th
7
SPC HOF meeting
FAME Sustainable Funding
Requirements
WP 4
Background
• HOF #6 in 2009
“voiced concern on the dependence of MRD on project funding,
leading to gaps in service delivery in between large projects;
voiced further concern that with a dominance of project funding,
work priorities may not be responsive to all members and some
members may be excluded from project activities.”
• CRGA in 2009 recommended SPC should
“establish a CRGA subcommittee to guide the development of a longterm financing strategy for SPC, which will include the definition of
SPC core functions and minimum level of services that must be
provided.”
Current FAME Financing
Sustainable Financing Sub-Committee
• 2 meetings during 2010
• Extended consultancy
• Consideration of ‘core business’, ‘most essential
services’
• Consultation with member countries
• Technical Divisions to develop outputs based
budget which identifies priorities and consult with
stakeholders
Essential or long –term?
Should SPC be doing it ?
Does it require ongoing finance?
• Economies of scale
• Development and
synchronisation of standards
across the region
• Regional leadership, strategic
engagement and advocacy
• Capacity building /
supplementation and skills
transfer
• Policy analysis, research and
development
• Systems for data collection,
analysis, reporting and
information dissemination
• Is it an ongoing or fixed term
requirement?
• Is there, or can there be an
exit strategy ?
• What are the impacts if the
service is discontinued?
• Need to be realistic
Examples of fixed-term activities
• Major research projects –
Tagging, ProcFish Coastal
• Capacity development with
handover strategy – Observer
training
• Emerging short-term needs –
OIE & aquarium exports
• ‘One-off’ meetings and
workshops
Some ongoing needs
• Oceanic
Maintenance of the regional
database
Stock assessments
Coordination of biological
research
Oceanographic information
• Coastal
Management – scientific
information and advice
Aquaculture policy/planning and
technical
Development – FADs, Bycatch mitigation
Both Programmes – Coordination and Project Management
- Adjustment for inflation
Current gaps in recurrent funding
• Now
- Operational funding (inc. information)
- OFP administration
- Data entry
- Fisheries Oceanography
• 2013/2014
- Stock assessment/national advice
- Observer training standards
- Coastal fisheries
science/management
- Mariculture development
Financial Requirements
• Strategic plan calls for an annual budget (all
sources) of around 12 Million CFP units at 2010
costs.
• Projections of core requirements would account
for about 45% of this (as opposed to around 30%
funded from current budget).
• Adjustment for increasing costs and a shift of
about 2.7 million units in 2014.
EDF11 - a possible solution?
• The EU is generally moving towards an approach of
sector-based budget support with ACP countries;
• The EU is the largest supporter of SPC fisheries projects,
and has provided funding since the Lome III agreement;
• Continued assistance to the sector under the regional
programme seems likely as fisheries is one of the few
resources important to all countries and territories
eligible for EU funding, and also reflects EU member
interests and priorities.
Recommendations
Heads of Fisheries:
• Are invited to consider the classification of services into ‘ongoing’
and ‘fixed term’ and, subject to any changes that they agree,
endorse the selection of ‘ongoing’ services as those requiring
recurrent or sustainable funding.
• Note the need for significant increases in recurrent funding, both
immediate and particularly in 2014/15.
• Endorse an approach by FAME management to the European Union
to explore options for sustained financing of regional fisheries
programmes under the next round of EU funding (EDF11), as part of
the broader SPC initiative.