Lake Malawi, and to aquaculture enterprises in the Lilongwe District. KE1 left the first draft of the Draft Fisheries and aquaculture Policy with the Technical Team on departure. KE1 then left Malawi on 3rd April and went to Swaziland.

KE2 returned to Malawi on 4th April and with the assistance of the Technical Team facilitated four stakeholder workshops in four different locations in Malawi (see report Annex 5), leaving again on 16th April for the Easter Holiday break. He also visited several institutions in Southern Malawi, which had not been visited during the first round of meetings. The ACP FISH II Regional Manager for Southern Africa Region was able to visit Malawi during this period and attended one of the stakeholder meetings, as well as having detailed meetings with the Focal Point and Deputy Director of Fisheries.

Following the Easter holiday period, on 2nd May 2011, both KE1 and KE2 returned to Malawi again and after making a courtesy call to the EU, with the Deputy Director of Fisheries and the ACP FISH II Focal Point for Malawi to brief them on the mission and progress so far, distributed the latest draft revision of the full fisheries policy, and had further detailed discussions with the Technical Team. They then facilitated, with the Technical Team, a two day validation workshop in Liwonde in S.Malawi (see report Annex 6). The results of this workshop were incorporated into the draft fisheries policy to produce a Draft Final Fisheries & Aquaculture Policy, in the format required by the Fisheries Department. This made up one of the annexes to the Draft Final Report left with the Focal Point on the departure of the experts on 12th May 2011.

SWAZILAND: After a short period of home office preparation the Inland Fisheries Policy Expert (KE3) arrived in Swaziland on 7th March and left on 12th March 2011. During this period KE3 initially met with the ACP FISH II Focal Point in Swaziland and the other members of the Technical team. KE3, accompanied by the Regional Manager, Southern Africa, ACP II and the Focal Point for Swaziland, made a courtesy visit to the EU Delegation in Swaziland to brief them on the purpose and progress of the mission.

Field visits to two areas where fish farming was being undertaken at subsistence and small scale commercial level, and to dams and water bodies suitable for fisheries development (either sport, or aquaculture) were also made. A series of meetings were arranged with appropriate stakeholders and institutions and courtesy visits to the Delegation of the EU and the PS of Agriculture were undertaken.


ACP Countries"



The KE3 was accompanied by the ACP FISH II Regional Manager for the Inception Meeting and a visit to the EU Delegation. A First Draft Policy was prepared and circulated, and was included in the Inception Report.

On 3rd April 2011, KE3 returned to Swaziland accompanied by KE 1. The next 3 days were spent, with the Technical Team, visiting institutions and preparing for the Validation Workshop, which was held on 7th April at the Happy Valley Resort, Ezulwini. This workshop was moved to the 7th April from the original date of 12th April due to the chance of a strike that could possibly have made participation by stakeholders difficult on the 12th April.

The results of the Validation Workshop (see Annex 15) were incorporated into the Draft Fisheries Policy and follow up meetings were made to a variety of institutions to cover topics raised at the Validation Workshop, and elsewhere; including to a sport fish competition to gather information.

The Draft Policy prepared by the Technical Team is based on a Draft Policy prepared by the Fisheries Section of the Ministry of Agriculture, which has been modified following the consultation and information gathering carried out during the mission.

The experts left Swaziland on 16th April, leaving the Draft Final Report, prepared in the format provided by the ACP II regional office, which contains the Draft Fisheries Policy, prepared in the format provided by the PPCU as one of the Annexes.

Policy formatting for the Draft Fisheries and Aquaculture Policies in Swaziland followed that provided to the Technical Team by the PPCU in Swaziland, where it was specifically requested by the PPCU that The Implementation Plan should be presented as a separate document. It is attached as Annex 10. The Policy Format provided did not contain a Policy Framework, so a separate Policy Framework was created during the consultation process, particularly in relation to the problems and objectives identified by stakeholders and to guide the process of developing the fisheries policy attached as Annex 11.

Early drafts of the Malawi Fisheries Policy followed a format provided by the Office of the President and Cabinet (OPC) after consultation with them by the Technical Team, however on May 11th, after the Validation Workshop it was requested, by the Department of Fisheries, that the format be changed and that it follow the format of the National Environmental Policy (2004) & Wildlife and National Parks Department (under development). In complying with this request the whole structure of the policy document and its contents had to be changed to conform. The Malawi Draft Fisheries Policy contains an implementation and a monitoring plan, with specific objectives, time-frames and indicators, which forms part of the Draft Revised Fisheries and Aquaculture Policy (Annex 7).

Both of the draft policies, for Malawi and Swaziland, as presented in this report, are likely to be subject to further modification by the respective Fisheries Administrations before they are finally adopted.

The format of this Final Report follows that provided to the Technical Team by the ACP II Regional Office.

With regard to the review and revision of the draft fisheries and aquaculture policies a guide to the review process was prepared to assist with future revision of policies, objectives or activities contained within them. For both Malawi and Swaziland these are provided as Annexes. In both cases these guidelines for review and revision of the policy are based on the principles of Project Cycle Management.


ACP Countries"



3 Comments on the Terms of Reference

In Swaziland the original ToRs called for a Validation workshop to be held and this was planned for 12th April 2011. However, it became apparent that a period of industrial unrest on or about the 12th April might interfere with the ability of the participants to attend, so the Validation Workshop was bought forward to the 7th April 2011 on the advice of the Technical team. This turned out to have been a wise decision.

The unrest that occurred in Swaziland on 12th April did not directly affect the performance of the mission, it only limited the scope of visits and consultations that could be made on that day and the following one.

Otherwise the ToRs (see Annex 1) were followed closely

4 Organisation and Methodology

The methodology was relatively straightforward.

MALAWI: During the first week KE2 contacted the Focal Point and Technical team, collected documents, and arranged future meetings. He was then involved, with the KE1, for the next three weeks in further discussions and field visits and the production of an interim report of activities (Annex 2). Subsequently KE1 left to go to Swaziland and four stakeholder workshops were carried out by KE2 in different parts of the country to obtain further opinion and input from the grass roots level (see Annex 5), the results of which were inserted into the draft policy. After a break for Easter KE1 and KE2 returned to Malawi and the draft report on the revision of the policy was validated at a two day workshop held in Liwonde (Annex 6) and the draft final version of the Fisheries Policy was produced (Annex 7).

SWAZILAND: KE3 with the Technical team collected documents and made visits to institutions and other bodies during the period 7th-12th March. Field visits were also made to aquaculture sites and dams.

KE3 then adjusted the existing Fisheries Section Draft Fisheries Policy in the light of the findings of these visits; and an inception report was prepared covering these activities and circulated, (see Annex 2).

Subsequently, the KE1 and KE3 returned to Swaziland, and made further consultations, they also arranged and facilitated the Validation Workshop, worked with the Technical Team in adjusting the Draft Fisheries Policy, particularly in the light of the results of the Validation Workshop findings, (see Annex 16) and undertook a SWOT analysis (see Annex 12). In addition they prepared the policy framework for the Fisheries Policy based on the results of the stakeholder consultations, specific recognized objectives and the identified problems to be addressed.

A list of people met and institutions visited in Swaziland can be found in Annex 14. The List of Documents consulted is in Annex 15.


ACP Countries"


Page 0


4.1 Delivery of Terms of Reference (table as below)

Malawi Terms of Reference How delivered through the assignment

1 Meet and work closely with the head of DoF of MAFS Director of DoF on study leave throughout assignment. Deputy Director, Mr Steve Donda met by KE2 on first day of assignment with Focal Point, Dr Friday Njaya.

2 In consultation with the DoF, establish the project technical team and devise the work plan for the assignment

Technical Team formed led by Focal Point Dr Friday Njaya with Mr Maurice Makuwila and Mrs Chiconde Pasani. Meeting on 14th April with Deputy Director, Focal Point, Technical Team and KE1 & KE2 devised plan for the rest of the mission and suitable timetable, including workshops and field visits.

3 Identify, collate and review background documents on the fisheries sector

Thorough review of documents provided by Fisheries Department, and other documents obtained from departments and sections visited including, Gender, National Aids Council, MAFS, Forestry, Irrigation, National Parks, Treasury and others.

4

Examine the current policy framework, identifying gaps and particularly analysing the effectiveness of the instruments in providing for efficient and sustainable management of fisheries and aquaculture

Current policy (2001) provided by Fisheries Department. Policy format provided by OPC. Reports on progress in Aquaculture and Capture Fisheries by Fisheries Department analysed, as well as several reports by international agencies including EU SPF project and Tradecom Facility specifically on fisheries in Malawi. Experiences of the ADB Lake Malawi Artisanal Fisheries Development Project (LMAFDP) relevant to the analysis, as well as the work of the Presidential Initiative on Aquaculture Development programme (PIAD). Strategies and policies of departments and ministries involved in cross cutting activities scrutinised so as to ensure continuity and future collaboration. Problems in implementation of current policies due to budget and staffing constraints noted. Field visits to obtain ground truth information in aquaculture and capture fisheries. A SWOT analysis was undertaken covering analysis of the fisheries of Malawi, including Capture Fisheries, Aquaculture, Processing, Institutional and Legal Framework, and Resources and Environment. This was used to confirm major


ACP Countries"


Page 0


themes and constraints already identified by the Technical Team. The results of the SWOT analysis are in the Interim Report.

5

Organize at least four regional meetings (1 day, 25 participants each), in order to collect meaningful input from the stakeholders, as per work plan. The consultant is in charge of the meetings’ organisation and logistics

4 regional meetings held, in (North to South) Mzuzu, Salima, Mangochi and Zomba, so as to coincide with geographic zones in Malawi. 93 stakeholders attended these meetings, 16 at Mzuzu, 27 at Salima, 28 at Mangochi and 22 at Zomba. Main problems noted were declining catches (capture fisheries) and slow growing species of fish (aquaculture). ACPII Fish Regional Manager attended Mangochi workshop and was able to liaise with Focal Point and Deputy Director Fisheries & KE2. Participants list prepared by the Fisheries Department. KE2 with assistance of Technical Team arranged logistics.

6 Carry out further consultative meetings and interviews with stakeholders, if necessary

This was an ongoing process throughout the mission. Every opportunity available was taken to interview stakeholders, during field visits, workshops and formally in Lilongwe and elsewhere where necessary.

7

Review the existing Malawi National Fisheries and Aquaculture Policy, taking into account the findings/recommendations of the meetings and consultations and prepare, in close collaboration with the technical team, [a first draft of the revised MNFAP]

The existing policy was reviewed in conjunction with the Technical Team. A Zero Draft was left with the Technical Team on 2nd April 2011 and a further, more refined draft conforming better to the format provided by OPC with added tables of the draft implementation plan and the draft indicators for the objectives was provided by the KE1 to the Technical Team and Focal Point on 24th April 2011, in time to be circulated to the participants at the Validation Workshop at Liwonde in May.

8 Submit the draft of MNFAP and discuss it with the DoF

On return to Malawi on 3rd May KE1 & KE2, with the Technical Team went through the draft policy very carefully and incorporated comments and opinion. Much of what was discussed was subsequently earmarked for inclusion in the agenda and discussed further at the Validation Workshop in Liwonde.

9 Elaborate guidelines for drafting fisheries policy for the DoF

A guideline for the elaboration of Fisheries Policy, based on the Project Cycle and the Logical Framework Approach was prepared for inclusion in the Fisheries Policy (this is consistent with the Policy Format provided to the Technical Team by the OPC), but at the request of the Fisheries Department


ACP Countries"


Page 0


was later moved to an Annex

10

Organise a national workshop to present, discuss and endorse the draft MNFAP (2 days, 25 participants); the consultant is in charge of the workshop’s organisation and logistics (subcontracting for workshop organisation is allowed).

The National Workshop was held at Liwonde on 9th & 10th May 2011. 25 participants attended, including the Technical Team and the Focal Point. A report on the workshop can be found in Annex 6.

11 Review the draft of MNFAP according to the inputs provided through the national workshop in close collaboration with the technical team

Immediately after the Validation Workshop the Technical Team and the consultants met to decide how the results were to be incorporated into the draft policy. A different format was proposed by the Fisheries Department and the necessary changes made over the next two days.

12 Present and discuss the final draft of the MNFAP with DoF

12th May. Debriefing at Department of Fisheries 12th May. CD with electronic versions of documents consulted, photographs taken, Draft Final Report with Annexes including the Annex 7 “Draft Malawi National Fishery and Aquaculture Policy (MNFAP)” provided to the Focal Point ACP II, Mr Friday Njaya & Deputy Director of Fisheries.

Swaziland Terms of reference How delivered through the assignment 1 Meet and work closely with the head of FS of MAC; Focal Point, Mr Freddy Magagula contacted on first day of assignment. 2 In consultation with the FS, establish the project

technical team and devise the work plan for the assignment;

Technical Team included Focal Point and two members of Fisheries Section, Mr Johannes Msibi and Mr Boy R Mavuso. Work plan established for first mission including visits to dams and aquaculture sites; and also to Government institutions, departments and Ministries. Throughout the assignment the Technical Team worked with the KE3 & KE1

3 Identify, collate and review background documents on the fisheries sector;

Many documents provided by Fisheries Section and Ministry of Agriculture. Other documents gathered from visits. All returned to provider or given to Fisheries Section in electronic format on CD on departure of KE1 & KE3

4 Examine the current policy framework, identifying gaps and particularly analysing the effectiveness of the

Draft policy framework examined. Comprehensive, but in need of added sections, particularly on institutional strengthening, possible interactions of


ACP Countries"


Page 0


instruments in providing for efficient and sustainable management of fisheries and aquaculture;

HIV/AIDS and aquaculture, more emphasis on possible sources of finance in commercial aquaculture, and conflict resolution between sport fishing and other users of water bodies. Gender issues also needed prioritising.

5 Carry out meetings, consultations, and field visits to relevant communities and fisheries in order to ensure meaningful input by key stakeholders;

Small-scale aquaculture sites visited. Two dams & lakes visited. Interviews with small-scale aquaculturalists. Government bodies visited. Environment, Water, HIV/AIDS (NERCHA), Ministry Agriculture, Swazi Meat Industries (by Telephone), Commerce, and Trade, Office of Prime Minister, local finance institutions.

6 Prepare, in collaboration with the technical team, the first draft of revised SFP and present it to the FS for discussion;

First Draft prepared prior to Validation Workshop and presented to Technical Team on 5th April

7 Carry out further consultation and field visits if needed;

After Validation Workshop on 7th April was completed certain extra meetings were arranged to cover areas highlighted by the workshop as important and which needed more in depth analysis. These included a follow up visit to NERCHA to discuss cooperation on PLHIV and aquaculture, a visit to the SwaziBank to discuss microfinance initiatives in small scale commercial aquaculture, and a further field trip to the van Eck dam to observe sport fishing and interview participants

8 Review, if necessary, the SFP including new findings/recommendation emerged during the meetings with FS and other stakeholders;

Alterations to the draft SFP were made to reflect the findings of the workshop, and the subsequent follow visits. Additionally a SWOT analysis for Aquaculture & Capture Fisheries was carried out to try to identify any gaps in the draft policy.

9 Organise a workshop to present the final version of SFP. (For report on workshop see Annex 16)

Validation workshop held 8th April in the Happy Valley Resort Conference room. 26 attendees. All day workshop, with break for lunch. Report in Annex 16 Opened by Under Secretary DAD MOA. Press in attendance. Newspaper articles covering Validation Workshop in Swaziland press on 8th April. Validation workshop had to be bought forward one week due to the likelihood


ACP Countries"


Page 0


of industrial unrest on the 12th and possibly 13th April 2011; which had the potential to interfere with the ability of participants to attend.

10 Delivery of Draft Final report (as required by ToRs) Debriefing at Ministry of Agriculture. PP Presentation made on 14th April to US DAD MOA 15th April. CD with electronic versions of documents consulted, photographs taken, Draft Final Report with 10 x Annexes including the “Draft Policy on the Management and Growth of Swaziland’s Freshwater Fisheries and Aquaculture Sectors” provided to the Focal Point ACP II. (Draft Final Report subsequently modified to include Malawi Revision of Fisheries Policy)


ACP Countries"


Page 0


4.2 Conduct of assignment/details of the assignment

MALAWI: The assignment undertaken by the KE1 and KE2 in Malawi was in 3 Phases.

Phase 1 was undertaken by KE2 from 8th March to 27th March and KE1 from 14 March to 3rd April 2011 for initial consultation, field visits and data collection.

Phase 2 was from 4th April to 16th April by KE2 only for the stakeholder workshops in four locations

Phase 3 was from 2nd May to 13th May for the final consultations, validation workshop and preparation of the Draft Final Report.

Timetable:

Dates Activity

KE2 8th March to 27th March, 2011 KE1 14th March to 3rd April, 2011

Meetings: Principal Secretary Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security Treasury DoF & Technical Team NAC, Forestry, Irrigation, National Parks, Gender, Treasury, Bunda College of Agriculture, MALDECO, Environment, Water, OPC Field Visits: MALDECO, Research Unit at Monkey Bay, Mangochi District Fisheries, Salima District Fisheries, Senga Bay BVCs, fish farmer Lilongwe District.

KE2 4th April – 16th April, 2011

Stakeholder workshops. Four one-day workshops were conducted at four venues, namely Mzuzu (5th April, 2011), Salima (8th April, 2011), Mangochi (14th April, 2011) and Zomba (15th April, 2011). The maximum number of participants was limited to around 25 per workshop.

KE1 & KE2 2nd May- 13th May, 2011

Visit to the EU Delegation for briefing and discussions on policy and cross cutting issues. Discussions with Fisheries Department and Technical Team on draft policy Administration for Validation Workshop and related matters. Validation Workshop on 9th & 10th May 2011 at Liwonde. Preparation of report on validation workshop and inclusion of comments from workshop to Draft Fisheries Policy. Readjust format of policy. Presentation of Draft Final Fisheries Policy and Draft Final Report 12th May

Outputs:

Inception Report: Development of a Fisheries and Aquaculture Policy for Malawi and National Fisheries Policy in Swaziland CU/PE1/MZ/10/001 /NEG March 2011

Annex 2

SWOT Analysis. Institutional Framework, Capture Fisheries, Aquaculture, Processing and Resources & Environment

Contained in Inception Report (Annex 2)

Report on Stakeholder Consultation Workshops. May 2011 Annex 5 Malawi Validation Workshop report. May 2011 Annex 6 Draft Malawi National Fishery and Aquaculture Policy 2011. May 2011 Annex 7


ACP Countries"


Page 0


SWAZILAND: The assignment undertaken by KE1 & KE3 in Swaziland was in two phases, from 7-12th March and then a second phase from 4th-15th April 2011. During the first Phase KE3 visited the country for a week and during the second phase KE1 and KE3 both visited Swaziland for two weeks.

Timetable:

Dates Activity

7 - 12th March KE3

Meetings: Principle Secretary and Under Secretary of the Ministry of Agriculture European Union Commission Delegation ACP Fish II Regional Manager Ministry of Natural Resources, Department of Water Affairs Ministry of Commerce, Department of Licensing Environmental Authority of Swaziland & Fisheries Section staff at MOA Field visits: three local fish farming projects Komati Basin Water Authority and visit to Maguga Dam

4th April - 15th April KE1 & KE3

Discussions with Fisheries Section on draft policy Invitations to Validation Workshop on 7th April, administration for Validation Workshop and related matters. Validation Workshop on 7th April (all day). Preparation of report on validation workshop and inclusion of comments to Draft Fisheries Policy. SWOT analysis on aquaculture & Capture Fisheries in Swaziland. Meetings with NERCHA (HIV/AIDS), Swazibank, Office of the Prime Minister Field visit to van Eck dam to observe sport fishing competition & interview sport fishermen Preparation of Draft Final Fisheries Policy and Draft Final Report

Outputs:

Inception Report: Development of a Fisheries and Aquaculture Policy for Malawi and National Fisheries Policy in Swaziland CU/PE1/MZ/10/001 /NEG March 2011

Annex 2

Draft Policy on the Management and Growth of Swaziland’s Freshwater Fisheries and Aquaculture Sectors. April 2011

Annex 9

Fisheries Policy Implementation Plan. April 2011 Annex 10 Fisheries Policy Framework. April 2011 Annex 11 SWOT analysis – Capture Fisheries and Aquaculture (April 2011) Annex 12 Policy Development and Review Processes (Including checklist) (April 2011)

Annex 13

Validation Workshop Report (April 2011) Annex 16


ACP Countries"


Page 0


5 Conclusions and recommendations

The methodology employed in both countries was based principally on the Logical Framework approach and the Project Cycle, plus other analyses and tools such as SWOT and problem & objective analysis at workshops. This approach proved to be suitable to the task of revising the fisheries policies of Malawi and Swaziland

Both in Malawi and in Swaziland the fact that a Technical Team was formed to assist with the mission made the revision of the fisheries policies less complex than was anticipated. It was also of great importance that the Regional Manager was well informed and interested in the progress of the work.

In both countries fisheries policy had not kept up with events either within the countries, regionally or internationally and for that reason both policies needed revising and updating.

The Malawi policy from 2001 was comprehensive, but contained no detailed implementation plan and objectives were not linked to indicators. The new format for policies provided by the OPC, included frameworks for implementation and monitoring and making the revised version a more user friendly document with better defined objectives. In addition, the stakeholder workshops to gain grass roots opinion on problems and possible objectives to be included in the policy proved to be immensely useful. The validation workshop of two days duration was instrumental in enabling the revised policy to be designed so as to be relevant to the immediate and urgent needs of the sector.

Implementation of the Malawi National Fisheries and Aquaculture policy depends to a great part on the ability of the Fisheries Department to obtain funding, internally and from donors, in order that it can pursue the objectives. If this funding is not forthcoming then the Department of Fisheries will have to concentrate on core objectives and the strategies to achieve them.

The Swaziland Fisheries Policy was already in an early draft format, making the revision of the Fisheries Policy less complex than was anticipated. Detailed consultations with stakeholders of all sorts served mainly to confirm the findings of the Technical Team, presented in the early draft fisheries policy, before the arrival of the experts provided by the ACP II project. What remained was for the Key Experts to work with the Technical Team to craft the draft policy into a working document suitable for presentation to the Validation Workshop held on 7th April 2011. The Validation Workshop, the SWOT analysis on Aquaculture & Capture Fisheries undertaken by the technical team and the follow up activities as a result of the workshop, meant that further minor changes could be made to the document to make it even more appropriate, and to ensure that it contained achievable objectives in a sensible time frame. The Implementation Plan for the Swaziland Fisheries and Aquaculture Policy is ambitious and the Fisheries Section will have to strive to maintain impetus if it is to be achieved.

There are two recommendations derived from the preparation of this report and the two policy documents which apply to both countries.

RECOMMENDATION 1: It is recommended that both the Fisheries Department of Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security in Malawi and the Fisheries Section of the MOA in Swaziland each draft a new fisheries act and new regulations to support the newly revised Fisheries Policies.

RECOMMENDATION 2: It is recommended that both the Fisheries Department of Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security in Malawi and the Fisheries Section of the MOA in Swaziland regularly revise their fisheries policies in line with the guidelines provided to them (5 years for both Swaziland and Malawi). The process for reviewing the activities that are being carried out to achieve the objectives should be undertaken annually at the same time as the budget revision process, so as to ensure their continued relevance.


ACP Countries"


Page 0


As required by the ToRs, on departure of the Experts from Swaziland and Malawi a CD was provided to the Focal Point in each country for his reference. It contains:

1) All relevant photos taken by the KE1, KE2 and KE3 during the visit (either to Malawi and Swaziland),

2) Electronic copies of all documents collected in electronic format during the visit and during literature review.

3) The draft final report (this report) with Annexes, one of which is the Draft “Policy on the Management and Growth of Swaziland’s Fresh Water Fisheries and Aquaculture Sectors” and the another the Draft “Malawi National Fisheries and Aquaculture Policy”

Hard copies of all documents referred to were returned to their respective owners.


ACP Countries"


Page 0


Annexes

Annex 1: Terms of Reference.

Revision of National Policy for Fisheries and Aquaculture in Malawi and National Fisheries Policy in Swaziland

1. Background Information 1.1 Beneficiary country

The direct beneficiary countries for the implementation of this contract are Malawi and Swaziland.

1.2 Contracting Authority

ACP FISH II Coordination Unit

36/21 Avenue de Tervuren

5th Floor

Brussels 1040

Tel: +32 (0)2 739 00 60

Fax: +32 (0)2 739 00 68

1.3 Relevant country background

The Southern Africa (SA) region for the purposes of the implementation of the ACP Fish II programme, operating through the Regional Facilitation Unit in Maputo, is made up of fisheries administrations in Angola, Botswana, Comoros, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Swaziland, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. The local programme implementation foresees also a coordination and collaboration with key Regional Fishery’s Bodies (RFB), Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMO) and Regional Economic Organization (REO) such as Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC), the South West Indian Ocean Fisheries Commission (SWIOFC) , the South East Atlantic Fisheries Organization (SEAFO), the Indian Ocean Commission (IOC), Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) and the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) Within the region, countries subject to this contact are Malawi and Swaziland.

Malawi with a population of 15 million of people (2009) is among the world's least developed countries ranking 160/182 in the UNHD index and has a per capita GDP of $US 800 (PPP1, 2007). The country is dependent on substantial economic aid. The economy relies mainly on the primary sector - 90% of export revenues come from agriculture - which accounts for more than one-third of GDP. Fisheries sector contribution to the national economy is estimated to be 4% of GDP, and sector is employing a significant proportion of the population as fishers, processors and traders and plays an important role livelihood and food security in rural areas. Malawi Growth and Development Strategy (MGDS) emphasises macroeconomic governance, decentralisation, rule of law and promotion of human rights. The Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development has embarked upon a policy of decentralisation that calls for a process of devolving political powers to the District Assemblies.

1 Purchasing Power Parity


ACP Countries"


Page 0


The Kingdom of Swaziland is a small landlocked country in southern Africa, with an area of 17,364 km2, bordering with South Africa and Mozambique. The country has a population of 1,185,000 million and is a medium income developing country with a GDP per capita of $US 4, 789 (PPP) in 2007. The economy is fairly diversified, with agriculture, forestry and mining accounting for about 13% of GDP, manufacturing (textiles and sugar-related processing) representing 37% of GDP and services constituting 50% of GDP. Fishery contribution is low and not estimated. Swaziland started one of its most significant political reforms supporting the decentralization process in 2004, when Government requested UNDP support for the development of such a policy. The programme included capacity building initiatives for various government officials, as well as training and sensitization activities. Government’s commitment to decentralization is also reflected in the allocation of a sum of US$1.3 million to the decentralization process in the 2006/07 public budget. To address the challenges confronting the country, the authorities of Swaziland have prepared the National Development Strategy (NDS, 1997-2022), and devised the Poverty Reduction Strategy and Action Plan (PRSAP), whose overall objective is to reduce the incidence of poverty in Swaziland from its current level of 66 per cent to 30 per cent by 2015, in line with the MDG and eliminate it by 2022.

1.4 Current state of affairs in the relevant sector

Fisheries sector in Malawi

The country is landlocked and has a total area of 118,484 km2, of which 23% is covered by water. The largest water body is Lake Malawi with a surface area of about 29,000 km2, and a length of about 700 km. Other water bodies include Lakes Malombe, Chilwa and Chiuta and major rivers like Shire, Linthipe, Bua, Dwangwa, Rukuru and Songwe. The fisheries sector, which contributes approximately 4 % to national GDP, is a source of job creation, directly employing about 60,000 fishers, and indirectly about 350,000 people who are involved in fish processing, fish marketing, net making, boat building and engine repair. Fisheries play an important role in ensuring food security for rural population.

The fisheries sector in Malawi encompasses capture fisheries and aquaculture. Capture fisheries, which is the major sector, entails both small-scale (the so-called artisanal sector) and large scale commercial fishing activities. Fishers in the small-scale commercial sector employ gears such as beach seines, open-water seine nets, fish traps, gillnets, handlines and longlines and use dugout canoes and plank boats with or without outboard engines. Annual fish landing averages is about 45,000 t, comprised mostly of small and large cichlids, Lake sardine (Engraulicypris sardella) and catfishes. Large-scale commercial activities, which are highly mechanised and capital intensive, are undertaken in the southern part of Lake Malawi. Principal fishing methods used are pair trawlers and stern trawlers for catching bottom and pelagic species at depth between 50 and 100 m. Yearly estimated catch for this sector is 5,600 t, composed mainly of small cichlids (Lethrinops and Copadichromis spp.), which account for approximately 21% of the total annual fish landings from the Lake. Malawi has furthermore developed an aquaculture sector with potential for both small and large scale undertakings in particular pond aquaculture and cage culture. The species currently farmed are the Tilapias (Tilapia rendalli, Oreochromis karongae and Oreochromis shiranus) and Northern Africa Cat Fish (Clarias gariepinus). The private sector has shown interest in investing in commercial aquaculture. Fish farms have been established and have started to produce aquaculture products. MALDECO Aquaculture limited, which is currently the largest fish farm in the country, produces tilapia fish, the so called Chambo (Oreochromis karongae) using cage culture in Lake Malawi. The Department of Fisheries is promoting fish farming through integrated agriculture, i.e. Integrated Aquaculture-Agriculture (IAA).

Fish available on local markets can be sold fresh, iced, frozen, smoked, sun-dried or preboiled and then dried. Much of the fish is consumed in rural areas, mainly near lakes and rivers and thus provides an important source of animal proteins for some of the poorest people in the country. Fish processing and trading is a major occupation among many fishing communities including women in Malawi since most of the fish sold to distant markets is in dry form for easy storage. Some of the small-scale commercial fishing companies have their own fish handling, processing and marketing facilities at their landing bases.


ACP Countries"


Page 0


The Fisheries Administration (FA) is under authority of the Department of Fisheries (DoF) of the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security (MAFS). The activities of the Department are guided by the Fisheries and Aquaculture Policy of 2001 (to be reviewed under the present contract), the Fisheries Conservation and Management Act of 1997, and the 2003 Fisheries Strategic Plan that outlines the different strategies for the development and management of the sector.

Fisheries sector in Swaziland

The Fisheries Sector in Swaziland is wholly inland and relatively small and not well developed. The country is reasonably well-watered but there are no natural lakes, swamps or floodplains of a significant importance. The main fishing areas are in the dams constructed principally for hydropower and in other smaller dams spread all over the country in the lowlands, used for water supply for both human and livestock consumption. Aquaculture is still an infantile stage - currently there are 80 ponds of an average extension of 200 m2 - but it does have a high potential for expansion and significantly improve the contribution of the fisheries sector to food security, poverty alleviation. The most common fish species exploited are the tilapias (T. mossambicus and T. rendalli) and catfish (Clarius garipinus). Capture fishery is very small and updated data are not available, however fish production is very low and almost 100% of fish with economic value is imported from neighbouring countries.

The fisheries administration is under the authority of the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives (MAC) Fisheries Section (FS). The FS is divided in two units, the Fisheries Management Unit (FMU) and the Fish Farming Unit (FFU). The department has in total 7 staff, including 4 field officers working on the four regions of Swaziland (Lubombo, Hhohho, Shysilweny and Manzini). The mandate of the FS is to ensure an optimal and sustainable exploitation of the country's fisheries resources and to promote the consumption of fish at both household and national levels in order to enhance national food security. FS is also in charge for the research which is normally carried out through external funded programmes and by students from the University of Swaziland for their dissertation projects.

The FS started in 2009 a project for developing a national fisheries policy with its own limited resources. A first draft has been prepared but still need to be turned into a definitive version and to be validated by local stakeholders. With provision of some Technical Assistance under this contract the documents is estimated to be ready by the end of 2010. The fisheries legislative framework is out of date: the main pieces are the Freshwater Fisheries Act and the Freshwater Fisheries Regulation, both of 1937. Other legislation relevant to fisheries is the Environmental Management Act of 2002 and the Water Act of 2003.After the finalization of the policy document the next step will be the revision of the legislation.

1.5 Related programmes and other donor activities:

In Malawi there are currently two projects ongoing, both targeting the Lake Malawi fishery:

• The Lake Malawi Artisanal Fisheries Development Project, largely funded by the African Development Bank, started in October 2003 and is aiming at improving fish production, marketing development, credit delivery, and at strengthening institutional capacity. The project is terminating in December 2010.

• The Lake Malawi/Niassa/Nyasa Conservation and Development Project, funded by the World Bank started in 2010, aims at improving the livelihood of people living around the Lake and natural resource management. The main components are: (i) developing a common approach to the sustainable management of the Lake’s resources; (ii) improving livelihoods and the sustainability of fishing and farming practices in and around the Lake and critical catchments; and (iii) supporting measures to reduce the sediment and nutrient inflow into the Lake.


ACP Countries"


Page 0


In Swaziland there are no donor funded activities ongoing in the sector.

In the conduct of the assignment, the consultant is expected to liaise with the mentioned programmes or institutions when appropriate in order to gather relevant information and to ensure cooperation with the projects/programmes and to avoid overlapping of activities. Representatives of the programmes/projects will be also involved in the consultation and validation process, when relevant.

2. OBJECTIVE, PURPOSE & EXPECTED RESULTS

2.1 Overall objective

The overall objective of the ACP Fish II Programme is to contribute to the sustainable and equitable management of fisheries in ACP regions, thus leading to poverty alleviation and improving food security in ACP States.

2.2 Purpose

In line with the objectives of the ACP Fish II Programme, as stated above, the purpose of this contract is to strengthen the FA capacity of planning and implementing sound and effective policy instruments, both in Malawi and Swaziland.

The purposes of this contract are:

• To support the Malawi’s DoF in revising the Malawi National Fishery and Aquaculture Policy (MNFAP); and

• To support the Swaziland FS in devising and validating the final version of the Swaziland Fisheries Policy (SFP).

2.3 Results to be achieved by the Consultant

In Malawi:

• Revision of the MNFAP is carried out and a final document of the policy is devised;

• At least four national consultation meetings (1 day, 25 participants each) to collect meaningful input from the stakeholders are carried out;

• A national workshop (25 people, 2 days) to endorse the final draft of the MNFAP is implemented; and

• Guidelines for fisheries policy elaboration for the use the Malawi DoF are devised.

In Swaziland:

• The final draft of SFP is devised; and

• A national workshop (1 day, 80 people) for the validation of the policy in Swaziland is carried out.

3. ASSUMPTIONS & RISKS

3.1 Assumptions underlying the project intervention

The need for revising fisheries policies has been clearly identified as priority since the first need assessment workshop for Southern African Countries held in Maputo during November 2009. Following consultation


ACP Countries"


Page 0


with FA designated Focal Points (FP) of both Malawi and Swaziland and visits to the countries confirmed the need. The assumption is that the beneficiary state and stakeholders are well aware of the intervention and prepared to allocate official hours to its implementation.

Since ACP FISH II is a demand-driven Programme, it is expected that counterpart institutions take all the necessary measures to ensure the fulfilment of their obligations and responsibilities as set forth under this project. Failure to meet that requirement is likely to result in the project not achieving the expected results.

3.2 Risks

Risks for implementation of this contract are minimised, since the intervention has been indentified in cooperation with the FAs of both the countries and endorsed by them. However a sudden change in the political will of FAs and/or Governments (related whether to some changes of the institutional and political set up and/or to the lack of will to accept the necessary changes in tasks or responsibilities which may be brought about), might negatively affect the assignment implementation, limiting its impact. To prevent such a risk the participatory planning approach adopted in the development of this intervention will continue throughout the implementation of the assignment, to ensure the full ownership by local stakeholders and the development of activities and methodology always coinciding with the FAs approach.

4. SCOPE OF THE WORK

4.1 General

4.1.1 Project description

In Malawi commercially valuable fish species are sometimes fully exploited and no further increase in yield can be expected. Despite the adoption of co-management since the 1990s, the fisheries management system has been characterized by weak community participation, even though currently is slowly changing .The current MNFAP aims at maximizing the sustainable yield of commercially valuable fish stocks and the policy states that the primary responsibility of the DoF remains the protection of the existing fish resources by means of appropriate research, the collection and analysis of the relevant data and the application of appropriate control mechanisms. However the policy has been drafted nine years ago and nowadays the intuitional framework has changed:

• the DoF has just been moved from the Ministry of Natural Resources to the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security. This change resulted in different policy approach, towards more food security and income generation;

• the new changes under the Decentralization Policy require a broad participation by all stakeholders and call for strengthening co-management.

Furthermore new technologies and approaches emerged in the last decade such as the development of cage culture as a fast growing venture, fish quality as a key feature in fish production and marketing. Finally, the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) Protocol on Fisheries has just drawn up its action plan which needs to be considered in the revised policy. The SADC Protocol on Fisheries highlights issues on management of shared resources, marketing, governance and cooperation among different actors. All these aspects need to be intergraded in the new revised MFANP.

In Swaziland even though fisheries resources are limited and the contribution of the sector to the GDP is low, the fisheries has a significant potential to improve performance of the economic activities in the country and to address food security and livelihood at both household and national levels. Against this background the FS has started in 2009 a project for developing a national fisheries policy with its own limited resources. The project, considered one of the key priorities for the sector’s development, has been carried out by the staff of the Swaziland FS, which developed a draft policy document. Consultations have been made with the fisheries sub-sectors which include fish farmers, anglers, water management organizations and relevant


ACP Countries"


Page 0


Government departments. This exercise gave some good results and succeeded in providing a draft policy document highlighting the main issues to be addressed in the sector and the key objectives to be targeted. The document, although almost final, still needs being revised. The revision should be carried out by a fisheries policy expert (not available within the FS staff), in order to ensure that the policy has covered all relevant areas and to devise an high quality document which might lead eventually to its validation.

Therefore the purpose of the assignment will be supporting the FAs in the two countries in the process of revising and finalising the national policies in both fisheries sectors. The contract implementation will involve technical assistance delivered by the Consultant to DoF and FS. The contract will also encompass the organization and facilitation of the consultation and validation process in both countries to ensure ownership of the project and outputs by administrations and stakeholders.

4.1.2 Geographical area to be covered

Countries covered by the present contract are Malawi and Swaziland. The assignment will involve all the national territories within each country, focusing on areas where fisheries play a major social and economic role.

4.1.3 Target groups

Target groups of the present consultancy in both countries include fisheries administrations and concerned government agencies, civil society organizations having related to fisheries (e.g. NGOs), the fishing and aquaculture industry (producers, processors, and traders) and local communities. To ensure meaningful input by all key stakeholders, these groups will be consulted through the consultation/validation workshops described in the assignment and through meetings and interviews.

4.2 Specific activities

The Consultants will complete the following tasks:

In Malawi

1. Meet and work closely with the head of DoF of MAFS;

2. In consultation with the DoF, establish the project technical team and devise the work plan for the assignment;

3. Identify, collate and review background documents on the fisheries sector;

4. Examine the current policy framework, identifying gaps and particularly analysing the effectiveness of the instruments in providing for efficient and sustainable management of fisheries and aquaculture;

5. Organize at least four regional meetings (1 day, 25 participants each), in order to collect meaningful input from the stakeholders, as per work plan. The consultant is in charge of the meetings’ organisation and logistics.

6. Carry out further consultative meetings and interviews with stakeholders, if necessary

7. Review the existing Malawi National Fisheries and Aquaculture Policy, taking into account the findings/recommendations of the meetings and consultations and prepare, in close collaboration with the technical team, a first draft of the revised MNFAP;

8. Submit the draft of MNFAP and discuss it with the DoF

9. Elaborate guidelines for drafting fisheries policy for the DoF;


ACP Countries"


Page 0


10. Organise a national workshop to present, discuss and endorse the draft MNFAP (2 days, 25 participants); the consultant is in charge of the workshop’s organisation and logistics (subcontracting for workshop organisation is allowed).

11. Review the draft of MNFAP according to the inputs provided through the national workshop in close collaboration with the technical team

12. Present and discuss the final draft of the MNFAP with DoF

In Swaziland

1. Meet and work closely with the head of FS of MAC;

2. In consultation with the FS, establish the project technical team and devise the work plan for the assignment;

3. Identify, collate and review background documents on the fisheries sector;

4. Examine the current policy framework, identifying gaps and particularly analysing the effectiveness of the instruments in providing for efficient and sustainable management of fisheries and aquaculture;

5. Carry out meetings, consultations, and field visits to relevant communities and fisheries in order to ensure meaningful input by key stakeholders;

6. Prepare, in collaboration with the technical team, the first draft of revised SFP and present it to the FS for discussion;

7. Carry out further consultation and field visits if needed;

8. Review, if necessary, the SFP including new findings/recommendation emerged during the meetings with FS and other stakeholders;

9. Organise a validation workshop (1 day, 80participants) to present the final version of SFP ; the consultant is in charge of the workshop’s organisation and logistics (subcontracting for workshop organisation is allowed).

Ideally the mission to Malawi and the mission to Swaziland should start the same day. Key Experts 2 and 3 will work under the coordination of the Team Leader, Key Expert 1.

In addition to the reporting requirements mentioned in section 7.1 of these terms of reference, the Consultant is required to prepare the following technical reports in English:

• an Interim Technical Report. This report will present the findings and conclusions of the assessment, along with the methodology and the work plan to be used to support the implementation of the assignment. It will be a short document, not exceeding 12 pages in length, to be submitted within 10 days of arriving in the countries to the RFU, CU and FAs;

• A Final Technical Report (FTR) per country, taking into account changes and comments from the RFU, CU and the FAs to be submitted within one month of the consultants leaving the countries. A draft FTR per country will be submitted before the Consultants leave each country on conclusion of his mission. Comments on the draft FTR may be made by the RFU, CU and the FAs within 14 days. If required second drafts will be submitted.


ACP Countries"


Page 0


4.3 Project management

4.3.1 Responsible body

The Co-ordination Unit of the ACP Fish II Programme, on behalf of the ACP Secretariat is responsible for managing the implementation of this contract

4.3.2 Management structure

The ACP Fish II Programme is implemented through the Co-ordination Unit (CU) in Brussels and 6 Regional Facilitation Units (RFUs) across the ACP States. The RFU in Maputo, Mozambique, covering ACP Member states in Southern Africa, will closely support implementation of this intervention and will monitor the execution of this contract pursuant to these terms of reference. All contractual communications should be addressed in original to the CU and copied to the RFU. Day-to-day supervision will be carried out by the RFU. For the purposes of this contract, the ACP Fish II Programme Coordinator will act as the Project Manager.

4.3.3 Facilities to be provided by the Contracting Authority and/or other parties

Not applicable.

5. LOGISTICS AND TIMING

5.1 Location

The activities of the assignment will be carried out in Malawi and Swaziland. In both countries, the Consultants will be based in the capitals (Lilongwe and Mbabane, as places of posting) with field missions to be carried out according to approved work plans.

5.2 Commencement date & Period of implementation

The intended commencement date is 15 January 2011 and the period of implementation of the contract will be four months from this date. Please refer to Articles 4 and 5 of the Special Conditions for the actual commencement date and period of implementation.

6. REQUIREMENTS

6.1 Personnel

6.1.1 Key experts

Key expert 1: Senior inland fisheries policy expert (Team leader)

Qualifications and skills

• A degree or equivalent in a relevant subject area (e.g Fisheries Management, Natural Resources Management, Rural Development, Agriculture, Economics, etc)

• The expert should have a high level of proficiency/fluency in written and spoken English

General professional experience

• Minimum 10 years of relevant international experience in fisheries management and fisheries policy devising, with the special scope on inland fisheries and aquaculture

• Previous experience as a team leader(minimum over 3 assignments)

• Communication, report-writing and project/task management skills

Specific professional experience


ACP Countries"


Page 0


• Previous experience in assessing ad revising fisheries policies and regulations for inland fisheries and aquaculture (minimum over 3 assignments)

• Previous experience in assessment of decentralization policies and legislation (minimum over 3 assignment)

• Experience of carrying out assignments for the EU or other equivalent international development partners (minimum over 3assignments)

The maximum number of missions for this expert outside the normal place of posting requiring overnights is 0.

There will be in-country field visits not requiring overnights for this expert.

Key expert 2: Inland fisheries and aquaculture expert (Malawi)


• A degree or equivalent in a relevant subject area (e.g, Biology, Fisheries Management, Natural Resources Management, Rural Development, etc)


• Knowledge of local spoken language will be an advantage


• Minimum 3 years of relevant experience in planning and implementing inland fisheries and aquaculture projects

• Experience in consultative process with local communities



• Previous experience in policy development of inland fisheries and aquaculture policy and management instruments (Minimum over 3 assignments)

• Minimum 3 years of experience in planning/implementing inland aquaculture interventions ideally with specific experience in cage culture and marketing aspects

• Minimum 3 years of experience in Malawi and/or surrounding countries

• Being form the region will be considered an advantage



Key expert 3: Inland fisheries policy expert (Swaziland)


• A degree or equivalent in a relevant subject area (e.g. Natural Resources, Rural Development, Agriculture, Economics, etc)


ACP Countries"


Page 0




• Minimum 5 years of experience in formulating/implementing of inland fisheries policies instruments



• Previous experience in assessing ad revising fisheries policies and capabilities to define priorities in inland fisheries sector (minimum over 3 assignments)

• Experience in planning and management of inland small scale aquaculture activities (minimum over 3 assignments)

• Minimum 3 year of experience in Africa; experience in the region will be an advantage

• Experience of carrying out assignments for the EU or other equivalent international development partners (minimum over 3 assignments)



Indicative allocation of working days between Key Experts and activities

Key Expert 1

Key Expert 2

Key Expert 3 Indicative task

Malawi Malawi Swaziland

Preparatory work 8 6 3

Field work 8 16 4

Policy drafting (MNFAP and SFP) 13 7 8

Workshop/consultations 8 13 4

Briefing, debriefing and FTR preparation 3 3 3

Total working days per KE 40 45 22

6.1.2 Other experts

Not applicable

6.1.3 Support staff & backstopping

Backstopping and support staff costs must be included in the fee rates of the experts.


ACP Countries"


Page 0


6.2 Office accommodation

Office accommodation of a reasonable standard and of approximately 10 square metres for each expert working on the contract is to be provided by the Consultant.

6.3 Facilities to be provided by the Consultant

The Consultant shall ensure that experts are adequately supported and equipped. In particular it shall ensure that there is sufficient administrative, secretarial and interpreting provision to enable experts to concentrate on their primary responsibilities. It must also transfer funds as necessary to support its activities under the contract and to ensure that its employees are paid regularly and in a timely fashion.

If the Consultant is a consortium, the arrangements should allow for the maximum flexibility in project implementation. Arrangements offering each consortium member a fixed percentage of the work to be undertaken under the contract should be avoided.

6.4 Equipment

No equipment is to be purchased on behalf of the Contracting Authority / beneficiary country as part of this service contract or transferred to the Contracting Authority / beneficiary country at the end of this contract. Any equipment related to this contract which is to be acquired by the beneficiary country must be purchased by means of a separate supply tender procedure.

6.5 Incidental expenditure

The Provision for incidental expenditure covers the ancillary and exceptional eligible expenditure incurred under this contract. It cannot be used for costs which should be covered by the Consultant as part of its fee rates, as defined above. Its use is governed by the provisions in the General Conditions and the notes in Annex V of the contract. It covers:

Travel costs and subsistence allowances for missions, outside the normal place of posting, to be undertaken as part of this contract. Travel costs (car rental, fuel) for in country field visits to be undertaken as part of this contract. If applicable, indicate if the provision includes costs for environmental measures, for example C02 offsetting.

The cost of organization of the national consultations and workshops, including travel (car rental if necessary), accommodation, daily allowance for participants of workshops and venue cost

The Provision for incidental expenditure for this contract is EUR 26900. This amount must be included without modification in the Budget breakdown.

Any subsistence allowances to be paid for missions undertaken as part of this contract must not exceed the per diem rates published on the Web site:

http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/work/procedures/index_en.htm at the start of each such mission.

6.6 Expenditure verification

The Provision for expenditure verification relates to the fees of the auditor who has been charged with the expenditure verification of this contract in order to proceed with the payment of further pre-financing instalments if any and/or interim payments if any.

The Provision for expenditure verification for this contract is EUR 2700. This amount must be included without modification in the Budget breakdown.

7. REPORTS

7.1 Reporting requirements

http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/work/procedures/index_en.htm


ACP Countries"


Page 0


Please refer to Article 26 of the General Conditions. There must be a final report, a final invoice and the financial report accompanied by an expenditure verification report at the end of the period of implementation of the tasks. The draft final report must be submitted at least one month before the end of the period of implementation of the tasks. Note that the final report is additional to any required in Section 0 of these Terms of Reference.

Each report shall consist of a narrative section and a financial section. The financial section must contain details of the time inputs of the experts, of the incidental expenditure and of the provision for expenditure verification.

7.2 Submission & approval of progress reports

Three copies of the progress reports referred to above must be submitted to the Project Manager identified in the contract. The progress reports must be written in English. The Project Manager is responsible for approving the progress reports

8. MONITORING AND EVALUATION

8.1 Definition of indicators

The results to be achieved by the consultant are included in section 2.3. Progress to achieving these results will be measured through the following indicators:

1. Quality of consultants fielded and speed of mobilisation to the relevant country will indicate a positive start to the assignment;

2. Identification of issues and problems as recorded in the Interim Technical Reports for the two countries;

3. Reported involvement of stakeholders in review/elaboration of policy documents;

4. Number of consultations and workshops carried out in each country;

5. Level of attendance at the stakeholder meetings/workshops in each country;

6. Number and nature of comments received on the Draft Final Report;

7. Respect of project milestones time schedule and reports time delivery.

The Consultant may suggest additional monitoring tools for the contract duration.

8.2 Special requirements

Not applicable


ACP Countries"


Page 0


Annex 2: Inception Report

See File: Annex 2 - Inception Report Malawi and Swaziland 29 March 2011.doc


ACP Countries"



Annex 3: Malawi: List of Documents consulted and International Agreements pertinent to Fisheries

Anon (Undated - 2010 ?) Vote 190. Sector: Economic. Department of Fisheries. Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security.

Anon (Undated - 2010 ?). The Fisheries Sector. Department of Fisheries. Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security.

Banda, Moses (Ed) (2005) The Chambo Restoration Strategic Plan. Proceedings of the national workshop held on 13-16 May 2003. Worldfish Centre, Domasi.

Chinsinga B. (2010) Policy and Institutional Framework Review of the Fisheries Sector in Malawi. Chancellor College, University of Malawi, Department of Political and Administrative Studies, P.O Box 280, Zomba

Cochrane. K (Ed) (2009) Climate change implications for fisheries and aquaculture. Overview of current scientific knowledge. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical paper 530. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. Rome, 2009

Commonwealth Secretariat (2007) Overview of Fish and Fish Trade in the ESA Region. The Fish Sector and Its Importance in Malawi. ESA Meeting on Trade and Sustainable approaches to fisheries negotiations under WTO/EPA. Mauritius, 2-4 May 2007. Commonwealth Secretariat and the Indian Ocean Commission with the support of DFID and GTZ.

Department of Fisheries (2001) National Fisheries and Aquaculture Policy. Department of Fisheries, PO Box 593 Lilongwe

Department of Fisheries (2005) National Aquaculture Strategic Plan (NASP): 2006-2015. Department of Fisheries. Ministry of Mines, Natural Resources and Environment.

Department of Fisheries (2007) Fisheries HIV and AIDS Strategy: 2007-2011. Department of Fisheries. Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security.

Department of Fisheries (2008) Fisheries Department. Annual Frame Survey, September 2008 (Kanyerere, Banda, Chilora, Nyasulu, Ngochera and Kaonga). Fisheries Bulletin No. 60. Department of Fisheries. Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security.

Department of Fisheries (2009) National Fisheries and Aquaculture Policy. 2009. Department of Fisheries. Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security. ZERO DRAFT. [Never published].

Department of Fisheries (2010) 2010/11 budget summary pre budget hearing meeting – 16th April, 2010 in the Ministry of Finance Conference room (Information note)

Department of Fisheries (2010) Department of Fisheries Progress Report 2010/11 Financial Year. Department of Fisheries Lilongwe.

Department of Fisheries (2010) Key Priority Areas for Department of Fisheries for 2010/11 FY. Department of Fisheries. Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security.

European Commission (2001) Ex Ante Evaluation. A practical guide for preparing proposals for expenditure programmes. EuropeAid Cooperation Office. Brussels.


ACP Countries"



European Commission (2004) Project Cycle Management Guidelines. EuropeAid Cooperation Office. Brussels.

European Commission (2009) Final Report. Identification of fishery products food safety issues and determination of a plan of action for inspection and certification of fishery products for export. Ref: CA042MWI. Cardno Agrisystems & MacAlister Elliott for Strengthening Fishery Products Health Conditions in ACP/OCT Countries Project.

FAO (2011) Fisheries and Aquaculture Profile for Malawi [WEB document]

Government of Malawi (1997) Fisheries Conservation and Management Act 1997. Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs

Government of Malawi (1998) Vision 2020.

Government of Malawi (2000) Fisheries Conservation and Management Regulations 2000. Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs

Government of Malawi (2002) Malawi National Land Policy. Ministry of Lands Housing and Surveys

Government of Malawi (2006) Strategic Plan 2007 – 2012. Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security, Lilongwe. (Draft)

Government of Malawi (2009) Generic Guidelines for mainstreaming Gender in the programme cycle and policies. Ministry of Gender, Children and Development. Lilongwe.

Government of Malawi (2010) Facilitation Trade in Exports of Fish Products in Malawi. Ministry of Industry and Trade. AOR 147-P164. Produced under the TRADECOM Facility of the EU

Government of Malawi. (2006) Malawi Growth and Development Strategy. Office of the President.

Government of Malawi. (2006) Strategic Plan 2007 – 2012 Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security

Government of Malawi. (2008) National Response to combat gender based violence. 2008 - 2013. Ministry of Women and Child Development, Private Bag 330, Capital City, Lilongwe 3, Malawi

Government of Malawi. (2010) The Agriculture Sector Wide Approach (ASWAp) Agenda 2010-14Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security.

Government of Malawi. (2011) DRAFT National Gender Policy. Ministry of Women and Child Development, Private Bag 330, Capital City, Lilongwe 3, Malawi

J. Nagoli, E. M. Phiri, E. Kambewa, D. Jamu 2009. Adapting Integrated Agriculture Aquaculture for HIV and AIDS-Affected Households: The case of Malawi. The WorldFish Center Working Paper 1957. The WorldFish Center, Penang, Malaysia.

Kanyerere GZ, Banda MC et al (2009) Annual frame survey September 2008. Fisheries Bulletin No 60 2009, Fisheries Research Unit, Monkey Bay.

Lake Malawi Artisanal Fisheries Development Project (2006) Baseline Study, Final Report. Enviro-Fish Africa (Pty) Ltd for Lake Malawi Artisanal Fisheries Development Project,


ACP Countries"



Department of Fisheries, Ministry of Mines, Natural Resources and Environment, Republic of Malawi

Lake Malawi Artisanal Fisheries Development Project. (2006) Forestry and Catchment Management State of Play Report. Enviro-Fish Africa (Pty) Ltd for Lake Malawi Artisanal Fisheries Development Project, Department of Fisheries, Ministry of Mines, Natural Resources and Environment, Republic of Malawi

Lake Malawi Artisanal Fisheries Development Project. (2006) Fisheries State of Play Report. Enviro-Fish Africa (Pty) Ltd for Lake Malawi Artisanal Fisheries Development Project, Department of Fisheries, Ministry of Mines, Natural Resources and Environment, Republic of Malawi

Lake Malawi Artisanal Fisheries Development Project. (2010) Project Findings Findings and Recommendations. (July 2003-December 2009). Project Coordination Unit. LMAFDP,Department of Fisheries,P.O. Box 593,Lilongwe

Makuwila. M. (2006) Analysis of fisheries and Aquaculture Sector Development in Malawi. MSc Thesis. University of Hull, UK

MRAG (2009) Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing. Policy Brief 8. Produced by MRAG for DFID & Defra. MRAG Ltd: 18 Queen Street, London, W1J 5PN United Kingdom http://www.mrag.net/mrag/Documents/PolicyBrief8_IUU.pdf

Njaya F (2007) An Appraisal of Kuyamba Cash Loan Scheme: Start-Up Capital. A Preliminary Discussion Report of the Cash Loan Scheme Submitted to Lake Malawi Artisanal Fisheries Development Project (LMAFDP). Fisheries Department, P.O. Box 47, Mangochi

Njaya. F & Donda S (2007) Fisheries co-management in Malawi: An analysis of the underlying policy process. Food security and poverty alleviation through improved valuation and governance of river fisheries in Africa. WorldFish Center, Africa and West Asia Programme, PO Box 1261 Maadi 11728, Cairo - Egypt

Njaya. F (2007) Fisheries Governance Analysis in Malawi. Paper Submitted to the Research Project on Food Security and Poverty Alleviation through Improved Valuation and Governance of River Fisheries. World Fish Centre

NORAD (Undated). The Logical Framework Approach. Handbook for Objectives Orientated Project Planning. Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation.

Republic of Malawi. (undated) Policy Document Format (electronic)

SADC (1996) Protocol on Trade Web document. http://www.sadc.int/

SADC. (2011) Protocol on Fisheries. Web document. http://www.sadc.int/

Sumaila, UR & J. Jacquet. (2009) When Bad Gets Worse: Corruption and Fisheries. Sea Around Us Project and Fisheries Economics Research Unit, Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4

USAID (2002) Community-Based Natural Resource Management AIDS Brief for Sectoral Planners and Managers. USAID Bureau for Africa, Office of Sustainable Development. Prepared by Development Alternatives, Inc. (DAI),Bethesda, Maryland, USA.


ACP Countries"



International Agreements pertinent to Fisheries in Malawi Document/Protocol/Convention/Date came into force in Malawi

Particularly covering

Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal (1992)

Management of Chemical Wastes

Beijing Declaration and Platform of Action (Signed 1995)

Gender Issues

Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (2000) Handling, transport and use of living modified organisms (LMOs) resulting from modern biotechnology

CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (1982)

International trade in specimens of wild animals and plants (important for Aquarium Industry)

Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP). (2003)

African governments have agreed to increase public investment in agriculture by a minimum of 10 per cent of their national budgets and to raise agricultural productivity by at least 6 per cent.

Convention on Biological Diversity (1992) Conservation of biodiversity. Important for Malawi as it covers introduction of exotic species for Aquaculture. Several sub agreements & protocols.

Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). Ratified by Malawi in 1987

Covers Gender issues and discrimination

Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), 1989

Article 32 states that children have the right to be protected from economic exploitation and from performing any work that is likely to be hazardous or to interfere with the child's education, or to be harmful to the child's health or physical, mental, spiritual, moral or social development.

Convention to Combat Desertification in Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or Desertification, Particularly in Africa (1996)

Desertification and mitigation of the effects of drought in those countries experiencing serious drought, particularly in Africa. Sustainable management of land and water resources.

FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (2001)

Introduces the precautionary approach & sustainable fisheries

FAO Technical Guidelines for Responsible Fisheries . The ecosystem approach to fisheries (2003)

Introduces the ecosystem approach in fisheries management


ACP Countries"



ILO Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention 182 (C182), 1999

Calls for immediate and effective measures to prohibit and eliminate the worst forms of child labour.

ILO. Minimum Age Convention 138 (C138), 1973

Binds ratifying countries to pursue a national policy for the abolition of child labour and to progressively raise the minimum age for employment or work to a level consistent with the fullest physical and mental development of young persons

Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing (Malawi not yet signed)

A supplementary agreement to the Convention on Biological Diversity covering access to Biological Diversity

Protocol to the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights (2005)

Human Rights/gender issues

Ramsar Convention (The Convention on Wetlands of International Importance) (1997)

Particularly waterbirds in wetlands, but wetlands in general (Lake Chilwa is a “RAMSAR” site)

Rio Declaration on Environment and Development (1992)

Environment

Rotterdam Convention (2004) Trade in Hazardous Chemicals including pesticides

SADC (1996) Protocol on Trade Trade and the reduction of tariff barriers SADC Declaration on Gender and Development (1977)

Gender issues

SADC Protocol on Fisheries (signed 2001) Places responsibilities on member states for management and development of fisheries and aquaculture.

SADC Protocol on shared watercourse systems in the Southern African Development Community Region (Ratified 2001)

Covers shared watercourses

Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (2004)

Persistent organic contaminants

The Abuja Declaration on Sustainable Fisheries and Aquaculture in Africa. (2005)

End to open access fisheries.

UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) 1987

Women & Gender

United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) (1994)

Comprehensive legal framework to regulate all ocean space, its uses and resources.

http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/prepareCreateTreatiesWorkspace/treatiesGeneralData.do?step=0&redirect=true&treatyId=511

http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/prepareCreateTreatiesWorkspace/treatiesGeneralData.do?step=0&redirect=true&treatyId=511


ACP Countries"



United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) & Kyoto Protocol (2006)

Climate change

WEHAB (part of the Rio Declaration) Water, Energy, Health, Agriculture and Biodiversity

WTO (various) Covers tariffs and non trade barriers to trade. Also covers, under the Doha round, undesirable subsidies for capture fisheries.

WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures

Amongst other things, the measures to be used for controlling fish quality


ACP Countries"



Annex 4: Malawi: List of Significant People met or interviewed.

(for people attending workshops see attendance list for those events)

Name Position Location/Organisation

Josiah Chamveka PFO Mangochi Fisheries Station

Ida Chimange TO. Lilongwe Aquaculture Officer Lilongwe District Office

Brino Chirwa PFO Head of Aquaculture Research

National Aquaculture Centre, Domasi

Steve Donda (Dr) Deputy Director Fisheries Lilongwe Fisheries Headquarters

Dr Daniel Jamu World Fish Centre Zomba

Orton Kachinjika CFO E Lilongwe Fisheries Headquarters

Mr Kamlaka Treasury Officer Treasury

Jeremiah Kang’ombe Associate Professor, Department of Aquaculture and Fisheries Science

Bunda College of Agriculture, University of Malawi

Daud Kassam (Dr)

Head of Department of Aquaculture and Fisheries Science

Bunda College of Agriculture, University of Malawi

Jaqueline Kazembe DCFO T Lilongwe Fisheries Headquarters

Joseph Kazima Assistant Director, Gender Affairs

Ministry of Gender, Children and Community Development

Vinda Kishombe Agricultural Economist African Development Bank, Lilongwe

Erica Maganga Permanent Secretary Ministry of Agriculture & Food Security

Andex Makungwa Dep Coordinator ASWAP Ministry of Agriculture & Food Security

Maurice Makuwila ACFP P Lilongwe Fisheries Headquarters

Holman Malata Head of Partnerships and Liaison Unit National Aids Commission

Elphy Malemia Human Resources Management Officer Lilongwe Fisheries Headquarters

Moffat Manasse PFRO Fisheries Research Unit, Monkey Bay


ACP Countries"



David Mbamba Aquaculture Officer TO NAC

Joe Mfune ACFO. (Manager ADB Fisheries Project) Lilongwe Fisheries Headquarters

Misford Mikuwa. Deputy Director, Water Resources (Surface) Ministry of Water Resources

Menton Mkandawire Farm Manager Maldeco Maldeco Fisheries, Mangochi District

George Mkondiwa Secretary for Persons with Disabilities and the Elderly

(Malawi Aquatic International))

Ministry of Persons with Disability and the Elderly

Peter Msefula Director of Gender and Women’s Affairs

Ministry of Gender, Children and Community

Ken Mthunzi Manager MALDCO Fisheries, Mangochi District

Joster Muharo Aquaculture Officer TO NAC

Geoffrey Mwepa DD Irrigation Services Min Irrigation and Water Development

John Ngalande Deputy Director Forestry Department, Lilongwe

H Ngwata P Accountant Lilongwe Fisheries Headquarters

Friday Njaya (Dr) CFO P HQ Lilongwe Fisheries Headquarters

Chris Nyasa Senior Fisheries Officer (Training)

(Principal) Mpwepwe Fisheries College

Jester Nyirenda Assistant Director, research & Planning

Department of National Parks & Wildlife

Patrick Nyirenda Environment Officer Environmental Affairs, Lilongwe

Chikondi L

Manyungwa Pasani PFO Lilongwe Fisheries Headquarters

Enrica Pellacani Counsellor, Head of Section. Rural Development & Food Security

EU Lilongwe

Harold Sungani RO Fisheries Research Unit, Monkey Bay

Patricia Zimpita Director of Policy Research, Monitoring and Evaluation Office of the President & Cabinet


ACP Countries"



Annex 5: Malawi: Stakeholder Consultation Workshops

See File: Annex 5 - Malawi Report on 4 Stakeholder workshops.doc


ACP Countries"



Annex 6: Malawi: Report on Liwonde Validation Workshop

A validation workshop for 25 people was held in Liwonde on 9th & 10th May 2011 to validate the draft of the Revision of the Fisheries and Aquaculture Policy for Malawi. The workshop produced a series of recommendations which were subsequently incorporated into the document.

Timetable

(The meeting ran very late so activities for Day 1 ran over into Day 2)

Day 1

9.00am Start

Prayer

Introductory remarks Fisheries Department

Participants introduce themselves Name, affiliation, specialism (if any)

Methodology employed in the preparation of the draft FP Robert Lindley

Summary of Stakeholder workshop outcomes Dr Mafaniso Hara

Summary of the Draft Policy - what it contains Robert Lindley

Group Photo

Group Sessions

Workshop divides into 3 groups and discusses the three main Policy Themes, Capture Fisheries, Aquaculture, and Reducing Post Harvest losses (plus the elements common to all three main policy themes).

Group sessions continue as long as necessary.

Groups report back in turn.

Only Group I - Capture Fisheries, managed to report back during Day 1

Day 2

Groups 2 & 3 reported back

Discussion on common elements of the strategy.

(Discussion on the Implementation Plan was shelved due to time shortages; as were discussions on Socially Acceptable methods of controlling access and effort and the introduction of exotics to aquaculture)


ACP Countries"



Instructions given to groups

The groups were asked to:-

1) Review the completeness & accuracy of the Fisheries Policy (Policy Theme chosen for that group & common elements supporting the Policy Theme chosen).

• Identify gaps

• Identify errors

2) Review the strategies presented and

• Identify strategies which could be moved to a different objective heading

• Identify strategies which are either not relevant or unimportant and need to be removed from the document

• Identify any modification to strategies that may be considered necessary

3) During the review of the strategies, identify those priority strategies covering:-

• Key Administrative Functions of the Fisheries Department, e.g. HRD, Cross-sectoral collaboration

• Key Technical Functions of the Fisheries Department, e.g. Collection of statistics, basic biological research

• Key Development Functions of the Fisheries department, e.g. Development of capture methods for pelagic under-fished stocks, fish handling and processing development

(note that the strategies suggested above may not be considered important by the Group, they are illustrative only)

During the reporting sessions the Group Reporter may be asked to justify his groups’ comments and decisions.

Presentations made by Groups

Group 1 Discussion group on Capture Fisheries

Group members:

Dr S Donda, Mr O Kachinjika,

Mr P Fatch, Mr Nyanyale, Mr Kasuzweni, Mrs C pasan, Mr M Manase & Mr Mwahuku

Reviewing completeness and accuracy of the Fisheries Policy

Gaps and errors

1) Need for consistency in usage of terms e.g. policy theme or policy area and also the choice of the term ‘lacustrine’

2) The goal of the policy should start with food security


ACP Countries"



3) MSY for pelagic resources of Lake Malawi was estimated at 33,000mt on an annual basis and not 30,000mt.

4) Strategies are putting much emphasis on the fisheries of Lake Malawi

5) Objective No.1 to cover other water bodies other than Lake Malawi.

6) Need for additional strategies under Objective No.1 covering inshore waters of Lake Malawi and other water bodies.

Observations

1) Aquarium trade should read aquarium fish trade. This is because the aquarium trade is general in nature and it includes molluscs, vegetation, etc.

2) Decentralisation and co-management should be a policy theme on its own to properly address both capture fisheries and aquaculture issues. In addition, there are many strategies under decentralisation.

3) Under Strategy No.3, the word ‘committee’ should be replaced with the term ‘institution’

4) Strategy No.3 should incorporate sustainability of the institutions.

5) Numbering of strategies should not be continuous.

Comments

1) Strategy No.5 should end at ‘local fisheries management institutions’.

2) All abbreviations e.g. MSY, MCF, etc should first be written in full.

3) Last statement under Strategy No.5 should read…DoF will have to assist.

4) Under Strategy No.10, sentence no. 2 should read …Article 6 of ‘CCRF’.

5) Rephrase paragraph under Strategy No.6 to include all stakeholders.

6) Rephrase paragraph under Strategy No.11….language and logic.

7) Strategy No.12 should include both numbers of fishers and gears. The paragraph underneath it should rephrased.

8) Strategy No.5 and 13 should be combined.

9) Interaction between cage culture and capture fisheries is not a serious matter but is an area of concern.

10) Remove the word ‘semi-industrial’ on first paragraph for Strategy No.14.

11) Replace ‘coastal’ with ‘inshore’ under Strategy No.15.

12) Replace ‘persecution’ with exploitation’ under Strategy No.16 and also note there is need to rephrase the paragraph.

13) Objective No.4, Strategy No.18 should also mention manpower as a problem area and not only lack of equipment.

14) Paragraphs under Strategies No.19 and 20 should be rephrased after consulting relevant institutions. In addition, remove the example of green belt initiative.


ACP Countries"



Missed Strategies

1) Management of shared waterbodies is not coming out clearly and should be under Objective No.3.

Priority Objectives & Strategies

• Increase in production

• Control of exploitation

• Protecting the environment for fisheries

• Participatory management is upgraded to be a policy theme and not an objective

Common elements across all policy areas

1) Remove ‘mother ministry’ in paragraph under Strategy No.1.

2) Take away all that is written after Lake Malawi in the opening statement of the first paragraph under Strategy no.3.

3) Last paragraph under Strategy No.3 needs more information.

4) Find a proper place for Strategy No.4, perhaps under Capture Fisheries.

5) Objective 3 should read Mainstream gender, HIV and AIDS.

6) Remove the word ‘neutral’ from Strategy No.9.

7) Remove last sentence in the paragraph under Strategy No. 6.

8) Strategy No.10 to read …Mobilise part of the 2% of the budget financial commitment to raise awareness throughout the sector.

9) Paragraph under Strategy No.11 has no logical flow of facts.

10) Objective 1 under Common Element 2 should be under the newly introduced policy theme – decentralisation and co-management.

11) In the statement of the strategies, remove the word ‘continue’ and start with ‘revise’. All the strategies need to be merged into one strategy.

12) Last paragraph before section 5.3 should be deleted.

13) Remove footnote No.8 under Strategy No.3 of section 5.3.

14) Need to include a goal that would elaborate infrastructure development as far as institutional strengthening is concerned.


ACP Countries"



Group 2 Discussion group on Capture Fisheries

Reviewed by

Drs Njaya, Kan’gombe, Messrs Nyirenda, Chirwa, Mrs Kalinde Thaulo, Water Resources Dept Rep & EAD Rep

General Observations

Regarding the word Aquaculture - there should be a mention of an aspect of aquaculture as implied in THIS policy and it should be well defined in the introduction.

A brief introduction - this could have been included whilst here so that people could comment.

Reference to statistics - should be carefully done and possibly these should be more highlighted in the Action Plans.

Aquaculture should not only be pursued as precautionary measure /remedial to fish decline in capture fisheries BUT also as a means to diversify food production and income generation.

Objective 1: Monitor and control aquaculture developments in the country

Should change to: To facilitate sustainable aquaculture development

Strategy 1: Improve the licensing system for aquaculture producers to include a licensing and inspection system for fish hatcheries

The strategy is broad: to be divided into two -

1. One to look at licensing

2. The other to look at certification of hatcheries

Strategy 2: Implement a comprehensive and harmonized data collection and analysis system for aquaculture

The strategy to start with “Develop and ………..

Explanation on the strategy is very brief – the problem to be addressed should be well explained

Strategy 3: Assess, mitigate and control environmental degradation and pollution from aquaculture on lacustrine and riparian habitats

Remove pollution

Add some examples such as introduction of alien fish species, introduction of pathogens, aquatic weeds, use of veterinary drugs

Objective 2: Encourage village level aquaculture enterprise for food security and income

Promote small-scale aquaculture enterprise for food security and income

Strategy 4: Maintain wide spread initiatives at district level for village level aquaculture

Should read: Up-scale and coordinate initiatives at district level for village level aquaculture

Description should be reworked to be more general.


ACP Countries"



Strategy 5: Ensure that Extension services and personnel are able to provide the advice and support that is needed by village fish farmers through capacity enhancement

Should read: Strengthening extension services

The statement should be straight forward

(An alternative is to train, as funds permit, agricultural extension workers in aquaculture so that areas that cannot be served by fisheries extension could be served by agriculture extension).

Description should be improved and rephrased to put more emphasis on this last paragraph

Strategy 6: Develop a more concentrated and better served extension service for village aquaculture through “centres of excellence” or “one-stop-shops” for fish farming.

To be fused to Strategy 5.

Who will implement one stop shop services?

Strategy 7: Increase collaborative effort with communities to incorporate village aquaculture in dams and other water bodies

Should read: Increase utilisation of dams and other water bodies for small scale aquaculture development

Strategy 8: Undertake a study on re- introduction of crustaceans (Macrobrachium spp) suitable for village level aquaculture

Should read: Diversify research to include research on crustaceans (Macrobrachium spp) and other local species suitable for small- scale aquaculture

Strategy 9: Examine the feasibility for the development of rice fish culture at village level to provide food security for rural villages

Should read: Examine and promote integrated aquaculture production systems (IAA, IIA systems)

New strategy to look into involvement of producer organisations and marketing issues

Objective 3: Encourage the development of commercial aquaculture in Malawi

Should read: Promote the development of commercial aquaculture in Malawi

Strategy 10: Develop capacity in Aquaculture in the DoF to serve the needs of commercial aquaculture enterprise

Already embed on human development

Strategy 11: Re examine the policy forbidding introduction of exotic species.

Should read: Conduct collaborative research on exotics to justify their introduction for aquaculture

Such research should not consider concentrate on the one attribute, fast growth, but also other attributes such as flavour, muscle tenderness, disease resistance, seed survival rate, etc.

Reference of FCR should change to FC

Strategy 12: Maintain the programme for genetic improvement of fish species and hybrids for aquaculture under strict control and regulations.

Strategy 13: Continue research into alternative native fish species for aquaculture.

Check nomenclature on fish species for consistence with acceptable format.


ACP Countries"



Combine Strategy 12 and 13 to read “Strengthen aquaculture research on topical issues 1) Genetic improvement, nutrition, marketing, production technology development etc )

Strategy 14: Strengthen links through the NAC (Domasi) with aquaculture information centres overseas to make available information on aquaculture to commercial operators.

Should read: Promote exchange of information on aquaculture technologies

Strategy 15: Develop aquaculture as a component of The Green Belt Initiative

To be deleted, as it is reflected somewhere else

Strategy 16: Monitor the effects of imports of the products of aquaculture so that negative effects can be minimized

Should be put on cross cutting issues as it is covered in other policy documents

Strategy 17: Establish and enforce guidelines and standards regarding the adoption of measures to prevent damage to aquatic biodiversity by pollution and environmental degradation from Aquaculture.

Explanation should be beefed up as it was done on explanation in Strategy 1.

Include explanation on EIA in this strategy

Strategy 18: Lobby to ensure that non-aquaculture developmental activities (especially infrastructure) in areas where aquaculture is being developed do not interact negatively with the industry.

Lobby should be removed and this sentence should start with “Ensure …….”

More emphasis should be put on collaborations otherwise it might seem confrontational in nature.

Group 3 Discussion group on Quality Control & Post Harvest General Observations made on document

‘Improving access of aquatic products to international markets’ is not included in the main document as an objective.

List of acronyms and abbreviations to be completed.

Acronyms to be written in full when mentioned for the first time.

Goal: Resolving Fish Quality Control and Post Harvest issues leading to increased fish supply

Objective 1: Strengthening inspection and quality control of fish and fish products

Strategy 1: Establish a Competent Authority

DoF and MBS to evaluate and decide which institutions shall be responsible for what activities in Quality Control for export, and which institution shall be the Competent Authority and where it will be situated

The Competent Authority shall be established to regulate fish quality (for both local and export market).


ACP Countries"



DoF will support the establishment of the Competent Authority and seek assistance as necessary to facilitate the process.

Strategy 2: Enhance capacity of laboratory facilities

The laboratories in Malawi do not presently have the capacity to undertake all the testing required for exports for some regions or countries (EU or USA), nor for testing imported feedstuffs for aquaculture, nor imported fish for residues and environmental contamination (except mercury). Up to now there has been little demand for such facilities from fisheries. With increased activity in the aquaculture industry leading (in time) to significant exports, increased imports of the ingredients for feed for aquaculture and the increased import of the products of aquaculture from neighbouring countries and the far east, the need for these facilities will increase. Hence on an ongoing basis, there will be a need to assess and enhance capacities of laboratory facilities, to test fisheries products for export, test imports, and for testing aquaculture feed supplies.

Strategy 3: Develop capacity of staff in the Competent Authority

When the Competent Authority is established the staff will have to be trained in all aspects of fisheries quality control. Although the Competent Authority is likely to be the MBS, DoF will be involved from the beginning and assist the MBS in matters relating to fisheries & the Competent Authority.

Strategy 4: Develop a set of manuals and Codes of Practice for inspection of fisheries products, chemical residues and environmental contaminants

Under the current legislation, DoF (through the FPOs) has to inspect imports and exports. This includes the export of live fish from the aquarium trade. DoF staff have no particular training to do so, nor any skills. They tend to just sign the forms after a brief inspection. This is generally undesirable, and until a new system is developed with the MBS, it is of some urgency that in the interim a short manual and accompanying COP for the inspection of all aquatic products for export is developed by the DoF.

With increased importation of cheap aquaculture products it is necessary to develop a system to ensure that the imported product is not injurious to the health of Malawi consumers. Unfortunately the MBS is unable at this time to test for pesticide residues in fish, nor most environmental contaminants. Until equipment is available in country, all that can be done is to rely on the certification process from the country exporting the product to guarantee its quality. If problems occur then samples could be sent overseas for testing.

In the meantime, as part of the establishment of the Competent Authority DoF will work with MBS in creating suitable protocols for inspection of imported aquatic products, over and above standard import regulations currently in force.

Objective 2: Improve fish handling, preservation and Marketing

Strategy 5: Disseminate to the public the health benefits of fish consumption and the ways of assessing the quality of fish

Most fish from the artisanal fishery is smoked, sun dried or para-boiled and at times cooked in vegetable oil (Kanyenya). The product is then packed in sacks or baskets and trucked to the urban centres for resale, usually in unhygienic markets and retail stalls. This does not cause too much problem generally, but it is not desirable. Fresh fish from the artisanal fishery is generally sold locally since it cannot be taken to distant markets, as there is no ice used at sea and seldom any available at


ACP Countries"



beaches. Where ice is used, it is mainly on the larger valuable fishes such as Chambo, which fetch a good price.

In the industrial fishery the fish is iced at sea, and then transported wholesale and fresh to urban centres where it is sold to retailers who hawk their wares in local markets & stores. Ice is used, but not necessarily throughout the whole cold chain. Some of the products of the industrial fishery and of large scale aquaculture (small pelagic fish & Chambo) are packed in trays, frozen and sold in supermarkets and stores in the larger towns. This latter fish is the best quality fish available in the towns and competes with better presented imports from South Africa and elsewhere.

DoF will enhance the publics’ awareness of the value of good healthy fresh fish through various communication channels such as the print and electronic media

Strategy 6: Develop a set of manuals and Codes of Practice for all aspects of inspection of fisheries products for local consumption

No quality control of aquatic products for consumption within Malawi is carried out. If fish is rotten then the consumer is relied upon not to buy the product, (and the processors sometimes discard fish that is very poor quality and unsellable), but these are the only controls.

Ice is generally not used in artisanal fisheries at all (though it is in the industrial fishery) except for high value fish like Chambo, and then only once the fish is landed. In many cases deteriorated fish is simply smoked or dried to disguise the poor quality of the raw product. Fortunately the traditional cuisine of Malawi does not permit many pathogens to survive, and few consumers are seriously adversely affected by poor fish quality: indeed the slight fermentation effects of slightly decomposed but subsequently smoked fish are considered desirable flavour enhancers.

Ideally a COP for fish quality for artisanal caught fish would be developed by DoF, but it will require considerable public awareness efforts to become accepted, and might cause considerable resentment if imposed without countervailing measures too, so this will not be prioritised.

For products from aquaculture and industrial fisheries, there is a need for a COP for quality. These fish products are usually sold fresh or frozen, and it is undesirable if substandard fish reaches the market. The COP would include conditions for on board vessels, in fish handling establishments, on transport vehicles, in retail and wholesale stores, and also include organoleptic assessment of the product itself.

DoF will develop a COP in conjunction with MBS, once the Competent Authority is formed.

Strategy 7: Create market centres for fish products at major fish landing centres and in urban conurbations and improve landing facilities and construct landing jetties at landing areas

This is a long term aim of the DoF, and in some of the larger landing sites and conurbation facilities do already exist, (Lilongwe market is used as a wholesale market by Maldeco for instance, and other sites exist in Zomba, Blantyre and Mzuzu).

On Lake Malawi several landing sites have been upgraded over the years and LMAFDP have recently improved several landing sites and access to landing sites.

Future improvements from government will await donor support.

Strategy 8: Attract private investment in fish handling and marketing infrastructure

DoF supports infrastructure development by the private sector but is unable to directly contribute except through donor support. DoF is however seeking to raise private investment in Fisheries through a variety of initiatives and it is to be hoped that this will benefit investment in this area.


ACP Countries"



This strategy will therefore involve building and expansion of storage facilities, ice machine installation and transport facilities, at inland/coastal landing centres and near market centres.

Strategy 9: Encourage the use of ice and insulated boxes in production and marketing chain

Although there is ice already available in most large urban centres (ice has many uses outside fisheries), its use in fisheries is very limited. Maldeco, the largest fishing company on Lake Malawi uses ice on some (but not all) of its vessels and through some of the cold chain, as do other companies, but beyond this the use of ice is much less common, except for preservation of high value species such as Chambo. Part of the reason is that drying of the catch produces a stable product suitable for sale to the consumer and ice costs a lot of money to buy and also needs insulated holds and boxes, so is not used on the bulkier smaller species in the artisanal catch.

In the short term the DoF should invest in an iceplant and machinery and consider subcontracting their management. DoF will use the Extension services to encourage ice use and advise fishermen and small businessmen on credit lines which they may be able to use to obtain the necessary funding.

Strategy 10: Stipulate minimum hygiene requirements for storage and handling of fish in licensing conditions for industrial and semi industrial trawlers, landing areas and markets

Large boats operating on Lake Malawi should ideally handle the catch better than artisanal fishermen in their small dugouts and planked open boats. Much of the catch from these vessels is going to be eaten fresh or frozen, rather than being smoked or dried. The use of ice and clean surfaces in holds and working areas is desirable. DoF will liaise with the fishing companies and jointly agree a timetable for improvements, so that the license conditions can be altered and quality on board be improved.

In those establishments dealing with fresh fish an improvement in standards is overdue. DoF will initiate discussions with the fishing companies, municipal authorities and fish traders to agree a code of practice which sets out the minimum hygiene standards that must be adhered to. Initially this CoD would be voluntary but a timetable for its adoption as a requirement to trade will also have to be decided.

Objective 3: Adding value to fisheries products

Strategy 11: Improve awareness of the possibilities for value addition and improved processing.

There are many different methods of adding value in fish processing though many are not applicable in Malawi.

A major problem is that in Malawi there are few large fish that lend themselves to filleting to produce boneless fillets which can be presented in various ways, neither are many fish large enough for cutting into steaks. The Chambo, the major farmed fish, even when “large”, is usually presented and prepared whole, since its fillets are very small. Fillets of fish are available in the shops in urban centres, but come from marine fish from South Africa (mostly hake), and Chinese origin tilapia, (O. niloticus).

There have been only limited attempts to improve processing for value added products. Most efforts have been aimed towards a reduction in the use of firewood, and have incidentally improved fish quality & value (Chokor & Ivory Coast kilns for instance). Raising the drying areas for fish onto racks was successfully introduced many years ago and has reduced contamination by sand and insects.

At the high value end of the market vacuum packing and better freezing techniques show some promise, as does the proper use of ice.


ACP Countries"



Objective 4: Improved Access of aquatic products to international markets

Strategy 12: Review fish quality control laws to ensure compliance with those of importing countries as well as ensure compliance of commodities with internationally-recognised standards of food safety and trade (e.g. WTO agreements, CODEX Alimentarius)

This is a long term goal of the DoF and the first work required is to improve the legislative background to support better fish quality. Currently those countries that import Malawi fish products have not introduced restrictions on those imports and in any case the export industry is very small. As time passes emphasis on QC will increase and the DoF will react accordingly.

The DoF does not anticipate the export of any aquatic products (except aquarium fish) to the EU in the foreseeable future and will not seek to comply with standards required for export to the EU. Put simply, in the medium term the effort and cost is not likely to justify the investment.

Strategy 13: Establish quality assurance programmes for fisheries and aquaculture products.

HACCP and GMP are extensively used in fisheries for the maintenance of fish quality programmes. Larger companies would expect to gain some ISO certification (ISO 9002). Usually the Competent Authority would introduce, with the fisheries administration, Codes of Practice and a series of rules and regulations to be adhered to by fish processing premises, aquaculture producers, on board vessels and in retail and wholesale markets, as well as for transport and any additional requirements for export products.

This means that over time Malawi has to comply with HACCP, GMP and all protocols related to fisheries to which Malawi is a signatory (e.g. SADC Protocol on Fisheries, WTO Agreements).

Strategy 14: Evaluate the impact of WTO, SADC & COMESA, and their possible effects on capture and aquaculture industries

The SADC Protocols on Trade and Fisheries and various WTO agreements have implications for fisheries in Malawi. The basic thrust of the SADC Protocol on Trade and WTO negotiations have been to break down the barriers to trade. By signing the SADC protocol Malawi has aligned itself with the interests of the powerhouse economy of the region, South Africa. The full implications of this are not yet apparent. The DoF will undertake a brief study, using internal resources, to look at the implications of trade and tariff developments in fisheries.

Strategy 15: Provide specific credit schemes to processors to facilitate compliance with national and international quality control requirements.

As the need to comply with international agreements on fish quality and handling come into effect, the catchers, processors and handlers of fish and other aquatic products will need to finance improvements to their facilities. It will probably be impossible for them to raise enough funds to do so without recourse to borrowing, which is difficult in Malawi. The DoF will investigate soft funding sources for this when the need arises. The DoF will not directly subsidise these inputs.

Objective 5: Mitigate the effects of processing and processing methods on the environment

Strategy 16: Collaborate with other sectors to reduce the effects of deforestation on areas near fishing villages

Deforestation of areas adjoining villages with large fish smoking facilities is a serious problem and although attempts have been made, such as by the Lake Malawi Artisanal Fisheries Development Project (LMAFDP), to plan for mitigation, with the assistance of the Forestry Department. The DoF will continue to liaise with the Forestry Department to get the recommendations of the LMAFD project implemented.


ACP Countries"



Strategy 17: Reducing pollution from fish processing facilities

As with many other aspects of processing, there are no regulations in force regarding pollution, specifically from fish processing establishments. At the moment this is not a pressing problem. However with the introduction of HACCP & GMF to the industry pollution issues will be addressed; but improvement will await the establishment of the Competent Authority and the updating of the Fisheries Regulations.

Strategy 18: Embark on fish processing technological research

Most of the landing sites have fish processing technologies such as smoking kilns. However, the efficient utilization of these facilities is not fully adopted. Hence the DoF needs to identify simple but efficient fish processing technologies that could easily be adopted by fish processors.

Other results from the workshop

Round up discussions led to a series of other decisions & comments. These included:-

• Abbreviations & Acronyms - should always be written out in full the first time they are mentioned

• Scientific names should be italicised

• Local Management Institutions should be written instead of BVCs

• There should be more on cage culture

• Property rights and conflicts need more work.

• Not so much between aquaculture and capture fisheries. (This not agreed with by some)

• The language used should be more inclusive

• Does the Competent Authority have to have a name ?

• Readiness of the country to export – is some time off

• MBS is the location for the Competent Authority

• New Policy Theme - “Governance” to be inserted

• New policy theme - “Human Resources & Skills” to be inserted

• Maintain the cross cutting issues, just shuffle some strategies to Governance & HR

• Department to decide on priorities later

• More to be done on data collection in wetlands and rivers. Maybe a new strategy needed.

• Ensure flow of strategies follows a logical path

The amendments and suggestions were subsequently inserted into the Draft Fisheries and Aquaculture Policy document.


ACP Countries"



List of attendees

NAME ORGANISATION ADDRESS EMAIL ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER

Dr. Steve Donda Fisheries Department P.O. Box 593, Lilongwe [email protected] 0999 950 035 Dr. Friday Njaya Fisheries Department P.O. Box 593, Lilongwe [email protected] 0999 278 088 Mr. O.M. Kachinjika Department of Fisheries P.O. Box 593, Lilongwe [email protected] 0999 510 127 Mr. Moffat Manase Fisheries Research Unit P.O. Box 27, Monkey-Bay [email protected] 0991 438 774 Mr. Josia Chamveka Fisheries Office P.O. Box 47, Mangochi [email protected] 0999 231 873 Mr. Wanangwa Sindani

Malawi Bureau of Standards P.O. Box 946, Blantyre [email protected] 0888 340 018

Mr. P. Fatch Fisheries Association of Malawi (FISAM)

P.O. box 81, Mangochi [email protected] 0888 620 745

Mr. B.B. Chirwa National Aquaculture Centre P.O. Box 44, Domasi [email protected] 0999 695 203 01 536 203

Mr. Peng Yiwang Chinese Expert P.O. box 44, Domasi [email protected] 0992 708 937 Mr. Robert Lindley ACP Fish II C/Department of Fisheries, P.O. Box

593, Lilongwe [email protected] +441892 539 883

Mr. Sidney Kamtukule

Department of Water Resources P/Bag 390, Lilongwe 3 [email protected] 0999 837 378 0888 337 378

Dr. M.M. Hara MEGAPESCA C/O Department of Fisheries, P.O. Box 593, Lilongwe

[email protected] +277 334 58987

Mr. C.T. Nyasa Malawi College of Fisheries P.O. Box 7, Mangochi [email protected] 0999 941 740


ACP Countries"



Mr. Leone Tarabusi ACP Fish II Maputo, Mozambique [email protected] +258829029872 Mr. Maurice Makuwila

Department of Fisheries P.O. Box 593, Lilongwe [email protected] 0888 984 859

Dr. Jeremiah Kang’ombe

Bunda College P.O. Box 219, Bunda, Lilongwe [email protected] 0999 330 855

Mr. Ron Chokani IFFNT P.O. Box 237, Mchinji [email protected] 0999 956 949 Mr. S. Nyanyale Department of Parks and Wildlife P.O. Box 41, Liwonde [email protected]

[email protected] 0888 876 743

Mr. P. Nyirenda Department of Environmental Affairs P/Bag 394, Lilongwe [email protected] 0999 639 350 Mrs. Chikondi Pasani Department of Fisheries P.O. Box 593, Lilongwe [email protected] 0993 901 029 Mr. Chancy Mtambo Ministry of Development and

Planning Cooperation P.O. box 30136, Lilongwe [email protected] 0993 884 694

Mr. Joseph Kasuzweni

Fisheries Office P/Bag 1, Machinga [email protected] 0999 796 370

Mr. Joe Mfune Department of Fisheries P.O. Box 593, Lilongwe [email protected] [email protected]

0999 125 000

Mr. Peter Mwankuku MALDECO Fisheries Ltd P.O. Box 45, Mangochi [email protected] 0888 877 432 Mrs. Gertrude Kalinde Thaulo

Machinga ADD P/Bag 3, Liwonde [email protected] 0888 873 931


ACP Countries"



Annex 7: Malawi: Draft National Policy for Fisheries and Aquaculture in Malawi

See File: Annex 7 - Malawi Fish Aq Policy Draft.doc


ACP Countries"



Annex 8: Malawi: Review of Existing Policy in Malawi

1 : Review of Existing Policy, Objectives and Activities

The review cycle for the policy (and objectives, since these are a core of the policy) is 5 years, though if there is a seismic shift in Government Policy this may require shortening to fit in with newly overarching objectives established.

Activities and procedures will be reviewed annually, at budget time, and related to the information contained in the DoF annual report. At this time minor changes to activities, procedures or timelines can be introduced so as to make the policy reactive to changing conditions, such as financing, success or failure of aspects of the policy or unexpected shocks.

Review dates will be set to allow adequate time for revision and approvals processes, however with the annual review of activities this will align very closely with that required of the budget cycle, since the two are inextricably linked.

Minor editorial or practical updates that do not affect the substance of the policy do not need to go through any approval process

Process of review

The process for a review of, or a new policy, and/or activities and procedures will be initiated by the fisheries section and may include environmental scanning and comparative analysis of relevant internal and external organisations, as well as investigation and analysis of:-

• relevant government policy and legislation, and national codes;

• existing policies (internal)

• gaps

• the need to revise or rescind each section

• consistency with other policies, plans and government objectives (external to Fisheries Section)

• possible constraints on implementing the policy

• previous records of relevant bodies;

• other relevant data, including the results of any SWOT analyses undertaken on the main pillars of the policy.

The research process for any review is:

• whether the policy and/or procedures is still consistent with best practice, strategic directions, and changes in national codes or government policy and legislation. Is it coherent within the current policy framework of government?

• Is the policy still relevant to the needs of the fisheries sector?

• whether the policy meets stakeholders’ needs. Has the policy been effective in achieving the objectives set?


ACP Countries"



• are there constraints on implementing the policy at lower organisational levels, particularly within the Extension Service. What lessons have been learned with the implementation of the policy ?

• is the level of compliance with the existing policy and/or procedures; indicating weaknesses. How effective has the policy been?

• whether any related sub-policies need to be revised or rescinded.

Will it be necessary to:

• consult key stakeholders

• amend or revise the policy

• prepare a revised draft and initiate a new round of consultation with the key stakeholders

• repeat this cycle until no further amendments/revisions are recommended by the key stakeholders.

Checklist for Review of Policy

Is there any substantial need to undertake a review of the policy?

1. Have general conditions changed so much as to render the old policy invalid?

2. Is government demanding a change of direction, significant enough to justify a review of policy?

3. Have there been any serious problems implementing the existing policy?

4. Can the policy be modified or changed without requiring a completely new policy document? (If so then attempt to modify parts of the policy rather than completely re-review the whole document)

5. Does a need exist to address a gap or meet compliance standards? (It may be possible to amend or add on to the policy rather than do a complete revision, or to introduce regulations outside the policy itself)

6. Is it the policy that requires review? (Perhaps issuing new updated regulations or adjusting procedures may solve an identified problem better than changing policy).

If the policy does appear to be needing revision then an ex-ante evaluation should be carried out so as to feed the process of the revision

1. Undertake a problem analysis, identifying stakeholders, focal problems and develop problem trees. Logical Framework Process Workshops are an effective way of identifying problems.

2. Define the objectives and develop indicators for each of the objectives. Make sure that the Objectives are Specific, Measurable, Accepted, Realistic and Time Dependent (SMART).


ACP Countries"



3. Look at the alternatives mechanisms for achieving the objectives. Are they appropriate? Are the ones chosen really the “best possible”?

4. Have the lessons of the past really been understood? Has a study of the effectiveness of the policy been undertaken? Is this being incorporated into the future policy?

5. Was monitoring and evaluation of the previous policy undertaken, and what are the results of this exercise?

6. Has any effort been made to assess cost effectiveness of the various strategies in the policy?

Then a final check that during the process of review :-

1. Have all other stakeholders been consulted; interviews, workshops, consultations by e-mail and web based discussion?

2. Have the problems been effectively identified?

3. Has feed back been incorporated into the policy review process?

4. Have issues on Gender, HIV AND AIDS, equality, fairness, diversity and other priorities of government policy been incorporated into any changes proposed?

5. Are the new proposals compliant with international agreements?

6. Have the alternative delivery mechanisms been examined?

7. Does the risk assessment show undue threats to implementation?

8. Are the Objectives “SMART” Specific, Measurable, Accepted, Realistic and Time Dependent?

And ensure that the new policy

1. Will satisfy the needs of the stakeholders in the short and long term (depending on the length of the policy = 5 years in Malawi).

2. Clearly defines the objectives to be achieved from each strategy.

3. Fits in with current practice where this exists, and with all stated government policies, objectives and existing activities.

4. Incorporates the lessons learned from previous implementation.

5. Covers all the relevant multi-agency aspects.

6. Covers issues arising from implementation, most importantly the level of financing which will be required; and the cost effectiveness of the activities proposed.

7. Contains a monitoring and evaluation process & a timeline.


ACP Countries"



Annex 9: Swaziland: Final Draft Policy on the Management and Growth of Fresh Water Fisheries and Aquaculture in Swaziland

See File: Annex 9 - Swaziland Final Draft Policy.doc


ACP Countries"



Annex 10: Swaziland: Policy Implementation Plan

ACTIVITY PERFORMANCE TARGETS IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE/COMMENTS 1. Adopt Final Policy Document

• Final policy document presented to

Ministry by APC Fish II Programme

Consultants

• Ministry to review final policy document

and request amendments

• Final amendments effected

• Final policy document accepted by

Ministry

• Final policy document submitted to

Cabinet for adoption

• APC Fish II Programme

Consultants

• Ministry & Fisheries

Section

• APC Fish II Programme

Consultants

• Ministry


Section

• 13-15 April 2011

• 15 April 2011 – 2 May 2011

• 2 May 2011 – 6 May 2011

• 9 May 2011 – 16 May 2011

• June 2011

2. Align Fisheries Section organogram and budget with policy objectives

• Submit motivations to Cabinet for the

appropriate budget to support the revised

organogram and fisheries policy objectives.


Section

• June 2011 – concurrently with Cabinet

process for Fisheries Policy approval


ACP Countries"



ACTIVITY PERFORMANCE TARGETS IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE/COMMENTS • Submit proposals to funding institutions.

The proposals should focus on funding the

expansion of the Fisheries Section.


Section

• September 2011

3. Develop Basic Data and Information Reporting Framework and Templates

• Develop reporting framework and

templates in terms of the Policy

• Develop fisheries data and information

management system

• Ministry& Fisheries

Section

• Contact ACP Fish II

Programme regarding

FISHBASE and

Fisheries Information &

Statistical System

(FINSS) software

• June 2011

• June 2011

4. Production of fingerlings • Completion of fish hatchery construction

• Commencement of breeding

• Distribution of fingerlings to fish farmers

• Fisheries and Land

Development Sections

• Fisheries Section


• September 2011

• October 2011

• December 2011


ACP Countries"



ACTIVITY PERFORMANCE TARGETS IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE/COMMENTS 5. Development of Rural Aquaculture

• Approach donors to fund/support the

development of rural aquaculture by

linking the benefits of increased access to

fish to good nutrition and improved

lifestyles for people living with HIV/AIDS.


Section

• September 2011

6. Development of Commercial Aquaculture

• Facilitate development of small-scale

commercial fish farming.

• Facilitate development of intensive

commercial fish farming.

• Facilitate the conducting of fish market

survey


• Fisheries Section and

partners

• Fisheries Section and

partners

• December 2011

• December 2012

• December 2011

7. Align Fisheries Section Budget

• Align budget for 2011-2012 to Policy

objectives.

• Ministry& Fisheries

Section

• September 2011


ACP Countries"



ACTIVITY PERFORMANCE TARGETS IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE/COMMENTS 8. Development of Wild Fish Capture Sector

• Promote ecotourism and sport fishing

• Conduct fish and fisheries biodiversity

surveys

• Regulate fish exploitation

• Fisheries Section,

Tourism Department and

Swaziland Tourism

Authority.



• June 2011

• 2014

• On going

9. Review and Update Regulatory Frameworks

• Review and update the 1937 Fisheries Act

and Regulations and align to the Fisheries

Policy

• Draft regulations as provided for under

section 4 of the 1937 Act

• ACP Fish II Programme

& Ministry& Fisheries

Section

• ACP Fish II Programme

& Ministry & Fisheries

Section

• 2012

• June 2011


ACP Countries"



ACTIVITY PERFORMANCE TARGETS IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE/COMMENTS 10. Review Policy • Have 5 small-scale commercial farmers

been authorised to farm?

• Have small-scale fish farmers submitted

their annual template reports?

• Have subsistence fish farmers been

registered on a subsistence fish farm

database and how many have been

registered?

• Have NGO’s in the HIV/AIDS sector and

NERCHA been formally approached with

a funding proposal for fish ponds?

• How many additional subsistence fish

ponds have been established and stocked?

• Is the annual reporting policy for the

subsistence and small-scale fishers working

or should this be changed?

• Ministry of Agriculture

& Fisheries Section and

fisheries stakeholders

through the Sector-wide

approach.

• 2016 (5 years)


ACP Countries"



ACTIVITY PERFORMANCE TARGETS IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE/COMMENTS • Has Cabinet approved filling of vacancies,

increased budget for the Fisheries Section

and amended organogram (approval may

be given implicitly when the Policy is

approved)


ACP Countries"



Annex 11: Swaziland: Fisheries Policy framework

INTERVENTION LOGIC OBJECTIVELY VERIFIABLE INDICATORS

SOURCES OF VERIFICATION

ASSUMPTIONS

OVERALL OBJECTIVE

The sustainable and efficient development and management of the fisheries and aquaculture sectors

Improvements in a range of social welfare indicators.

National census data Health statistics Poverty rates

There is political stability and consistency of Government policy towards fisheries

PURPOSE Improvement of fisheries production in Swaziland through improvement from subsistence and commercial aquaculture, and increased production from dams and other water bodies.

Numbers of subsistence level farmers Numbers of commercial fish farmers Catch returns from artisanal fishermen

Registration data Annual production figures (through Agriculture Extension) Sport fishing records

Land tenure and other rights for aquaculture protected Provision of funding for fisheries Donor support

Pillar 1: Institutional Improvement

Size of Fisheries Section Establishment Budget for Fisheries Section Donor assistance

Fisheries Section monthly and annual reports

Government support at MOA level Donor interest in Fisheries

RESULTS

Pillar 2: Regulation of Sport Fishing Numbers of sports fishers, catch and release records, and numbers of sport fish visitors

Reports from Sport Fishing Clubs Tourism reports

Continued good relations with the Sport Fishing community No adverse conflicts with artisanal fishers Good water resources management


ACP Countries"



Pillar 3: Improvement of Control and Monitoring of Subsistence Wild Capture Fishing

Numbers of artisanal fishermen registered Artisanal catch

Catch records from artisanal fishermen

Registration and reporting system functions Unregulated poaching with nets

Pillar 4: Encouragement of Subsistence Aquaculture

Numbers of subsistence aquaculture units registered Aquaculture production

Production figures from subsistence aquaculture reporting & registration Agriculture Extension surveys

Hatchery becomes functional Agriculture Data collection systems does capture aquaculture production Donor support Registration system works

Pillar 5: Small-Scale Commercialisation of Aquaculture

Numbers of Commercial Aquaculture units registered Commercial aquaculture production

Production figures from reporting, Agriculture Extension surveys and (possibly) trade activity recorded by Dept Commerce

Domestic sources of funding for investment exist Marketing systems developed adequately Registration system works

Pillar 6: Development of Intensive Commercial Aquaculture

Numbers of Intensive Aquaculture Units established

Export figures Registration and reporting of commercial units

Investment funds available Suitable species & methods developed Bio-security issues Taxation & tariff issues


ACP Countries"



ACTIVITIES Pillar Activities Performance targets Implementation Timeline/Comment

1.1 Restructuring the Fisheries Section & Development of Human Resources and Skills (a)Restructuring the Fisheries Section (b) Development of Human Resources & Skills (c) Key staff training areas

Structure altered to that proposed in Fisheries Policy Increase in operational budget from the E1,403,321 in 2009/2010 to E1,971,090 by 2013/2014. Fill all vacancies as soon as is reasonably practical and subject to civil service practices and restrictions. Training in Veterinary and Fisheries Management

MOA Fisheries Section PSC Donor support required for Training

Structure and funding by end FY 2012/3 for completion For training support of donors is required, and is an ongoing activity.

Pillar 1: Institutional Improvement

1.2 Prioritising fisheries so as to overcome funding constraints

Prioritise the Fisheries Section so as to obtain increased funding.

NGOs. NERCHA. MFC

Ongoing from present


ACP Countries"



1.3 Development of regulatory frameworks, fishery management institutions and management system Strategy 1.3.1 Updating current fisheries laws and regulations Strategy 1.3.2 Stocking of Alien and Invasive Fish Species Strategy 1.3.3 Trans-boundary Fisheries Management Strategy 1.3.4 Import and Export of Fish and Fish Products Strategy 1.3.5 Ecosystems Approach to Fisheries Management Strategy 1.3.6 Improving Management of Watershed Areas Strategy 1.3.7 Planning for Climate Change

Mostly covered by a new regulatory framework. (Important, can be created by regulations made by Minister and come into force when gazetted) New Fisheries Legislation Establish a trans-boundary fisheries commission to include representatives from South Africa and Mozambique

Fisheries section. Section Donors. MOA, Minister (as the maker of regulations) Fisheries section. Section Donors. MOA, Minister (as the maker of regulations) Foreign Affairs, MOA, Fisheries Section

Target to get gazetted by end 2012 Very difficult to get passed as a complex procedure. Maybe be better in the short term to control fisheries through regulations and leave legislation as it is. Lengthy process but desirable. 2015/6 ?

1.4 Information Management Systems

Fisheries Section to be provided with regular reporting templates from the various sectors & disseminate information on fisheries and aquaculture

Fisheries Section Agriculture Extension

Ongoing from 2011


ACP Countries"



1.5 Food Health and Fisheries Management

Imposition of the provisions of the Food Safety Act and the standards set out in terms of that Act for fish intended for human consumption. Ministry will review present standards for fish feed and ensure that these standards prohibit the use of dangerous additives such as hormones.

Various bodies responsible for food and standards, including Municipal Authorities, Standards Authority, Ministry of Health & Social Welfare, MOA & Fisheries Section

Dependant of staffing at Fisheries Section. Also dependant on will of other bodies Unrealistic to expect implementation before end of 2013 at earliest, if then !

1.6 Reduction in Illegal & Unregulated Fishing

Preventive education strategies and regular enforcement of laws to curb the use of nets and encourage the use of lines instead to harvest fish.

Fisheries Section. Sports fishing clubs & associations Dam owners Communities

Ongoing. A slow process not subject to immediate improvement due to staff shortages that will not be rectified until the end of 2012/3 FY at earliest

1.7 Mitigation of HIV/AIDS HIV/AIDS mainstreamed into all activities Provision of protein through subsistence aquaculture for people living with HIV/AIDS

Fisheries Section, MOA & NERCHA NERCHA, Fisheries Section, MOA, & NGOs such as World Vision

Ongoing, existing activity Key component of fisheries Policy. Ongoing & receiving more emphasis.


ACP Countries"



Pillar 2: Regulation of Sport or Recreational Fishing

2.1 Revision of Permit Fees 2.2 Imposition of Bag limits or Catch Limits 2.3 Improvement of Catch reporting 2.4 Creating Preferred Sport Fishing Areas 2.5 Prohibition on sale of fish caught 2.6 Catch & Release in Sport Fisheries

Covered by a new regulatory framework. (Important, can be created by regulations made by Minister and come into force when gazetted) Target is that sport fish are recorded, and released unless too injured to be returned alive. Sport Fishing areas agreed on each water body so as to minimise interaction with other users

Fisheries section. Section Donors., MOA, Minister (as the maker of regulations)

Target to get regulations gazetted by end 2012 Establish systems for catch reporting by one year after regulations gazetted. Enforcement problematical due to small staff numbers, but Sport Fishery self regulated

Pillar 3: Improvement of Control and Monitoring of the Subsistence Wild Capture Fishing

3.1 Permit Fees for Subsistence Fishers 3.2 Imposition of Bag limits or Catch Limits for Subsistence Fisheries 3.3 Development of Catch Reporting for Subsistence Fisheries 3.4 Limitations by Species for the Subsistence Fishery based on 2002/2003 Fish and Fisheries Survey

Covered by a new regulatory framework. (Important, can be created by regulations made by Minister and come into force when gazetted) Catch reporting improved so as to provide assessment of artisanal catch

Fisheries section. , MOA, Minister (as the maker of regulations) Reporting system to be established by Fisheries Section with Agriculture Extension

Target to get regulations gazetted by end 2012 Establish systems for catch reporting by one year after regulations gazetted. Enforcement problematical due to small staff numbers.


ACP Countries"



Pillar 4: Encouragement of Subsistence Aquaculture

4.1 Defining the role of the Fisheries Section 4.2 Establishment of fish hatcheries to support subsistence aquaculture 4.3 Registration with the Fisheries Section 4.4 Improvement of the Reporting and Data Capturing Requirements

Introduce suitable regulations Provision of a number of critical technical and support services to subsistence fish farmers Construction of Hatcheries Production reporting improved so as to provide assessment of artisanal catch

Fisheries section. Section Donors. MOA, Minister (as the maker of regulations) Fisheries section Agricultural extension services, Fisheries section Registration and reporting system to be established by Fisheries Section with Agriculture Extension

Target to get regulations gazetted by end 2012 Dependant on Fisheries Section receiving planned strengthening. Not before FY 2012/3 Ongoing. End 2011 one hatchery Establish systems for aquaculture reporting by one year after regulations gazetted.


ACP Countries"



Pillar 5: Encouragement of small-scale commercial fish farming

5.1 Strengthening the Role of the Fisheries 5.2 Issuing of Permits 5.3 Establishing Reporting and Data Capturing Requirements for Small-Scale Commercial Aquaculture 5.4 Support for private hatcheries

Introduce suitable regulations Construction of Hatchery Aquaculture reporting improved so as to provide assessment of artisanal catch Private hatcheries established

Fisheries section. Section Donors. MOA, Minister (as the maker of regulations) Fisheries section Registration and reporting system to be established by Fisheries Section with Agriculture Extension Fisheries section & private sector

Target to get regulations gazetted by end 2012 Target 15 model farms by end 2015 Ongoing. End 2011 one established Establish systems for aquaculture reporting by one year after regulations gazetted. Probably not until 2015 at the earliest. Depends on finance

Pillar 6: Development of Intensive Commercial Fish Farming

6.1 Strengthening the Role of the Fisheries Section 6.2 Developing a Permit & Regulation system for cage based aquaculture

Covered by a new regulatory framework. (Important, can be created by regulations made by Minister and come into force when gazetted)

Fisheries section. Section Donors. Minister (as the maker of regulations)

Target to get regulations gazetted by end 2012 Realistically Intensive Commercial Fish Farming is unlikely to become an issue during the lifetime of this policy.


ACP Countries"



Annex 12: Swaziland: SWOT Analysis.

(items in bold are considered to be key elements)


ACP Countries"



1. Subsistence and small-scale commercial aquaculture in Swaziland STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES

• General political support and linkages with other programmes, such as agriculture and HIV/AIDS

• Fish hatcheries exist (being constructed) • Rural household food security from integrated agriculture and aquaculture

(fits in well with rural farming practice) • Some trained staff in the Fisheries Section • Relatively well established methods of aquaculture at subsistence level • Good availability of natural and man-made water bodies • Clean water available in many areas • Solid price for the product all year – no fluctuations & high demand product • Tasty product which people like • Culture species available in the region • Moral support from local community and other locally based organisations &

NGOs • Fisheries section monitoring programme in place in 2013 • Agricultural diversification • Mobilisation of women in the community

• Poor access to credit. Currently, financial institutions view the aquaculture industry adversely, due to the risk and undefined markets for the product

• Supplies of fry from the wild, can be diseased, erratic, lead to stocking of different species of tilapia

• Aquaculture legislation is out of date and incomplete • Shortages of staff in the Fisheries Section & shortage of some skills in the Fisheries

Section • Shortage of resources for training and extension services • No local Code of Practice established or enforced for Aquaculture • No system to ensure quality of fish for food safety purposes • Not enough fish hatcheries for large scale development = lack of fingerlings • Large part (63%) of the local community are poor • A significant capital investment is required for commercial aquaculture business start-up • Limited access to the Dam waters as shore land can be owned by few or protected. • Poor resettlement of the rural community will reinforce resource conflicts (water, finance,

land) • Market instability – panic selling if funds needed • Low margins through the product chain • Distribution and processing facilities are inadequate for large scale production • Current aquaculture producers are more add-ons to agriculture than established aquaculture

businesses • Long pay-back time if commercial fish take 6-8 months to grow to table size • Lack of, and expensive, fish pond construction equipment by farmers • Dependence of women on men for many activities (digging ponds etc)


ACP Countries"



THREATS OPPORTUNITIES

• Low prioritization by government and small size of Fisheries Section • Financial industry’s lack of cooperation and willingness to address lending

opportunities within this industry • Lack of government understanding to meet aquaculturalists requirements, for

example, allowing inappropriate development • Disease threats • Pollution from high intensity aquaculture and industrial pollution on rivers

and dams. • Competition between different users for water and land resources can cause

tensions • Possible conflicts with other departments on policy • Lack of incentives for aquaculture • Slow growing species being used • Drought and erratic weather conditions, climate change • Habitat degradation on catchments areas • General economic downturn • Lack of money management skills in communities • HIV/AIDS directly impacting fish farming communities and fish farmers • Erratic supplies of feed & high price of feed inputs • Feed quality and testing issues • High production costs (cannot compete with cheap imports on price)

• Technology simple, appropriate and known • Different climates in the country allow for different species to be utilised • Aquaculture industry is positioned for growth similar to past trends in the poultry or

pig industries. • Lots of room for land based aquaculture • Available water resources generally • Move from small scale/subsistence level to commercial • Suitable climate in most of the country • Reduce imports of low grade fish • Stock enhancement in natural water bodies • Crustaceans: Macrobrachium spp, crayfish etc possible species for luxury market


ACP Countries"



2. Capture fisheries in Swaziland STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES

• Fisheries Section functioning and generally skilled • Overarching regulatory framework exists and opportunities to regulate

the sector better • Support from local Chiefs and communities for conservation measures

and regulation of illegal fishing (links to participatory management of the fisheries)

• Self regulation Sport Fishery • Existing sport clubs and associations • Sport fishery used to support conservation • Ownership of some dams is private, so controlled and well managed • Sport fisheries are enforcement partners • Access to food for subsistence fishers • General sense of importance of conservation measures

• An open access and often unregulated fishery • Regulatory framework weak on some matters (e.g. participatory

management) • Only one fisheries staff allocated to wild capture fisheries (emphasis is on

aquaculture) • Difficult to manage and enforce regulations as spread over a large geographic area • Capture fisheries not part of the national debate • Subsistence fisheries totally disorganised • Low appreciation of the value of sport fisheries and of capture fisheries in general. • Sport fishing perceived to be an elitist activity • Politicians don’t differentiate between wild capture and aquaculture they simply

refer to “fisheries” • Politicians don’t appreciate the limitations of capture fisheries to provide fish

supplies


ACP Countries"



THREATS OPPORTUNITIES

• Illegal stocking and illegal introductions • Conflicts of use and access to resources between users • Degradations of the environment by poor land use management and

pollution • Continued use and acquisition of nets in water bodies • Sport clubs becoming “arrogant” • Climate change (unknown effects) • Open access and entry to the subsistence fishery • Poor management due to poor management at Government level • HIV/AIDS directly affects the fishing communities • Conflicts between cage culture in aquaculture and subsistence capture

fisheries (exclusion of subsistence fishers) • Dangers of disease and pollution from cage culture in dams & reservoirs • High investment level for entry to sport fishing

• Participatory Management through communities leading to better management and enforcement

• Sport fisheries to establish better relations with the Fisheries Department • Amendment of regulations and a regulation review • Increased food security for subsistence fisheries (PLHIV improved nutrition,

general improvement in nutrition, reduced food imports and food aid) • Ability of sport fishing to contribute to increased economic activity • Investment in sport fishing leads to job creation in rural areas • Ecotourism and sport fishing tourism promotion • Stock enhancement - hatchery exists (end 2011) • New dams will increase the area available


ACP Countries"



Annex 13: Swaziland: Policy Development and Review Processes

The need for new policy and/or procedures may be identified by:

• an ultimate (approval) body such as Cabinet or Parliament • a penultimate body such as the Fisheries Section or the Ministry of Agriculture, • another significant stakeholder.

The triggers for a new policy and/or activities may include:

1. Changes to the external operating environment (such as a new tariff or trade regime, new international protocols)

2. Changes to government policy or legislation (overarching policy may lead to changes in government, e.g. the Poverty Reduction Strategy, Expenditure Review)

3. Review of the strategic directions of the Fisheries (in time the requirements of the Fisheries section may change).

4. New initiatives within management areas that are the responsibility of Fisheries (technology, availability of donor funding and new co-operative ventures with other service providers)

5. The need for consistency across areas of service delivery, where these have diverged from existing practises. (Perhaps in the collection or collation of data from aquaculture).

6. A review cycle, established in the policy, and in this case every 5 years from first approval, for the entire policy.

Review of Existing Policy, Objectives and Activities

Policies, objectives and activities of the Fisheries Section must be reviewed on a regular basis.

The review cycle for the policy (and objectives, since these are a core of the policy) is 5 years, though if there is a seismic shift in Government Policy this may require shortening to fit in with the newly overarching objectives established.

Activities and procedures should be reviewed annually, at budget time. At this time minor changes to activities, procedures or timelines can be introduced so as to make the policy reactive to changing conditions, such as financing, success or failure of aspects of the policy or unexpected shocks.

Review dates should be set to allow adequate time for revision and approvals processes, however with the annual review of activities this will align very closely with that required of the budget cycle, since the two are inextricably linked; and the policy cycle for Swaziland is 5 years.

Minor editorial or practical updates that do not affect the substance of the policy do not need to go through any approval process


ACP Countries"



Process of review

The process for a review of, or a new, policy and/or activities & procedures will be initiated by the fisheries section and may include environmental scanning and comparative analysis of relevant internal and external organisations, as well as investigation and analysis of:

• relevant government policy, legislation and national codes; • existing policies (internal) • gaps • need to revise or rescind each section • consistency with other policies, plans and government objectives (external to

Fisheries Section) • possible constraints on implementing the policy • previous records of relevant bodies; • other relevant data, including the results of any SWOT analyses undertaken on the

main pillars of the policy.

The research process for any review is:

• whether the policy and/or procedures is still consistent with best practice, strategic directions, and changes in national codes or government policy and legislation. Is it coherent within the current policy framework of government?

• Is the policy still relevant to the needs of the fisheries sector? • whether the policy meets stakeholders’ needs. Has the policy been effective in

achieving the objectives set? • constraints on implementing the policy at lower organisational levels, particularly

within the Extension Service. What lessons have been learned with the implementation of the policy?

• the level of compliance with the existing policy and/or procedures; indicating weaknesses. How effective has the policy been?

• whether any related sub-policies need to be revised or rescinded.

It will be necessary to:

• consult key stakeholders • amend or revise the policy • prepare a revised draft and initiate a new round of consultation with the key

stakeholders • repeat this cycle until no further amendments/revisions are recommended by the key

stakeholders.


ACP Countries"



Checklist for review of Policy and Procedures/Activities

Is there any substantial need to undertake a review of the policy?.

I. Have general conditions changed so much as to render the old policy invalid?

II. Is government demanding a change of direction, significant enough to justify a review of policy?

III. Have there been any serious problems implementing the existing policy? IV. Can the policy be modified or changed without requiring a completely new

policy document? (If so then attempt to modify parts of the policy rather than completely re-review the whole document)

V. Does a need exist to address a gap or meet compliance standards? (It may be possible to amend or add on to the policy rather than do a complete revision, or to introduce regulations outside the policy itself)

VI. Is it the policy that requires review? (Perhaps issuing new updated regulations or adjusting procedures may solve an identified problem better than changing policy).

If the policy does appear to be needing revision then an ex-ante evaluation should be carried out so as to feed the process of the revision

I. Undertake a problem analysis, identifying stakeholders, focal problems,

develop problem trees. Logical Framework Process Workshops are an effective way of identifying problems.

II. Define the objectives and develop indicators for each of the objectives. Make sure that the Objectives are Specific, Measurable, Accepted, Realistic and Time Dependent (SMART)

III. Look at the alternatives mechanisms for achieving the objectives. Are they appropriate? Are the ones chosen really the “best possible”?

IV. Have the lessons of the past really been understood? Has a study of the effectiveness of the policy been undertaken? Is this being incorporated into the future policy?

V. Was monitoring and evaluation of the previous policy undertaken, and what are the results of this exercise?

VI. Has any effort been made to assess cost effectiveness of the various strategies in the policy


ACP Countries"



Then a final check that during the process of review

I. All other stakeholders have been consulted; interviews, workshops,

consultations by e-mail & web based? II. Problems have been effectively identified?

III. Feed back has been incorporated into the policy review process? IV. Issues on Gender, HIV/AIDS, Equality, fairness, diversity and other priorities

of government policy have been incorporated into any changes proposed V. The new proposals are compliant with international agreements?

VI. The alternative delivery mechanisms has been examined? VII. Did the risk assessment show undue threats to implementation?

VIII. The Objectives are “SMART” Specific, Measurable, Accepted, Realistic and Time Dependent

And ensure that the new policy

I. Will satisfy the needs of the stakeholders in the short and long term

(depending on the length of the policy = 5 years in Swaziland) II. Clearly defines the objectives to be achieved from each strategy

III. Fits in with current practice where this exists, and with all stated government policies, objectives and existing activities

IV. Incorporates the lessons learned from previous implementation V. Covers all the relevant multi-agency aspects

VI. Covers issues arising from implementation, most importantly the level of financing which will be required; and the cost effectiveness of the activities proposed

VII. Contains a monitoring and evaluation process and a timeline.


ACP Countries"



Annex 14: Swaziland: List of Significant Persons and Organisations consulted

1. Principal Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture

2. Under Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture

3. Mr Freddy Magagula, Fisheries Section

4. Mr Johannes Msibi, Fisheries Section

5. Mr Boy Mavuso, Fisheries Section

6. Mr Leone Tarabusi, ACP Fish II Programme

7. Mr Raniero Leto, EU Commission Delegation to the Kingdom of Swaziland

8. Ms Nonceba Noqayi, Komati Basin Water Authority

9. Rev Jameson Mncie, Komati Basin Water Authority

10. Mr Angel Gwebu, Komati Basin Water Authority

11. Mr Sibonangaye Mkhatshwa, Komati Basin Water Authority

12. Visit to rural pond-based fish farmer

13. Visit to a 2nd rural pond-based fish farmers

14. Visit to a small-scale commercial fish farmer, Mrs Nzimande

15. Mr Trevor Shongwe, Department of Water Affairs

16. Mr M Hlophe, Ministry of Commerce

17. Telephonic conversation with representative of Ministry of Finance

18. Ms Constance Dlamini, Environment Authority

19. Mr Diccon Robinson, Sport Fisher

20. Mr Johan Snyman, Sport Fisher

21. Mr Derek von Wissel, National Emergency Response Council on HIV/AIDS

22. Mr Bhekizwe Maziya, SwaziBank

23 Telephonic conversation with Swazi Meat Industry (Veterinary Section)

24 Patric Ginindza - Public Policy Coordination Unit


ACP Countries"



List of attendees at Validation Workshop on 7th April

Name Organisation

Amos V. Khumalo MOA (Fish)

Bongani Masuku MOA-US-DAD

Bonginkosi Shabangu Bank of Swaziland

Bonisile Dlamini MOA-INFO

Calsile Mhlanga SEA

Constance Dlamini SEA

Daniela Isola EU Delegation

Diccon Robinson SWD Angling Association

Freddy Magagula MOA

Johannes Msibi MOA

Lephinah Ndlangamandla MOA

Martin Fakudze MOA

Mavuso Boy R MOA

Momvula Fakudze SBIS

Ndlela Nomfundo MEPD

Petros Simelane DWA

Phindile Dlamini MOA

Rafael Rafael UNISWA

Robert Lindley Facilitator

Sandile Mlambo Trade

Shaheen Moolla Facilitator

Sibonangaye Mkhatshwa KOBWA

Sibusiso Mnisi Trade

Sifiso Sibdandze Times of Swaziland

Spencer Green-Thompson M NR & Energy

Stephen Zuke SEA

Winnie Mavuso Swazi Observer

Xolani Dlamini MOF


ACP Countries"



Annex 15: Swaziland: References

All documents obtained in electronic format have been provided to the Fisheries Section, Ministry of Agriculture on CD, along with all photographs taken during the visit. Hard copies of documents referred to, and not available in electronic format, have been returned to their providers.

Anon (2005) The Abuja Declaration on Sustainable Fisheries and Aquaculture in Africa

Cochrane. K (Ed) (2009) Climate change implications for fisheries and aquaculture. Overview of current scientific knowledge. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical paper 530. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. Rome, 2009

European Commission (2001) Ex Ante Evaluation. A practical guide for preparing proposals for expenditure programmes. EuropeAid Cooperation Office. Brussels.

European Commission (2004) Project Cycle Management Guidelines. EuropeAid Cooperation Office. Brussels.

Fisheries Section Ministry of Agriculture (2004) Fish and Fisheries Survey of Swaziland (2002-2003) South African Institute for Aquatic Biodiversity,(formerly the JLB Smith Institute of Ichthyology,) Grahamstown, South Africa.

Fisheries Section Ministry of Agriculture (2004). Draft Fisheries Policy

Fisheries Section Ministry of Agriculture (2009) Budget for Fisheries Department (2009-2014)

Fisheries Section Ministry of Agriculture (Undated - 2010?). Proposed organisational structure for the Department of Fisheries

Government of Swaziland (2005) Comprehensive Agriculture Sector Wide Policy (CASP) Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations and the Government of the Kingdom of Swaziland (TCP/SWA/2907)

Government of Swaziland (1937) Protection of Fresh Water Fish Act, 75 of 1937

Government of Swaziland (1937) Fresh Water Fish Regulations of 1937

Government of Swaziland (1969) Public Health Act, 1969

Government of Swaziland (2000) The Waste Regulations 2000

Government of Swaziland (2000) The Environmental Audit, Assessment and Review Regulations, 2000 Legal Notice No.31 of 2000

Government of Swaziland (2002) The Environment Management Act, 5 of 2002

Government of Swaziland (2002) The Environmental Audit, Assessment and Review Regulations


ACP Countries"



Government of Swaziland (2003) Swaziland Water Act, 7 of 2003

Government of Swaziland (2005) Draft Comprehensive Agricultural Sector Policy. Ministry of Agriculture

Government of Swaziland (2005) National Food Security Policy

Government of Swaziland (2005) Poverty Reduction Strategy and Action Plan (PRSAP). Ministry of Economic Planning and Development

Government of Swaziland (2005) .The Constitution of the Kingdom of Swaziland Act 2005

Government of Swaziland (2006) Poverty Reduction Strategy and Action Programme, 2006, Vols 1 & 2

Government of Swaziland (2008) Governments programme of action 2008 - 2013 Presented by the Prime Minister to parliament

Government of Swaziland (2008) Komati Basin Development Project, Overview 2008

Government of Swaziland (2010) Swaziland Millennium Goals Progress Report. Ministry of Economic Planning and Development.

Government of Swaziland (undated) Draft National Water Policy

Government of Swaziland (1995) Livestock Development Policy, Ministry of Agriculture. June 1995

Government of Swaziland (1999) The National Development Strategy (NDS) Ministry of Economic Planning and Development (http://www.ecs.co.sz/nds/)

J. Nagoli, E. M. Phiri, E. Kambewa, D. Jamu 2009. Adapting Integrated Agriculture Aquaculture for HIV and AIDS-Affected Households: The case of Malawi. The WorldFish Center Working Paper 1957. The WorldFish Center, Penang, Malaysia.

SADC (1996) Protocol on Trade Web document http://www.sadc.int/

SADC. (2011) Protocol on Fisheries. Web document http://www.sadc.int/

Treaty on the Establishment and Functioning of the Joint Water Commission between the Government of the Kingdom of Swaziland and the Government of the Republic of South Africa www.kobwa.co.za

UNDP (2010) Swaziland Annual Work Plan


ACP Countries"



Annex 16: Swaziland: Validation Meeting Report

A Workshop was held to validate and improve the Draft Fisheries Policy prepared by the Technical Team preparing the policy.

The Workshop was bought forward from the 12th April to 7th April due to industrial action scheduled for the 12th April, and that might have interfered with the ability of the participants to travel.

Location. Happy Valley Hotel Conference Centre, Ezulwini, Swaziland

Date: 7th April 2011

(Comments made at the Validation Meeting were subsequently included in the Draft Final Policy)

Timetable:

8.30am Official Opening

RH Lindley of ACP II project introduced ACP II and the work of the Fisheries Policy team.

Introduction.

Speech by the Undersecretary Ministry of Agriculture

Participants introduce themselves

Objectives of the workshop - RH Lindley

Background to fisheries policy, how the policy was developed - S Moolla KE3

Document overview. Structure, contents, finding ones way around - RH Lindley KE1

Group sessions to discuss contents of draft Fisheries Policy document

Group 1 report back

Lunch

Groups 2 & 3 report

General discussion

Vote of thanks - F Magagula Focal Point ACP II

Workshop ends 16:30

Group discussions topics


ACP Countries"



Each group was given a list of Strategies to discuss amongst themselves. They were asked to:-

1. Suggest sub-strategies that have not been included and should have been

2. Try to define an end objective for each strategy & sub strategy- then ask themselves is that objective realistic? If not then how should the strategy be adjusted so that it has a realistic objective?

3. Present alternatives to any strategy that is considered to be over ambitious, un-fundable or just unrealistic given other constraints. Identify anything that should be dropped completely?

4. Under each main strategy prioritise the sub-strategies. Which ones are core functions of the Ministry, which are less important etc.

5. Suggest what is needed to take each main strategy forward?

Group 1 Participants Considered: Strategy 1 Development of Human resources and skills Improving fisheries training in the Fisheries Section so as to make the staff better able to deliver services Strategy 4: Regulation of Sport or Recreational Fishing Strategy 4.1: Revision of Permit Fees Strategy 4.2: Imposition of Bag limits or Catch Limits Strategy 4.3: Improvement of Catch reporting Strategy 4.4: Creating Designated Sport Fishing Areas Strategy 4.5: Prohibition on sale of fish caught Strategy 4.6: Encouragement of the use of Tag & Release in Sport Fisheries Strategy 4.7: Harvesting of Species to be limited based on 2002/2003 fish survey Strategy 8: Development of commercial cage-based fish farming Strategy 8.1: Strengthening the Role of the Fisheries Section Strategy 8.2: Developing a Permit & Regulation system for cage based aquaculture

Group 2 Participants Considered: Strategy 2 Collaboration with other sectors and bodies Strategy 2.1 Improving Management of Watershed Area Strategy 2.2 Planning for Climate Change Strategy 5: Improvement of Control and Monitoring of the Subsistence Wild Capture Fishing Strategy 5.1: Permit fees for subsistence fishers Strategy 5.2: Imposition of Bag limits or Catch Limits for subsistence fisheries Strategy 5.3: Development of Catch reporting for subsistence fisheries Strategy 5.4: Limitations by species for the subsistence fishery based on 2002/2003 fish survey introduced


ACP Countries"



Strategy 7: Encouragement of small-scale commercial fish farming Strategy 7.1: Strengthening the Role of the Fisheries Section Strategy 7.2: Issuing of Permits Strategy 7.3: Establishing Reporting and Data Capturing Requirements for Small-Scale Commercial Aquaculture Strategy 7.4: Support for private hatcheries

Group 3 Participants Considered: Strategy 3 Institutional Improvement Strategy 3: Institutional Improvement Strategy 3.1: Prioritising fisheries so as to overcome funding constraints Strategy 3.2: Restructuring of the Fisheries Section Strategy 3.3: Reduction in Illegal & Unregulated Fishing Strategy 3.4: Development of regulatory frameworks, fishery management institutions and management systems Strategy 3.5: Improving data collection and data management Strategy 3.6: Food health and fish quality control Strategy 3.7: Ecosystems Approach to Fisheries Management Strategy 3.8: Transboundary fisheries management Strategy 3.9: Import and export of fish and fish products Strategy 3.10: Mitigation of HIV/AIDS Strategy 6: Encouragement of Subsistence Aquaculture Strategy 6.1: Defining the role of the Fisheries Section Strategy 6.2: Issuing of Permits Strategy 6.3 Improvement of the Reporting and Data Capturing Requirements Strategy 6.4 Establishment of fish hatcheries to support subsistence aquaculture

Results: The comments made on the various strategies and activities proposed in the draft strategy were:

Strategy 1: Development of human resources and skills

The Ministry needs to do a needs assessment and analyse and derive a plan to match with proposed policy objectives.

There is an issue regarding vacancies that need to be filled

Training manuals for staff and community bodies

Involve school goers and educate them about fisheries and conservation - KOBWA has invested in schools education.


ACP Countries"



Strategy 2: Collaboration with other sectors and institutions

Strategy 2.1: Improving Management of Watershed Areas

Utilize terminology “water pollution from development activities”

Add bullet points for activities such as deforestation and uncontrolled veld fires

What about municipal waste leakage that affects ground water?

There is a concern about the timeframe for each of the working groups

Strategy 2.2: Planning for Climate Change

Accepted as is

Strategy 3: Institutional Improvement

Re-Prioritized strategies and order of flow.

Strategy 3.1: Prioritising fisheries so as to overcome funding constraints

Need increased budget.

Seek funding from donors and partnerships to raise funds.

Strategy 3.2: Restructuring of the Fisheries Section

Undertake consultation with and identification of stakeholders – sector-wide approach including KOBWA, trade etc.

Re organogram, staff numbers need reviewing. For example, will need at least 4 fco’s, technical officers should increase to 8. This is an example.

Strategy 3.3: Reduction in Illegal & Unregulated Fishing

Unchanged

Strategy 3.4: Development of regulatory frameworks, fishery management institutions and management systems

Unchanged

Strategy 3.4.1 Updating current fisheries laws and regulations

Unchanged

Strategy 3.4.2 Stocking of Alien and Invasive Fish Species

Unchanged

Strategy 3.5: Improving data collection and data management

Change to “information management systems”

Information must not only be collected but also shared with stakeholders.

Systems are needed in this regard

Information management system must start with info gathering, analysis and then sharing via extension officers, media.


ACP Countries"



Strategy 3.6: Food health and fish quality control

Accepted but noted that this must comply with the bio-safety bill particularly concerning Genetically Modified Organisms and obligations under the Cartagena Protocol

Strategy 3.7: Ecosystems Approach to Fisheries Management

Unchanged

Strategy 3.8: Transboundary fisheries management

Unchanged

Strategy 3.9: Import and export of fish and fish products

Unchanged

Strategy 3.10: Mitigation of HIV/AIDS

Unchanged

Strategy 4: Regulation of Sport or Recreational Fishing

Unchanged

Strategy 4.1: Revision of Permit Fees

Different types of permits for sport and subsistence,

Permits must be paid for by sport fishing as they benefit from a public resource and this should be enforced by fisheries with local authorities and fishing bodies.

Strategy 4.2: Imposition of Bag limits or Catch Limits

Agree with this - a bag limit should be placed

Strategy 4.3: Improvement of Catch reporting

Agree with this - Fishing bodies already collect data and this could be used as well

Strategy 4.4: Creating Designated Sport Fishing Areas

Not designated - instead “preferred areas” reserved for particular purposes such as sport fishing where fish is only caught and released.

Also supported creation of conservation areas where fish spawn and these areas need protection from harvesting

Perhaps consider “fishing priority areas”

Strategy 4.5: Prohibition on sale of fish caught

Sport fishers will be prohibited from selling, bartering or exchanging for commercial benefit the fish harvested under a sport fishing permit.

Agree

Strategy 4.6: Encouragement of the use of Tag & Release in Sport Fisheries

Drop reference to Tag and release and use “catch and release” instead as sport fishers do not harvest any fish.


ACP Countries"



Strategy 4.7: Harvesting of Species to be limited based on 2002/2003 fish survey

Delete because the sector does not harvest any fish.

Strategy 5: Improvement of Control and Monitoring of the Subsistence Wild Capture Fishing

Unchanged

Strategy 5.1: Permit fees for subsistence fishers

Accepted policy

Strategy 5.2: Imposition of Bag limits or Catch Limits for subsistence fisheries

Accepted policy

Strategy 5.3: Development of Catch reporting for subsistence fisheries

Accepted policy

Strategy 5.4: Limitations by species for the subsistence fishery based on 2002/2003 fish survey introduced

Accepted policy

Strategy 6: Encouragement of Subsistence Aquaculture

Strategy 6.1: Defining the role of the Fisheries Section

Insert 6.4 here as 6.2

Strategy 6.2: Issuing of Permits

Group says that because its subsistence fish farming, permit should not be required.

Other forms of subsistence farming do not require permits.

Instead of permits, subsistence farmers should rather register with the Ministry and submit data as below. DEBATE: Commerce Dept believes that permits must be required but zero-rated and access decentralized.

Strategy 6.3 Improvement of the Reporting and Data Capturing Requirements

Will instead use agricultural extension officers to collect data - no reporting.

Strategy 6.4 Establishment of fish hatcheries to support subsistence aquaculture

Accepted as is

Strategy 7: Encouragement of small-scale commercial fish farming

Accepted

Strategy 7.1: Strengthening the Role of the Fisheries Section

Accepted policy but add bullet points that Ministry must subsidize access to construction machinery for ponds at subsidized rates to assist commercialization of fish farming. But this is not realistic (Ministry of Agriculture). Government must create the environment in which this can be more easily accessed.


ACP Countries"



In addition markets for fish should be found by the ministry. However, markets should be identified first by fishers and then fish farmed for this purpose. Further response was that because the sector concerned fishers, the state should provide support by identifying markets. Ministry of Agriculture raised concerns about making this an obligation. Government must provide a conducive environment to support access to markets.

Strategy 7.2: Issuing of Permits

Accepted policy

Strategy 7.3: Establishing Reporting and Data Capturing Requirements for Small-Scale Commercial Aquaculture.

Accepted policy but Ministry must adopt data management system.

With regard to the monthly reporting obligation, the group considers monthly reporting realistic.

Reports to be submitted to agriculture extension officers in each rural development area.

Strategy 7.4: Support for private hatcheries

Accepted policy

Strategy 8: Development of commercial cage-based fish farming

Strategy 8.1: Strengthening the Role of the Fisheries Section

Instead of “cage based” rather use “intensive commercial fish farming” as restricting the description to only cages may be not sustainable.

Strategy 8.2: Developing a Permit & Regulation system for cage based aquaculture

Accepted


ACP Countries"



List of those attending

Name Organisation

Bongani Masuku MOA-US-DAD

Sifiso Sibdandze Times of Swaziland

Momvula Fakudze SBIS

Bonginkosi Shabangu Bank of Swaziland

Petros Simelane DWA

Lephinah Ndlangamandla MOA

Mavuso Boy R MOA

Stephen Zuke SEA

Ndlela Nomfundo MEPD

Amos V. Khumalo MOA (Fish)

Spencer Green-Thompson M NR & Energy

Sibonangaye Mkhatshwa KOBWA

Constance Dlamini SEA

Diccon Robinson SWD Angling Association

Calsile Mhlanga SEA

Bonisile Dlamini MOA-INFO

Rafael Rafael UNISWA

Xolani Dlamini MOF

Phindile Dlamini MOA

Freddy Magagula MOA

Martin Fakudze MOA

Johannes Msibi MOA

Sibusiso Mnisi Trade

Sandile Mlambo Trade

Winnie Mavuso Swazi Observer

Daniela Isola EU Delegation

Shaheen Moolla Facilitator

Robert Lindley Facilitator


ACP Countries"


Press reporting - Times of Swaziland April 8th 2011



ACP Countries"




ACP Countries"

