PROJECT IDENTIFICATION FORM (PIF)
PROJECT TYPE: Full-sized Project
TYPE OF TRUST FUND:GEF Trust Fund
For more information about GEF, visit TheGEF.org
PART I: PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Title:
Country(ies):
GEF Agency(ies):
Other Executing Partner(s):
GEF Focal Area(s):
Integrated Approach Pilot
Name of parent program:
Pacific Islands Regional Oceanscape Program (PROP)
Pacific Islands region
GEF Project ID:1
WB (select) (select)
GEF Agency Project ID:
Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency
Submission Date:
2014-08-25
(FFA); Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat
Oceanscape Unit; Marshall Islands Marine
Resources Authority (MIMRA); Solomon
Islands Ministry of Fisheries and Marine
Resources (MFMR); and Tuvalu Fisheries
Department (TFD)
Multi-focal Areas
Project Duration (Months)
IAP-Cities
IAP-Commodities
IAP-Food Security
Corporate Program: SGP
[if applicable]
Agency Fee ($)
598,630
A. INDICATIVE FOCAL AREA STRATEGY FRAMEWORK AND OTHER PROGRAM STRATEGIES2
Objectives/Programs (Focal Areas, Integrated Approach Pilot, Corporate
Programs)
BD-1 Program 1 (select) (select)
BD-3 Program 6 (select) (select)
IW-3 Program 6 (select) (select)
IW-3 Program 7 (select) (select)
(select) (select) (select)
(select) (select) (select)
(select) (select) (select)
(select) (select) (select)
(select) (select) (select)
Trust Fund
GEFTF
GEFTF
GEFTF
GEFTF
(select)
(select)
(select)
(select)
(select)
Total Project Cost
(in $)
GEF Project CoFinancing
financing
1,369,863
5,000,000
1,369,863
5,000,000
1,780,822
6,170,000
1,780,822
6,000,000
6,301,370
22,170,000
B. INDICATIVE PROJECT DESCRIPTION SUMMARY
Project Objective: To strengthen coastal ecosystem management in the Pacific Islands region and sustainably finance
the conservation of at least 3 large Pacific marine protected areas
(in $)
Financing
Trust
GEF
CoProject Component
Project Outcomes
Type3
Fund
Project
financing
Financing
Link sustainable marine
TA
Formation of a regional or sub-regional
GEFTF
450,000 11,520,000
products to regional
grouping to harmonize regional
markets
management approaches
Conservation of critical
TA
(a) Catalytic and sustainable financing
GEFTF 5,851,37 10,000,000
marine habitats
leveraged for at least 3 large Pacific
0
marine protected areas; (b) ecosystembased coastal management is: expanded
to an additional 14 attols in RMI;
strengthened amongs 50 communities n
Solomon Islands; and leads to restoration
of Funafuti lagoon in Tuvalu
(select)
(select)
1
2
Project ID number will be assigned by GEFSEC and to be entered by Agency in subsequent document submissions.
When completing Table A, refer to the excerpts on GEF 6 Results Frameworks for GETF, LDCF and SCCF.
3
Financing type can be either investment or technical assistance.
GEF-6 PIF Template-July 2014
1
(select)
(select)
(select)
(select)
(select)
(select)
(select)
(select)
(select)
(select)
(select)
(select)
(select)
(select)
Subtotal
6,301,370
Project Management Cost (PMC)4 GEFTF
0
6,301,370
Total Project Cost
If Multi-Trust Fund project :PMC in this table should be the total and enter trust fund PMC breakdown here (
)
4
21,520,000
650,000
22,170,000
For GEF Project Financing up to $2 million, PMC could be up to10% of the subtotal; above $2 million, PMC could be up to 5% of the subtotal.
PMC should be charged proportionately to focal areas based on focal area project financing amount in Table D below.
GEF-6 PIF Template-July 2014
2
C. INDICATIVE SOURCES OF CO-FINANCING FOR THE PROJECT BY NAME AND BY TYPE, IF AVAILABLE
Sources of CoType of CoName of Co-financier
Amount ($)
financing
financing
GEF Agency
Donor Agency
Recipient Government
(select)
(select)
(select)
Total Co-financing
World Bank
Government of New Zealand
Marshall Islands Marine Resource Authority
Grants
In-kind
In-kind
(select)
(select)
(select)
6,200,000
13,270,000
2,700,000
22,170,000
D. INDICATIVE TRUST FUND RESOURCES REQUESTED BY AGENCY(IES), COUNTRY(IES) AND THE
PROGRAMMING OF FUNDS A)
(in $)
Country/
GEF
GEF
Trust
Programming
Agency Total
Regional/
Focal Area
Project
Agency Fund
of Funds
Global
Financing Fee (b)b) (c)=a+b
(a)
WB
GEFTF
Pacific Islands
Region
International Waters
(select as applicable)
2,191,781 208,219 2,400,000
WB
GEFTF
Republic of the
Marshall Islands
Biodiversity
(select as applicable)
1,826,484
173,516
2,000,000
WB
GEFTF
Tuvalu
Biodiversity
(select as applicable)
913,242
86,758
1,000,000
WB
GEFTF
Solomon Islands
International Waters
(select as applicable)
1,369,863 130,137 1,500,000
6,301,370
Total GEF Resources
a)
b)
598,630
6,900,000
No need to fill this table if it is a single agency, single trust fund, single focal area and single country project
Refer to the Fee Policy for GEF Partner Agencies.
E. PROJECT PREPARATION GRANT (PPG)5
Is Project Preparation Grant requested? Yes
No
If no, skip item E.
PPG AMOUNT REQUESTED BY AGENCY(IES), TRUST FUND, COUNTRY(IES) AND THE PROGRAMMING OF FUNDS
Project Preparation Grant amount requested: $
GEF
Agency
Trust
Fund
Country/
Regional/Global
(select)
(select)
(select)
(select)
(select)
(select)
Total PPG Amount
5
6
Focal Area
(select)
(select)
(select)
PPG Agency Fee:
Programming
of Funds
(in $)
Agency
Fee6 (b)
PPG (a)
(select as applicable)
(select as applicable)
(select as applicable)
0
0
Total
c=a+b
0
0
0
0
PPG requested amount is determined by the size of the GEF Project Financing (PF) as follows: Up to $50k for PF upto $1 mil; $100k for PF
up to $3 mil; $150k for PF up to $6 mil; $200k for PF up to $10 mil; and $300k for PF above $10m. On an exceptional basis, PPG amount
may differ upon detailed discussion and justification with the GEFSEC.
PPG fee percentage follows the percentage of the Agency fee over the GEF Project Financing amount requested.
GEF-6 PIF Template-July 2014
3
F. PROJECT’S TARGET CONTRIBUTIONS TO GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS7
Provide the expected project targets as appropriate.
4.
Corporate Results
1. Maintain globally significant biodiversity
and the ecosystem goods and services that
it provides to society
Replenishment Targets
Improved management of landscapes and
seascapes covering 300 million hectares
2. Sustainable land management in
production systems (agriculture,
rangelands, and forest landscapes)
3. Promotion of collective management of
transboundary water systems and
implementation of the full range of policy,
legal, and institutional reforms and
investments contributing to sustainable use
and maintenance of ecosystem services
120 million hectares under sustainable land
management
4. Support to transformational shifts
towards a low-emission and resilient
development path
5. Increase in phase-out, disposal and
reduction of releases of POPs, ODS,
mercury and other chemicals of global
concern
750 million tons of CO2e mitigated (include both
direct and indirect)
6. Enhance capacity of countries to
implement MEAs (multilateral
environmental agreements) and
mainstream into national and sub-national
policy, planning financial and legal
frameworks
Water-food-ecosystems security and conjunctive
management of surface and groundwater in at
least 10 freshwater basins;
20% of globally over-exploited fisheries (by
volume) moved to more sustainable levels
Disposal of 80,000 tons of POPs (PCB, obsolete
pesticides)
Reduction of 1000 tons of Mercury
Project Targets
To be calculated
based on the coastal
area with introduced
or strengthened
ecosystems
management and the
area of the 3 large
MPAs to be identified
during preparation
for sustainable
financing.
Preliminary estimate
is 0.5 million hectares
hectares
Number of freshwater
basins
Percent of fisheries,
by volume To be
calculated based on
volume of Pacific
Islands coastal
fisheries moved to a
more sustainable
managemen (tentative
target -10% for PICs,
0.5% globally)
metric tons
metric tons
metric tons
Phase-out of 303.44 tons of ODP (HCFC)
Development and sectoral planning frameworks
integrate measurable targets drawn from the
MEAs in at least 10 countries
ODP tons
Number of Countries:
Functional environmental information systems
are established to support decision-making in at
least 10 countries
Number of Countries:
PART II: PROJECT JUSTIFICATION
Project Overview
7
Provide those indicator values in this table to the extent applicable to your proposed project. Progress in programming against these targets
for the projects per the Corporate Results Framework in the GEF-6 Programming Directions, will be aggregated and reported during midterm and at the conclusion of the replenishment period. There is no need to complete this table for climate adaptation projects financed
solely through LDCF and/or SCCF.
GEF-6 PIF Template-July 2014
4
A.1. Project Description. Briefly describe: 1) the global environmental and/or adaptation problems, root causes and
barriers that need to be addressed; 2) the baseline scenario or any associated baseline projects, 3) the proposed
alternative scenario, with a brief description of expected outcomes and components of the project, 4)
incremental/additional cost reasoning and expected contributions from the baseline, the GEFTF, LDCF, SCCF, and
co-financing; 5) global environmental benefits (GEFTF) and/or adaptation benefits (LDCF/SCCF); and 6)
innovativeness, sustainability and potential for scaling up.
1) Global environmental problems, root causes and barriers.
The Pacific Islands Ocean Region covers some 11 percent of the world’s ocean area and is home to 22 small island
countries and territories. The economies of Pacific Island countries (PICs), 11 of whom are members of the Bank, are
fundamentally shaped by this geography as much as any other feature. Essentially some 9 million people live on
hundreds of islands covering roughly 40 million square kilometers of the earth’s surface, compared to approximately
40 million people living in the much smaller area (2.75 million sq. km.) of the Caribbean. The archipelagic nature of
most PICs, and their strong reliance on coastal ecosystems for food, weather protection, resilience against shocks,
and other services means that they fundamentally depend on healthy ocean environments and resources.
Natural coastal habitats of PICs are increasingly degraded or threatened throughout the region (particularly coral reef
ecosystems which have declined 38 percent since 1980) as a result of coastal development, destructive fishing
practices, inadequate watershed management (agriculture and logging), sewage and other forms of pollution from
cities, ships and industry, solid waste disposal and mining of coastal aggregates, among others.
A number of recent analyses make a compelling case for the introduction of management reforms to reduce fishing
effort, protect or enhance the supporting ecosystems, and generate key economic benefits as a contribution to growth
and welfare (World Bank and FAO, 2009; Prince’s Charities, 2012; CEA, 2012). Introducing such policies and
management reforms represents a significant opportunity to protect and conserve fragile marine ecosystems,
benefiting coastal communities, countries and the global economy at large. Nowhere are the marine ecosystems and
associated services more important to livelihoods, food security and the economic growth of countries than in the
Pacific Ocean. In the aggregate, Pacific Ocean ecosystems such as coral reefs represent a tremendous endowment of
shared natural capital throughout the region. Unfortunately, like so much of the world, the natural capital of the
Pacific Ocean has been systematically undervalued over the last two decades, and increasingly overdrawn.
Strengthening community-led coastal ecosystems management and protecting of critical ocean habitats from
specified uses (including terrestrial habitats in the coastal zone that can impact ocean ecosystems) often provides
benefits that extend far beyond the boundaries of the targeted area, for example in terms of replenishing adjacent
fishing grounds due to the protection of spawning grounds, supporting low-environmental impact (but often highvalue) tourism, reducing the risk from natural hazards to nearby communities or cities as in the case of mangrove
protection, maintaining carbon sequestration capacity, and supporting globally significant biodiversity.
The barriers to addressing these global environmental problems in the Pacific Ocean are the policy and institutional
frameworks (including legal, fiscal and management arrangements) for more sustainable use, and the resources
needed to implement them. For the coastal habitats, effective models based on community/stakeholder empowerment
for resource management exist, but need to be scaled up significantly in order to achieve impact.
2) Baseline projects.
The baseline project to address these challenges is the proposed Pacific Islands Regional Oceanscape Program
(PROP). To overcome the barriers to addressing the environmental problems described above, the objective of the
PROP is to strengthen the management of selected Pacific Island oceanic and coastal fisheries, as the basis for
sustainable and increased economic benefits from this resource. This will be achieved through investments in: (i)
sustainable management of oceanic fisheries; (ii) sustainable management of coastal fisheries, and (iii) regional
coordination, implementation support, training and monitoring and evaluation. PROP investments will be made as a
GEF-6 PIF Template-July 2014
5
series of interdependent and overlapping projects to multiple recipients/borrowers, who are facing a common set of
environmental problems and share common development goals. Each of the projects is self-standing and will finance
a different eligible recipient/borrower, and each is expected to last approximately six years. The eleven PICs who are
member countries of the World Bank are eligible to participate, as all share the transboundary fisheries and fish
resources, as well as the natural habitats upon which they depend. The first five projects in the series are expected to
be approved in late 2014 for the countries of the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), the Republic of the Marshall
Islands (RMI), the Solomon Islands and Tuvalu, and to the Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA).
Subsequent projects are envisaged starting in 2015 for additional eligible countries. Taken together, the series of
operations is expected to span 9 years, at the end of which it will have covered all eleven eligible PICs.
The PROP has a shared development objective and approach, i.e. a common framework, meaning that each project in
the series has similar design features, drawing from the general framework or menu of components and activities
eligible for support, while the specifics are different in each country. This common framework, or menu, from which
countries can draw, includes the following:
•
Component 1: Sustainable Management of Oceanic Fisheries. This component aims to help participating
Pacific Island countries strengthen the management of the region’s purse seine and long-line tuna fisheries. Towards
this objective, the component includes both regional and national activities to: (i) strengthen the capacity of national
and regional institutions to sustainably manage Pacific Island tuna fisheries; and (ii) ensure an equitable distribution
within Pacific Island countries of the benefits of sustainably managed tuna fisheries.
•
Component 2: Sustainable Management of Coastal Fisheries. This component aims to support participating
countries to sustainably manage defined coastal fisheries, focusing on those with the greatest potential for increased
benefits, i.e. coastal fisheries such as bêche-de-mer (BDM) that (i) can generate export earnings for the country,
and/or (ii) support livelihoods, food security and dietary health. Towards this objective, this component includes both
regional and national activities to: (i) empower stakeholders to sustainably manage targeted coastal fisheries in
participating countries; and (ii) link sustainable coastal fish products to regional markets.
•
Component 3: Sustainable Financing of the Conservation of Critical Fishery Habitats. This component aims
to help identify revenue streams to sustainably finance the conservation of critical habitats that underpin oceanic and
coastal fisheries in the region. Towards this objective, the component will include both regional and national
activities to establish: (i) Pacific Marine Conservation Development Financing Mechanisms to support the growing
number of large marine protected areas (MPAs) in the region; and (ii) a pilot Pacific Blue Carbon regional program
for small to medium scale fishery habitats. The aim of this component is not to provide sustainable financing for all
regionally-significant fisheries habitat conservation efforts, but rather to provide the catalytic upstream finance
needed to identify, develop and achieve consensus on the mechanisms to deliver such financing, and then to assist
countries to secure this financing, for example from the GEF, international foundations, etc. Thus the financing from
this component aims to leverage significant additional finance to the region for conservation of critical fishery
habitats.
Component 4: Regional Coordination, Implementation Support, Training and Monitoring and Evaluation. This
component aims to provide regional coordination, implementation support and program management, to ensure a
coherent approach to program implementation and wide dissemination of results and lessons learned; as well as
regional and national implementation support and training as needed for the program to achieve its objectives.
Towards this objective, this component includes both regional and national activities to: (i) support a program
management unit within FFA for implementation support to participating countries; (ii) share knowledge and
outreach globally; (iii) support the Oceanscape Unit within the Pacific Island Forum Secretariat to monitor program
progress within the wider context of the Pacific Oceanscape Framework; and (iv) support program management,
monitoring and evaluation in each participating country.
Other initiatives in the Pacific Islands region include:
•
GEF-funded Reef-to-Ridge (R2R) Program ($82.9 million), implemented by UNEP/UNDP/FAO
•
IFC investments (e.g. SolTuna project)
•
The New Zealand Aid Programme provides $3.3 million per year to the FFA for tuna fisheries management,
development and compliance services to its Pacific Island members. In recent years New Zealand has worked closely
with the Cook Islands and Solomon Islands in strengthening the agencies responsible for managing fisheries
GEF-6 PIF Template-July 2014
6
resources. Mekem Strong Solomon Islands Fisheries is a 5-10 year programme of support to Solomon Islands to
develop the fisheries and marine resources sector
•
GEF/UNEP project on Blue Forest - "Standartized methodologies for Carbon Acounting and Ecosystem
SErvices Valuation of Blue Forests"
3) Proposed alternative scenario and expected outcomes.
The baseline PROP Phase I program focuses heavily on investments in the sustainable management of fisheries, with
a more limited focus on directly addressing the threats to the ecosystems and the biodiversity they support.
E.g. in relation to the MPAs, the baseline program includes technical assistance to identify clear criteria for
sustainable financing based on costs and benefits, target priority areas for such financing (i.e. Pacific Ocean ‘arcs’),
and establish innovative financing mechanisms for at least 3 large MPAs, including coastal refugia. However, the
baseline program does not include any funding to capitalize the 3 innovative financing mechanisms it tries to
establish, nor does it.
For this reason, additional GEF funding is requested over a six-year period to help provide and leverage revenue
streams to sustainably finance the conservation of critical habitats that underpin the oceanic and coastal fisheries in
the region, in at least 3 large MPAs; to link sustainable marine products to the regional markets; and to support three
of the four countries to scale up efforts to empower coastal stakeholders and communities to legally and sustainably
manage defined ecosystems and associated services. The alternative scenario to the baseline, and the expected
outcomes, are presented below.
Proposed GEF project components:
GEF Component 1: Link Sustainable Marine Products to Regional Markets
$0.5 million GEF funding is requested for Component 2.2 of the PROP to mediate the formation of a regional or subregional fishery grouping to harmonize regional management approaches, exploit collective management or
bargaining opportunities, and other actions to advance the economic interests of participating Pacific islands
countries. These activities would be implemented regionally, via a sub-grant to the SPC:
In parallel with national efforts to restore BDM fisheries, mediate the formation of a regional or sub-regional
BDM fishery grouping to advance the economic interests of participating PI countries. Regional technical assistance
and convening would be provided to harmonize economic and other management arrangements, developing
minimum terms and conditions of resource access, establishing a regional register of responsible/ compliant BDM
industry participants, maximizing the leverage available through collective bargaining and action, and promoting
exchange of technical information in support of national-level management initiatives. The proposed arrangement
would mainly be of interest to the main BDM-producing Pacific Island countries (those of Melanesia) but, as with
PNA, countries with lower levels of production would also benefit from the bargaining power generated by the larger
producers. The proposed BDM arrangement will almost certainly be built on an existing regional or sub-regional
grouping of countries, and may ultimately be extended to cover other coastal fishery resources, particularly trochus,
another high-value export product.
Ongoing technical support to countries with BDM and coastal fisheries management (e.g. a ‘BDM task
force’), including support to assess potential biological, economic and fiscal management tools for BDM and other
export-oriented coastal fishery products, which could be applied at the national level as part of an integrated suite of
management arrangements that involve both CBM and MCS. This would also include periodically updated
assessments of BDM production, price and market trends and other industry monitoring and intelligence; and
development of fishery monitoring tools that can be deployed at national level to enable performance assessment of
fishery management and development activities, and training of national staff from participating countries in their
GEF-6 PIF Template-July 2014
7
use. These tools may possibly be based in part on the fishery monitoring ‘dashboards’ already developed by the Bank
for other countries/ regions.
GEF Component 2: Conservation of Critical Marine Habitats and Coastal Ecosystems Management ($6.4 million
GEF: $3.4 million IW and $3.0 million BD)
a)
Conservation of Critical Habitats in the Pacific Islands Region
$0.5 million GEF funding is requested for Component 3 of the PROP to help strengthen and develop models of
sustainable financing for the conservation of critical habitats that underpin oceanic and coastal fisheries in the region,
following the guiding principles of the Pacific Oceanscape Framework, with the following activities:
Establish a Pacific Marine Conservation Development Fund to support the establishment of large scale
oceanic MPAs, including mechanisms for cost and benefit sharing:
o Assessment of existing and potential new regional sites for large scale marine protected areas.
o Technical assistance for the establishment of a Pacific Marine Conservation Development Fund, including
among others, (i) a Regional Conservation Trading Scheme; (ii) piloting an Ecosystem Services Market; and (iii)
Regional Assurance Funding.
o Technical assistance, training and exchange of lessons learned to individual Pacific Island countries hosting
large MPAs.
Establish a pilot Pacific Blue Carbon regional program for the conservation of small to medium scale marine
habitats:
o Assessment of opportunities to pair up with established, standards-based mechanisms to pay for carbon
stored (REDD+), identification of opportunities in the voluntary carbon market and development of a Pacific Blue
Carbon Regional Program.
o Development of criteria and identification of 3 to 5 potential pilot trial communities and projects for Blue
Carbon funding.
o Baseline research and development of marine conservation strategies and funding proposals for pilot trial
sites.
b)
National Activities
•
Coastal Ecosystems Management in RMI
An additional $2.0 million GEF funding is requested for Component 2.1 of the PROP to support the expansion of the
Government’s Reimaanlok (looking forward) program to legally empower coastal communities to sustainably
manage defined coastal ecosystems, to the remaining 14 atolls in the country. The expected outcome from GEF
funding for this project is to expand the scope of the PROP to support community ecosystem-based management in
all 24 atolls of RMI. The Government has launched the Reimaanlok (Looking Forward) program to empower
communities to manage natural resources, both marine and terrestrial, in the outer islands, in some cases coupled
with support to increase market access for fishery products. The Reimaanlok process is currently limited in coverage
due to funding and logistical constraints, but the Government is aiming to extend it to all atolls. The baseline PROP
project will only provide IDA financing to support the extension of this support to 10 of the 24 atolls. In each case,
Marshall Islands Marine Resources Authority (MIMRA) will work closely with communities to assess the status of
the coastal resources and the ecosystems that support them, and develop legally-recognized management measures.
The main transformational change will be robust local management of the reef ecosystems in the Marshall Islands, as
communities are supported to develop and introduce enhanced resource management measures that are recognized in
law. These efforts will empower communities to conserve critical coastal habitats such as coral reef systems, and
more broadly to strengthen local institutions working with multiple actors and stakeholders to better manage the
coastal resources.
•
Coastal Ecosystems Management in Solomon Islands
GEF-6 PIF Template-July 2014
8
GEF funding is proposed for Component 2.1 of the PROP to expand the Government’s recent pilots in communitybased management of coastal resources throughout the country. The expected outcome from GEF funding for this
project is to support the Solomon Islands to adopt an ecosystem approach in managing coastal habitats sustainably,
focusing on those with the greatest potential for increased benefits. This effort would build upon the country’s
system of customary ownership of marine and coastal resources, and help incorporate and strengthen such systems in
the context of the formal legal framework. The main transformational change will be the re-establishment of local
management of the Solomon Islands’ coastal and reef ecosystems, as communities throughout the archipelago are
supported to develop and introduce enhanced resource management measures that are recognized in law as
Provincial Ordinances. Such inclusive institutions create better incentives for sustainable marine resource use and
conservation, and help traditional systems adapt to changing patterns of use due to population growth and technology
increases. Such efforts will also empower coastal fishing communities to conserve critical habitats such as mangrove
areas and the coral reef ecosystems, and more broadly to strengthen local institutions working with multiple actors
and stakeholders to better manage the coastal fisheries.
•
Coastal Ecosystems Management in Tuvalu
An additional $1.0 million GEF funding is proposed for Component 2.1 of the PROP to support integrated
stakeholder management and restoration of Funafuti lagoon and the fisheries it supports. Funafuti, the capital island
in Tuvalu, presents a special case which is quite different from the country’s other islands. Urban drift has led to
significant overcrowding (more than 50 percent of the national population now lives on Funafuti) and the presence of
sub-communities from all of Tuvalu’s islands leads to reduced compliance of decisions made by traditional leaders.
High population densities (6,500 people in an area of only 2 sq. km) have led to problems of sewage and solid waste
disposal, and these have in turn impacted on lagoon water quality and fish resources. Management of the lagoon
ecosystem has not kept pace with population growth in Funafuti. This project would provide the resources needed to
support TFD to improve management of the Funafuti lagoon and its fishery resources, via enhanced resource
monitoring and surveys, development with stakeholders of a management plan for the lagoon fishery and the wider
ecosystem, and enhanced awareness-raising and surveillance for enforcement.
The investments in each of the country above is expected to generate significant regional spill-over benefits and will
provide a platform for harmonization of regional coastal ecosystem management and fisheries policy. Regional
coordination among participating countries will be important for ensuring a coherent approach to program
implementation and wide dissemination of results and lessons learned.
4) Incremental/additional cost reasoning.
The total GEF6 funding requested is $6.9 million over 6 years, with total co-financing of $22.17 million. This
represents the additional cost of achieving the expected outcomes of (i) formation of a regional or sub-regional
grouping to harmonize regional management approaches, (ii) catalyzing sustainable finance of the effective
management of at least 3 large MPAs in the Pacific islands region; (iii) expanding the scope of the PROP to
community-led coastal ecosystems management in RMI (expanding ecosystems management to an additional 14
atolls), Solomon Islands (adopting ecosystems approach in coastal management among 50 communities) and Tuvalu
(strengthening ecosystems management to restore Funafuti lagoon) .
5) Global environmental benefits.
The expected global environmental benefits of the GEF funding in the Pacific would be to empower coastal
communities to conserve critical habitats such as mangrove areas and coral reefs, and more broadly to strengthen
local institutions working with multiple actors and stakeholders to better manage the coastal resources.
6) Innovativeness, sustainability and potential for scaling up.
The innovativeness, sustainability and potential for scaling up is significant, as the project’s support to local
communities for coastal ecosystems management will be a model that can be replicated throughout the Pacific
Islands region, often with the support of the PROP.
GEF-6 PIF Template-July 2014
9
A.2. Stakeholders. Will project design include the participation of relevant stakeholders from civil society and
indigenous people? (yes
/no ) If yes, identify key stakeholders and briefly describe how they will be engaged in
project design/preparation:
Project design will reflect a framework prepared with stakeholders in order to ensure that the processes of (i)
formation of regional/sub-regional grouping to harmonize management aproaches, (ii) managing large MPAs, and
(iii) introducing reforms to work with communities and develop legally-recognizes coastal ecosystem management
measures, are consultative and consensus-driven. The key stakeholders are the coastal fishing communities in and
around the areas identified.
A.3. Gender Considerations. Are gender considerations taken into account? (yes
/no ). If yes, briefly describe
how gender considerations will be mainstreamed into project preparation, taken into account the differences, needs,
roles and priorities of men and women.
It is estimated that between 135,000 and 340,000 women, out of a total of 4.8 million in the Pacific Islands region,
are involved in the fisheries sector in varying degrees. However, cultural norms and traditional gender roles impact
on women’s participation. Women are restrained by multiple obligations, limited time and mobility and therefore,
traditional fishing activities in the Pacific Islands are generally segregated, with men focusing on offshore areas, and
women's activities usually confined to inshore catchment areas including fishing and collecting or gleaning a number
of species from the reef. Women are also increasingly taking up economic opportunities offered by small businesses
involved in other areas the fisheries sector, such as eco-tourism, post-harvest and processing, aquaculture, marketing
and trading.
A.4 Risk. Indicate risks, including climate change, potential social and environmental risks that might prevent the
project objectives from being achieved, and, if possible, propose measures that address these risks to be further
developed during the project design (table format acceptable):
Risks to the Program’s success include weak implementation capacity, social aspects of coastal fisheries
management, and climate change. These risks are described below, including their rating and mitigation measures.
Risk -- Design: the program has a large number of stakeholders and relatively weak implementation capacity in some
cases, due to limited human resources
Rating -- Substantial
Risk Mitigation Measures -- To manage this risk, the Program Support Unit in FFA will work with participating
countries, whose efforts will be focused around a core and targeted set of activities. FFA has demonstrated capacity,
and will provide real-time support when needed by participating countries.
Risk -- Social aspects of coastal fisheries management: some traditional users may have access to resources limited
or reduced as a result of new management measures.
Rating -- Moderate
Risk Mitigation Measures -- To manage this risk, the Program includes a process framework as part of the
Environmental and Social Management Framework, ensuring a consultative process is followed in supporting
stakeholder groups to manage defined coastal fisheries.
Risk -- Climate change
Rating -- Substantial
Risk Mitigation Measures -- The Climate and Disaster Risk Screening Tool was completed for the PROP, indicating
sea level rise, strong winds, ocean temperature and acidification being three main hazards for the region - both
historically and with a future potential impact on natural resources, economy and livelihoods of the PICs in general.
Climate change risk is incorporated in project design and will be addressed during implementation phase - through
relevant studies, TORs, consultation and dialogue with stakeholders.
GEF-6 PIF Template-July 2014
10
A.5. Coordination. Outline the coordination with other relevant GEF-financed and other initiatives:
The project will work closely with and suppor the GEF Program for Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (ABNJ),
which supports the Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA) in strengthening management of the tuna fisheries. FFA will also
provide the PROP Program Support Unit, which will help link country projects and investments to regional
management efforts.
DESCRIPTION OF THE CONSISTENCY OF THE PROJECT WITH:
B.1 Is the project consistent with the National strategies and plans or reports and assessements under relevant
conventions? (yes
/no ). If yes, which ones and how: NAPAs, NAPs, ASGM NAPs, MIAs, NBSAPs, NCs,
TNAs, NCSAs, NIPs, PRSPs, NPFE, BURs, etc.:
The health of the Pacific Ocean and the fisheries resources it supports are central to the achievement of the Pacific
Plan, adopted by Pacific Islands Forum (see footnote 5) leaders in 2005 as the master strategy for regional
integration and coordination. Recognizing this, PICs have developed a number of regional policies, policy
frameworks and initiatives to support such efforts. First and foremost, the Pacific Islands Regional Ocean Policy
(PIROP) and the Pacific Islands Regional Ocean Framework for Integrated Strategic Action (PIROF-ISA) were
approved by leaders in 2002 and 2005 respectively, and are referred to in the Pacific Plan. The PIROP’s goal is to
ensure the sustainable use of the Pacific Ocean and its resources by Pacific peoples and external partners. In the
context of the Pacific Plan, PIROP and PIROF-ISA, the Pacific Islands Forum leaders endorsed the Pacific
Oceanscape Framework in 2010, as a framework for policy implementation to better understand and conserve the
Pacific Ocean to guarantee the vision of the Pacific Plan. Leaders tasked the Council of Regional Organizations of
the Pacific (CROP) to support implementation of the respective elements of the Pacific Oceanscape Framework.
These agencies include the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat, the Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC)
including the Applied Geoscience and Technology Division (SOPAC), the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional
Environment Program (SPREP), the Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA) and the University of the South
Pacific (USP). The Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat will house an Oceanscape Unit responsible for monitoring
implementation of the Framework, while FFA provides direct fisheries management services to the Forum’s member
countries, together with the scientific research and assessments provided by SPC.
The health of this natural capital asset is also central to the World Bank’s twin goals to reduce poverty and boost
shared prosperity in the region. Better managed coastal ecosystems, in particular more productive oceanic and
coastal fisheries, will supply Governments with greater revenues for investment and rural communities with more
secure food, nutrition and livelihoods. Specifically, management systems that enhance sustainability of the resource
and increase inclusion of stakeholders in the decision-making process will help ensure that the socio-economic
benefits of the region’s coastal ecosystems are better captured by PICs and their distributive feature is increased. As
such, this Program to promote regional integration for better management of fish resources is one of the key
instruments in the Bank’s regional strategy to support sustained growth and poverty reduction with increased
resilience, together with enhanced natural resource sustainability. The proposed operation is included in the Country
Assistance/Partnership Strategies for the Federated States of Micronesia (FY2014 to 2017), Kiribati (FY2011 to
2014), the Republic of the Marshall Islands (FY2013 – 2016), the Solomon Islands (FY2013 – 2017) and Tuvalu
(FY2012 – 2015). The proposed operation builds upon analytical work published by the Bank in 2009, Fisheries in
the Economies of Pacific Island Countries and Territories, and on a Fisheries Engagement Strategy for the Pacific
Islands Region completed in early 2012.
PART III: APPROVAL/ENDORSEMENT BY GEF OPERATIONAL FOCAL POINT(S) AND GEF
AGENCY(IES)
GEF-6 PIF Template-July 2014
11
A. RECORD OF ENDORSEMENT8 OF GEF OPERATIONAL FOCAL POINT (S) ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT(S):
(Please attach the Operational Focal Point endorsement letter(s) with this template. For SGP, use this SGP OFP
endorsement letter).
DATE (MM/dd/yyyy)
NAME
POSITION
MINISTRY
B. GEF AGENCY(IES) CERTIFICATION
This request has been prepared in accordance with GEF policies9 and procedures and meets the GEF
criteria for project identification and preparation under GEF-6.
Agency Coordinator,
Agency name
Karin Shepardson
Signature
Date
(MM/dd/yyyy)
08/25/2014
Project
Contact
Person
John Virdin
Telephone
Email
(610)4310278
jvirdin@worldbank.org
C. ADDITIONAL GEF PROJECT AGENCY CERTIFICATION (APPLICABLE ONLY TO NEWLY ACCREDITED GEF
PROJECT AGENCIES)
For newly accredited GEF Project Agencies, please download and fill up the required GEF Project Agency Certification
of Ceiling Information Template to be attached as an annex to the PIF.
8
For regional and/or global projects in which participating countries are identified, OFP endorsement letters from these countries are required
even though there may not be a STAR allocation associated with the project.
9 GEF policies encompass all managed trust funds, namely: GEFTF, LDCF, and SCCF
GEF-6 PIF Template-July 2014
12