P ROJECT T YPE : Full Sized Project
THE GEF T RUST F UND
Submission Date : 19 March 2009
Resubmission : May 21, 2009
PART I: PROJECT IDENTIFICATION
GEFSEC P ROJECT ID 1 : 3941
PROJECT DURATION: 48 months
GEF AGENCY P ROJECT ID: 4242
C OUNTRY : India
P ROJECT T ITLE : Mainstreaming Coastal and Marine Biodiversity
Conservation into Production Sectors in the Malvan Coast,
Maharashtra State, India
GEF A GENCY : UNDP
O THER E XECUTING PARTNERS : Union Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF) and Maharashtra Department of Environment and Forests
GEF F OCAL A REA
2 : Biodiversity
INDICATIVE CALENDAR*
Milestones
Work Program (for FSP)
Expected Dates
(mm/dd/yyyy)
June 2009
CEO Endorsement/Approval October 2010
Agency Approval Date November 2010
Implementation Start December 2010
Mid-term Review (if planned) December 2012
Project Closing Date December 2014
* See guidelines for definition of milestones
GEF-4 S TRATEGIC PROGRAM
SP4: Strengthening the Policy and Regulatory Framework for
Mainstreaming Biodiversity
N AME OF PARENT PROGRAM / UMBRELLA PROJECT : Programme for Mainstreaming Coastal and Marine Biodiversity
Conservation into India’s Production Sectors
A.
P ROJECT FRAMEWORK :
Project Objective : To mainstream coastal and marine biodiversity conservation into production sectors that impact the estuarine and rocky beach ecosystems of the Malvan Coast (Maharashtra State)
Project Components TA/
STA b
Expected Outcomes Expected Outputs Indicative GEF
Financing a
Indicative Cofinancing a
Total USD
USD % USD %
600,000 29% 1,500,000 71% 2,100,000 1. Cross-sectoral planning framework
(spatial and sector development planning) that mainstreams coastal and marine biodiversity conservation, with a special emphasis on an ecosystem approach to fisheries (EAF) management
TA
Pressures on Malvan’s coastal and marine biodiversity primarily from subsistence and commercial fisheries are reduced (potential future threats from mining, tourism and agriculture to be addressed as a proactive/ precautionary measure)
A functioning crosssectoral platform involving
District Planning Dept,
Forest Dept, the Maritime
Board, Dept. of Industries,
Fisheries, Agriculture,
Tourism, Private Sector &
NGOs
An environmentally sustainable economic development plan for
Malvan Coast addressing biodiversity concerns
Approximately 18,000 hectares of coastal landscape and seascape area in
Malvan will be under environmentally sustainable management
Policy and regulatory framework for production sectors sensitized to biodiversity
1
Project ID number will be assigned initially by GEFSEC .
2 Select only those focal areas from which GEF financing is requested
Fisheries sector policies and regulations are in line with environmentally sustainable economic development plan
(including better inclusion of biotic, abiotic and human components of ecosystems in which fisheries operate, development of fish refugia, and exploring market-based incentives
1/ 11

Project Components
2. Institutional strengthening for implementing EAF, and biodiversity mainstreaming
TA/
STA b
TA
Expected Outcomes conservation needs to avoid/ reduce negative impacts of mining and fishing activities (as measured by GEF SO-
2 Tracking Tool)
An operational marine biodiversity information system with monitoring & reporting systems to measure change in baseline data values over time
Population of indicator species (e.g. hawksbill turtles) remain stable
Malvan Marine
Sanctuary (29.12 km 2 ) under improved conservation status
Participation of coastal communities and fishermen societies in the decision making process related to production activities
(e.g., mining, commercial fisheries) that affect biodiversity
Increased knowledge
& skills for integration of environmental management considerations and safeguards into policies, plans and activities of key sectors
UNDP Capacity
Development
Scorecard shows improvement in different indicators
Expected Outputs Indicative GEF
Financing a
USD % for sustainable fisheries through certification)
Other sector policies and regulations are brought in line with the environmentally sustainable economic development plan (e.g.,
EIA legal and policy frameworks governing mining and siting agreements incorporate biodiversity conservation)
Baseline data collected and assessed for marine biodiversity and ecosystem services and their values to feed into land use planning and decision making
(fisheries development, planning of concessions for mining sector)
Awareness generation targeting public and private sector to communicate economic and social value of coastal and marine ecosystems
Through support from the overall Program (IGCMP), sharing of experiences with other western coastal
States and Union
Territories to support replication, and with the
Godavari River project to support cross-fertilization of experiences.
Capacity development strategy, tools and methods including training programmes developed for individual sectors
(fisheries, mining, agriculture, tourism) based on capacity needs assessments
Developing the capacity of staff from the wildlife sanctuary for enforcing regulations within the sanctuary and for participatory planning, including community mobilization and conflict resolution
Institutional mechanism for sustaining capacity development processes
1,000,000 25
Indicative Cofinancing a
USD
3,000,000
%
75
Total USD
4,000,000
2/ 11

Project Components TA/
STA b
Expected Outcomes Expected Outputs Indicative GEF
Financing a
USD %
Indicative Cofinancing a
USD %
Total USD post-project
3. Sustainable natural resource use by communities residing on the Malvan coast
TA At least 50% of hamlets/ villages/ communities living in the project area observe sustainable fishing practices, and have diversified their income opportunities
Community-led resource management mechanism and plan for fisheries resource base (including zoning, season based fishing, monitoring and enforcement)
Livelihood diversification strategy (e.g., nature and cultural tourism, valueadded processing of fish products) and related socio economic interventions based on market and community capacity needs.
1,600,000 25 4,800,000 75 6,400,000
6. Project management 300,000 25 900,000 75 1,200,000
Total project costs 3,500,000 10,200,000 13,700,000 a List the $ by project components. The percentage is the share of GEF and Co-financing respectively to the total amount for the component; b TA =
Technical Assistance; STA = Scientific & technical analysis.
B.
I NDICATIVE C O FINANCING FOR THE PROJECT BY SOURCE and BY NAME (in parenthesis) if available ($):
Sources of Co-financing Type of Co-financing Amount
Project Government Contribution
GEF Agency(ies)
Bilateral Aid Agency(ies)
Multilateral Agency(ies)
Private Sector
NGO
Cash/ In-Kind
Total co-financing
C.
I NDICATIVE F INANCING P LAN S UMMARY F OR T HE P ROJECT (US$):
Previous Project
Preparation Amount (a) 3
Project (b) Agency Fee
10,200,000
10,200,000
Total
GEF
Co-financing
3,500,000
10,200,000
13,700,000
350,000 3,850,000
10,200,000
14,050,000 Total 350,000
D.
GEF R ESOURCES R EQUESTED BY F OCAL A REA ( S ), AGENCY ( IES ) SHARE AND COUNTRY ( IES ): Not applicable.
A. S TATE THE ISSUE , HOW THE PROJECT SEEKS TO ADDRESS IT , AND THE EXPECTED GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL
BENEFITS TO BE DELIVERED :
1.
Located on the western side of the Indian Peninsula, the state of Maharashtra is among the top 5 states in India (out of
29 states and 6 Union Territories) in terms of overall species diversity 3 . The Western Ghats – that start near the border of
Gujarat and Maharashtra in the north and run through to the southern tip of India – is one of the world’s 12 mega centres of biodiversity and is said to possess over 700 species of flowering plants endemic to Peninsular India. Of these, about
125 species are exclusively known from northern Western Ghats. Within Maharashtra, three ‘Hot Spots’ have been
3 5,220 species of animals, including 86 mammals, 466 birds, 581 fishes, 97 reptile species and 3,025 plant species are recorded in Maharashtra
(BNHS, 2005).
3/ 11

identified with major concentration of endemic plants. Of these, one is located in the coastal area, one in the Western
Ghats, and one in the Marathwada–Satpura ranges 4 .
2.
The state has a long coastline (720 km.; 9% of India’s coastline) spanning the 5 coastal administrative districts of
Thane, Mumbai, Raigarh, Ratnagiri, and Sindhudurg (from north to south). The coastal zone has varied ecological habitats such as islands, estuaries, mangroves, rocky shores and sandy beaches. The coastline is indented by numerous river mouths, creeks, small bays, headlands, promontories and cliffs. There are 18 estuaries harbouring 17 mangrove species
(mangrove ecosystems occupy 330 km 2 along the coast and account for 13% of the total mangrove area of the country) associated with other flora and fauna species in varying density. Marine algae are more in number along rocky shores; altogether, 91 marine algal species were found along the Maharashtra coast with Malvan displaying the maximum number of marine algal species (73). Some species are economically important (species belonging to genera such as Monostroma,
Gelidium, Gracilaria, Sargassum , etc) and exploited for their commercial value, while others ( Acetabularia sp., Caulerpa verticillata ) are rare (Untawale and Dhargalkar, 2002).
3.
In general, the benthic macrofauna is dominated by polychaetes in terms of density and diversity (more than 72 species are reported from Maharashtra and 47 from Malvan area). One of the ecologically important faunal groups recorded at only a few locations (Vengurla Rock Islands, Malvan, Ratnagiri and Mumbai) is coral, and of these sites, corals are most abundant at Malvan. Eleven species of corals are reported from Malvan waters (ICMAM Project
Directorate Report, 2002). The coastal zone also plays an important role as a breeding and feeding ground for a large number of birds. However, avifaunal studies of the coastline are not many. A total of 121 bird species were recorded from mangroves and adjacent areas (Ali and Ripley 1983; Samant 1986). Out of these, 66 species are resident and local, birds,
24 are true migrants, 28 are resident with migratory populations, and only 3 are vagrant or occasional strays. The coasts of Maharashtra also have porpoises, dolphins, and marine turtles. Three species of sea turtles are found to be most commonly nesting along the Maharashtra coast: olive ridleys ( Lepidochelys olivacea ) are the most common species, recorded from 100% of the sites, whereas green turtles ( Chelonia mydas ) were recorded from 23% sites and leatherback turtles ( Dermochelys
) from just 3% of the sites 5 .
4.
A number of areas along the Maharashtra coast are rich in marine biodiversity and have unique flora and fauna that needs to be preserved. Most notable among these is the Malvan region 6 (Malvan taluka 7 in Sindhudurg district 8 ). The 32 km. long coastline of Malvan taluka extends from Achra in the north to Bhogave in the south, adjoining Nevati in
Vengurla taluka . Scientific studies were undertaken by the National Institute of Oceanography ( NIO ) in 1979 to assess the marine biodiversity of the region. The first report, produced by NIO in 1980, highlighted the importance of the area from a biodiversity perspective. Other reports have also indicated that this is one of the most biologically diverse areas in
Maharashtra, including the comprehensive report on Malvan’s marine flora and fauna prepared by the ICMAM Project
Directorate (Department for Ocean Development).
5.
The Malvan coast is classified into six habitats – rocky shore, sandy shore, rocky island, estuarine, muddy and mangrove habitats. Malvan is biologically the richest coastal region in Maharashtra. The intertidal zone along the Malvan coast is characterised by the presence of coral species in Rajkot, Sarjekot and in the mouth of Kolamb creek. The rocky coastline of Malvan is primarily composed of sedimentary rocks. These rocks are soft and easily eroded by both wave and wind action, which is favourable to animals that prefer a burrowing existence. Many crevices and cracks in the rocks serve as ideal sheltering, feeding and breeding grounds for many invertebrates and also as an ideal substratum for harbouring marine algae (seaweed). The biological organisms range from 73 species of marine seaweeds ( Ernodemis verticilata ) to mangroves (18 species), corals (11 species), molluscs (73 species), polychaetes (47 species), arthopods (47 species), and fishes (74 species). Besides, pearl oysters, marine turtles, dolphins and porpoises are also encountered. This area stands out as relatively the best area for marine turtles in Maharashtra. There are only two sites where leatherback turtles are recorded. These are Achra in Malvan taluka and Kashid in Raigad district. Hawksbill Turtles are very rare and only recorded in Malvan taluka . The region harbours a rich avian fauna. There are 367 species of flora and fauna reported for the Malvan coast, though recent records show only 279 species.
4 Source: ‘National Parks and Sanctuaries in Maharashtra’, reference guide (Vol.1), by Pratibha Pande, Published by Bombay Natural History
Society, 2005.
5 Survey conducted by Bombay Natural History Society (BNHS) in 2001
6 For details see the prioritization exercise undertaken as part of the Biodiversity Conservation Prioritization Project. Findings are summarized in the report “Setting Biodiversity Conservation Priorities for India” (Volume 1) by Singh and others (2000).
7 Sub-division of a district
8 Sindhudurg means “fort in the sea”; the district is named for the fort built by King Shivaji in the 16 th century on Sindhudurg Island.
4/ 11

6.
Malvan town is bound by three creeks–Karli, Kolamb and Kalavali. From Malvan Bay, a chain of submerged and exposed rocky islands extends towards the south. In this chain there are several islands including Sindhudurg Island at the northern tip and Malvan rock in the south. Sindhudurg Island is situated about a kilometre from the mainland and is about
3 km from the Malvan port. The sea in between and around the Fort has many submerged and exposed rocks that provide an ideal substratum for marine biota and shelter to many organisms. The extension of this chain of islands leads to Nevati rocks and Vengurla Rock (Burnt Island), which is an IBA site for Edible-nest swiftlet ( Aerodramus fuciphagus ).
7.
Recognizing the ecological significance of this area, the Government of Maharashtra designated a part of Malvan coastal waters as the Malvan (Marine) Wildlife Sanctuary on 13 April 1987. While this is an important step, the area’s coastal and marine biodiversity continues to be impacted by economic activities in the wider landscape outside the wildlife sanctuary.
8.
The principal economic activity on the Malvan coast is fishing , with Malvan being one of the main fishing centres on
India’s west coast. There are 19 fishing villages in Malvan taluka . There are 1,957 households, with a total fisherfolk population of 9,469, an active fishermen population of 2,660, and 1,106 women employed in allied activities ( CMFRI ,
2006; Dept. of Fisheries, GoM). There are 12 registered fishermen’s co-operative societies, and 1,068 fishing vessels, which include 186 mechanized vessels, 390 motorized vessels and 492 non-motorized vessels ( CMFRI , 2006). The fishing gear is mainly composed of trawl nets (648), gillnets (11,441) and hooks-and-line (1,225). The mechanized fishing vessels are anchored in the Sindhudurg fort area, and the catch is transported to the shore by carrier vessels. The mechanized fishing vessels undertake one-day fishing operations. The traditional fishermen from the region own 50 trawlers, while the rest of the trawlers are owned by outsiders. Besides the trawlers, there are fibre-glass OBM s (of gorai type) that fish using different kinds of gillnets. The ra mpa n s are traditional fishing gear used in the region, requiring 50 people to drag the net to the shore. The major catches of rampan s are mackerel and sardines.
9.
There has been a rapid mechanization of the fishing industry in recent years. Fish stocks are considered to be overexploited. Damage is being caused by the non-implementation of regulation related to mesh size and gear, which results in removal of juvenile fish that compromises future recruitment of fish stocks. Even though trawling and purse seining are not permitted within the buffer zone of the existing notified marine sanctuary, these are being carried out with impunity. Fishing activities in the core zone are destroying breeding and nursery grounds. The concentration of a large number of trawlers in Malvan bay (which is very close to the marine wildlife sanctuary) is impacting the critical habitat of
Malvan. Because of the sheltered bay and fish marketing related infrastructures, trawlers and other mechanised fishing vessels from all parts of Malvan taluka congregate here. The sheltered nature of the bay means that flushing of water is poor, and this compounds the impact on the surrounding environment. Traditional fishermen are gradually loosing their livelihood opportunities owing to unsustainable fishing by the mechanized vessels. The loss of traditional livelihoods combined with inadequate or inappropriate skills for alternative employment opportunities has increased the reliance of some sections of the local population on a shrinking natural resource base, including on the marine wildlife sanctuary.
10.
There are other economic activities taking place on the Malvan coast but these are of lesser importance in terms of their current impact on coastal and marine biodiversity. However, these could potentially become significant threats in the future and a proactive/ precautionary approach towards mainstreaming biodiversity conservation considerations in these sectors is warranted. Agriculture employs 31% of the workforce and accounts for 36% of the land use, followed by horticulture & plantation that accounts for 32% of land use. Paddy is dominant among the agricultural crops, followed by coarse grain and groundnut. Mango, Cashew, Coconut and Aracanut are the principal plantation crops. It is said that approximately 25% of agricultural input applications finds its way to the sea as runoff and through riverine discharges.
However, a full understanding of the impact of this on Malvan’s coastal and marine biodiversity is lacking.
11.
As of now there are no large scale industries around the Malvan coast. However, mining-related industries have been set up at Redi, in the adjoining taluka of Vengurla. At present there are four mining units operating from this area, comprising of two iron ore mining units, one unit involved in processing of imported iron ore and another involved in silica sand mining. Signing of MOUs for a few more units is in the pipeline. At present this industrial activity has little impact on coastal and marine biodiversity of Malvan coast, possibly due to the fact that between Neoti and Redi there are two creeks. However, if the activity is extended northwards beyond Vengurla, it could have adverse impacts. There is need to strengthen the capacity of the district administration as well as the Indian Bureau of Mines that are involved in regulation and policy framing governing mining sector in order to avoid, reduce and mitigate negative impacts of mining industry through incorporation of biodiversity considerations in to EIA and siting agreements. These agencies need to ensure that the existing units effectively incorporate and implement action plans addressing biodiversity concerns in their
5/ 11

corporate environment management plans. In addition, there are 49 units in the MSME sector (medium, small and micro enterprises in the manufacturing and services sector), dominated by units manufacturing food products & beverages (18 units). Out of the 49 units, only 27 units are located in the coastal area of the taluka . Tourism development is also considered to have good potential in Malvan waters and is being explored by government and private companies.
12.
In terms of ports and maritime traffic , at present there is no data available to conclusively support or negate the perception of threats to Malvan’s biodiversity from maritime traffic. It is gathered that ships calling on Marmagoa port use the sea route passing through Malvan waters and are known to discharge ballast waters in the sea. However, the magnitude of the problem is not known. In general, Maharashtra’s coast hosts 49 of India’s 140-odd minor and intermediate ports. Together, these ports handle a significant volume of the total traffic passing non-major ports in India.
Maritime traffic is known to have direct impacts on marine biodiversity, with especially visible impacts on larger mobile animals such as cetaceans, although these have not been studied in Maharashtra coast. Indirect impacts arise from increased sedimentation due to periodic dredging of navigational channels and other port-related activities, which impact on corals and other biodiversity. There is also the risk of introduction of Invasive Alien Species (IAS) through ships’ ballast water and also of oil spills, as Maharashtra handles some 23% of India’s crude oil imports. The impacts of IAS are not clearly known, and till date there have been 24 incidences of major oil major spills along Maharashtra coast.
13.
A number of laws regulate the activities of production sectors that impact coastal and marine ecosystems and biodiversity throughout India of which the most significant is the Coastal Regulation Zone Notification of 1991, promulgated under the Environment (Protection) Act (EPA), 1986. The 1991 notification restricts and controls development activities within a landward distance of up to 500 metres from the high tide line along India’s coasts. Also under the CRZ Notification, all states are required to prepare a Coastal Zone Management Plan (CZMP) and establish a
Coastal Zone Management Authority. Other state legislation relevant to coastal and marine biodiversity includes the
Maharashtra Marine Fisheries Act, 1981, adopted under the national Marine Fishing Regulation Act (MFRA), 1978, which provides for protection, conservation and development of fisheries in Maharashtra. The Act also regulates mesh size, gear and reservation of zones for different fishing sectors, and aims to protect the interest of traditional fishermen and their crafts. The Maharashtra Pollution Control Board Norms ensure compliance with the EPA 1986 regarding standards for controlling water and other forms of pollution. Additionally, the Environmental Policy Statement of the
Maharashtra Maritime Board (GMB), which manages ports and regulates maritime traffic in the state, emphasizes the importance of environment management to the sustainable development of Maharashtra, including the need to minimize the environmental impacts of ports operations.
14.
The marine wildlife sanctuary is an important tool for conservation of Malvan’s coastal and marine biodiversity.
However, the sanctuary alone is unlikely to ensure the maintenance of biodiversity and ecosystem processes given the complex ecological dynamics of coastal and marine ecosystems that operate at the landscape level (beyond MPA boundaries), as well as the nature and scale of the direct and indirect drivers of ecosystem degradation, many of which originate outside the sanctuary, and their synergistic interaction. In order to improve conservation prospects of the unique flora and fauna of Malvan’s estuarine and rocky beach ecosystem, the long term solution needs to be anchored in several key elements: taking an ecosystem approach to fisheries (EAF), exploring market incentives for encouraging sustainable management of fisheries (certification of fish production), improving spatial planning in the coastal zone by pursuing closer integration between management of the sanctuary and land use decisions in the surrounding area, and ensuring that local populations can meet livelihood needs while being effective stewards of the resource base by diversifying incomes
(added value processing of fishery-based products, cultural and nature-based tourism). Further, coastal communities need to internalize and be active participants in the kind of management plan necessary for an Ecosystem Approach to Fishing
(EAF), such as the concept of fish refugia/ no-take zones. Opinion makers need to be involved in discussions and local authorities need to address all the issues emerging from such discussions. There are, however, a number of barriers to realizing this long-term solution.
15.
Weaknesses in spatial and sectoral planning: There is a disconnect between governance of the marine wildlife sanctuary and management of activities in the wider coastal landscape, even though there should be linkages between these two processes. Land use decisions need to be coordinated across the different sectors, most notably between management of the marine sanctuary (led by the Forest Department) and fisheries so that synergies are maximized, adverse impacts are minimized, and competing objectives can be reconciled. Coordination is also warranted with other sectors (Agriculture, Industry, and Tourism) as a precautionary, pro-active measure anticipating threats in the future. This weakness stems partly from the absence of a cross-sectoral platform for decision-making on land use in the coastal zone, and also due to the fact that there remain information gaps on issues such as threatened and/ or vulnerable habitats and
6/ 11

stocks, and fisheries catch and effort (for subsistence and commercial operations) that need to underpin the design and effective implementation of an ecosystem approach to fisheries management. Similarly, better information is needed on the impacts of other activities (agriculture, fishing port, tourism, mining) so that viable, alternative, sustainable options can be identified, and these should inform sector development strategies. Planners and decision-makers from relevant departments and agencies at the State level do not have access to appropriate information, tools and other mechanisms for analyzing land use trade-offs when making choices about land use. Also, the interests of coastal communities in the planning and decision-making process are not well represented, although they are important actors and stakeholders in the coastal and marine zones.
16.
Inadequate institutional capacities for enforcement and monitoring of existing regulations governing production activities: This relates primarily to enforcement of an ecosystem approach to fisheries, sustainable agriculture practices that minimize the impact of agricultural run-off, as well as to better enforcement of regulations pertaining to the marine wildlife sanctuary. Even when regulations are in place, the capacity to enforce and monitor these is restricted due to staff not having the requisite information, tools, internal systems and incentives. There is limited capacity within sectoral departments to effectively incorporate and implement EAF and biodiversity management considerations in plans and activities.
17.
Insufficient incentives and know-how at the community level for alternative sustainable uses of the resource base:
Barriers to integrating conservation concerns into the economic activities of local resource users include weak capacity to access new economic opportunities and develop alternatives to traditional sources of livelihood that are no longer viable as a result of degradation of the natural resource base. While there are sector-based interventions and schemes to help such disadvantaged communities, there is a need to better engage the communities through their own resource management systems and governance structures to promote EAF and explore other markets, such as value-added processing of fishery-based products and employment associated with nature-based and cultural tourism.
18.
The Government of India is therefore requesting GEF assistance to address these barriers. The proposed project will mainstream biodiversity conservation into the policies and practices of coastal and marine resource use in the critical habitat of Malvan with a special emphasis on ecosystem approach to fisheries (EAF) management. The project will also address potential threats to biodiversity arising out of the mining related development coming up in the Redi area of the adjoining taluka of Vengurla. The proposed project is being developed as one of two demonstration projects under the national GEF Programme for Mainstreaming Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Conservation into India’s Productive
Sectors (championed by the MoEF and Maharashtra Forest Department). The experience and lessons from this project located on India’s west coast will complement those generated by the Coringa project on the east coast, enabling India to broaden its knowledge and experience with management of coastal and marine biodiversity within protected areas and outside. The main project components are as follows:
19.
Component 1: Cross-sectoral planning framework (spatial and sector development planning) that mainstreams coastal and marine biodiversity conservation, with special emphasis on EAF. A cross-sectoral platform will be established involving all key public and private sector stakeholders. This group will lead the development of an environmentally sustainable economic development plan for the Malvan coast (covering all economic activities that impact marine and coastal biodiversity) based on a Strategic Environmental Assessment approach. Policies and regulations in each sector
(Fisheries, Agriculture, Industry/ Mining, Tourism, and Forests) will be reviewed with the view to identifying changes that are needed in sectoral plans to align them with the broader environmentally sustainable economic development plan for the Malvan coast, including the development of a strategy to ensure better compliance with the regulatory framework.
Particular emphasis will be placed on the fisheries sector which is the main economic activity currently affecting the coastal and marine environment. This could involve re-examining and extending current fisheries management practices to take into account the biotic, abiotic and human components of ecosystems in which fisheries operate; translating economic, social and ecological goals into operational objectives, indicators and performance measures; exploring market-based incentives for sustainable fisheries through certification. The review of sectoral policies and development of the coast-wide sustainable development plan will be informed by the identification and/or development of the necessary ecological and economic information and tools to ensure the integration of biodiversity values into land use planning and decision-making. Specific knowledge products will be developed for government and private sector decision-makers to demonstrate the economic value of EAF and mainstreaming biodiversity conservation principles into sector growth strategies. Experiences will be documented to facilitate sharing and dissemination at the sub-regional (among western coastal States and Union Territories) and cross-regional (between western and eastern coastal/ marine ecoregions) levels, under the aegis of the India GEF Coastal and Marine Program (IGCMP).
7/ 11

20.
Component 2: Institutional strengthening for EAF and biodiversity mainstreaming . This component focuses on developing the capacities (skills, knowledge, internal incentive systems, etc) of government departments to ensure effective enforcement and monitoring of policies and regulations designed to reduce adverse impacts on Malvan’s coastal and marine biodiversity, especially Marine Fishing Regulations. Capacity development efforts will be based on a participatory capacity needs assessment and will target sector staff from Fisheries, Agriculture, Industry, Tourism, and
Forests. Capacity building activities will also target staff from the wildlife sanctuary to improve their capacity for enforcing regulations within the sanctuary and for participatory planning, including community mobilization and conflict resolution.
21.
Component 3: Sustainable natural resource use by communities residing on the Malvan coast. This component will address impacts from unsustainable resource use by economically displaced local communities by developing local capacity for alternative livelihoods. Strategies and capacities will be developed for diversifying local incomes from activities such as nature-based and cultural tourism, ornamental marine fish breeding, adding value to fishery-based products and addressing the issues of fish discard and utilization of low value species (value addition through dressing & packaging of fresh fish; preparation of ready to eat fish products involving fish discards; traditional fish cuisines such as
Malvani fish curry). In addition, the component will look at strengthening community-based sustainable management of fishing activity by strengthening existing community governance mechanisms, and providing support for resource inventories, sustainable use thresholds, licensing, zoning, as well as monitoring and enforcement.
22.
Subject to further discussions and agreements reached between all the key stakeholders during the PPG, the following changes are expected at the landscape level as a result of this project:

A functioning cross-sectoral platform involving Forest Dept, the Maritime Board, Dept. of Industries, Fisheries &
Agriculture Departments, Tourism Department, Private Sector and local communities

An environmentally sustainable economic development plan for Malvan

Strengthened legal and policy framework in the fisheries sector to avoid and reduce negative impact of fisheries development and incorporate biodiversity conservation into sectoral planning

Strengthened legal and policy framework in the mining sector to avoid and reduce negative impact of mining development and incorporate biodiversity conservation into sectoral planning

Better information and awareness within the public and private sector on the contribution of well-preserved coastal & marine ecosystems on the Malvan coast to economic activities

Increased engagement of local private sector companies in restoration of coastal and marine environment as well as biodiversity

Greater institutional capacities to integrate ecological considerations in development planning

Increased compliance with code of conduct of responsible fisheries of the FAO, provisions of the marine fishing act relating to fishing zone, mesh size regulations and provisions of the marine sanctuary

Reduced eutrophication of coastal waters from reduction in flow of excess nutrients from agriculture and sewage

Reduced sediment loads that degrade coastal ecosystems, particularly the critical coral reefs and sea grass habitats

Enhanced capacities at the community level for livelihood diversification and reduced impact on the natural resource base

Improvements in selected coastal and marine ecological indicators

Sustainable use of coastal and marine resources by marginalized and impoverished local communities as a result of increased capacity to access and/or develop new employment opportunities and thereby increase income and reduce pressure on natural resources

Switching from open access fisheries to rights based fisheries for coastal fishing communities
B. D ESCRIBE THE CONSISTENCY OF THE PROJECT WITH NATIONAL / REGIONAL PRIORITIES / PLANS :
23.
The proposal is line with India’s priorities for coastal and marine ecosystem management as articulated in the
National Environment Policy (2006) and the National Biodiversity Action Plan. The Government of India has identified
Malvan as a priority coastal and marine ecosystem for conservation. Malvan has been identified as 1 of 11 ecologically and economically critical habitats along the west and east coasts of India by the Department of Ocean Development
(DOD), the designated national nodal agency dealing with Oceans and Seas under Agenda 21 (Chapter 17). The
Maharashtra Maritime Board’s Environment Policy Statement stresses the importance of maintaining the health of
Maharashtra’s coastal and marine ecosystems to sustain the state’s economic development. Under its Integrated Coastal
8/ 11

and Marine Area Management (ICMAM) programme, DOD has made a series of recommendations with which the present project is closely aligned. The project experiences will contribute to the national integrated coastal zone management programme that is being developed in response to the recommendations of the Expert Committee
(Swaminathan Committee) set up by the Government of India to review the CRZ Notification and its implementation.
C. D ESCRIBE THE CONSISTENCY OF THE PROJECT WITH GEF STRATEGIES AND STRATEGIC PROGRAMS :
24.
The project is consistent with GEF BD Strategic Objective 2 ‘To mainstream biodiversity in production landscapes/ seascapes and sectors’, and with GEF BD Strategic Priority 4 on ‘Strengthening the Policy and Regulatory Framework for
Mainstreaming Biodiversity’. The project focuses on internalizing the goals of biodiversity conservation and the sustainable use of biological resources into production sectors that are located in the globally significant Malvan area of the Western India Marine Ecoregion. The objective is to influence development models and growth strategies in this area to reduce the threats to biodiversity emanating in the wider landscape outside the Malvan Marine Sanctuary, including fisheries that is the main economic activity, as well as future threats from extractive industries.
D.
J USTIFY THE TYPE OF FINANCING SUPPORT PROVIDED WITH THE GEF RESOURCES :
25.
GEF is providing grant funding for technical assistance, which is considered the most suitable funding modality for this type of project that focuses on mainstreaming, capacity development and community-based demonstrations of conservation actions and alternative livelihood development for subsequent up-scaling through investments.
E .
O UTLINE THE C OORDINATION WITH OTHER RELATED INITIATIVES :
26.
The project will closely coordinate with the following related initiatives.
 The DOD’s ICMAM Programme – by building on the earlier scientific work and ICMAM’s recommendations for Malvan.

The project will link closely with the World Bank’s proposed Coastal Zone Integrated Management Project
(currently at a concept stage and slated for approval in early 2009. The present project will avoid duplication by working closely with the World Bank, government partners and other stakeholders to ensure complementarities.
Specifically, the project will add value to this larger programme by focusing on demonstrating effective approaches for mainstreaming biodiversity objectives into production activities in relation to ICZM.

The present project will also work closely with the UNDP-GEF Global Ballast Water Management Project, under which India is developing and implementing a comprehensive National Work Plan to address the global threat of marine bio-invasion through ship ballast water.
F . D ISCUSS THE VALUE ADDED OF GEF INVOLVEMENT IN THE PROJECT DEMONSTRATED THROUGH INCREMENTAL
REASONING :
27.
India’s west coast ecoregion spans the coastal belt of five states (Gujarat, Maharashtra, Goa, Karnataka, and Kerala).
This 3,446 km coastal stretch is characterized by diversified ecosystems, with many areas being of high significance, such as Malvan, as they harbor globally threatened species. The coastal belt in India is also pivotal to the country’s economic development, and is also home to a quarter of the country’s population. Recognizing the importance of balancing ecological and economic needs, the government has established marine protected areas as a means for preserving biodiversity. However, given accelerating development pressures and the fact that biodiversity cannot be shielded from harmful activities taking place in the coastal landscape outside protected areas, far greater emphasis needs to be placed on mainstreaming biodiversity considerations into economic activities, especially those taking place in and around key ecological areas such as Malvan, and adopting an ecosystem approach to fisheries management.
28.
This provides a strategic entry point for this GEF-financed intervention. The GEF Alternative scenario will catalyze additional measures near ecologically important areas within Malvan that need to be in place to ensure that biodiversity concerns are internalized/ mainstreamed in sectoral planning and implementation frameworks that are having the greatest impact on biodiversity. By focusing on Malvan, national capacities for mainstreaming will be developed that can then be extended to the rest of the Western India marine ecoregion. Recognizing that the different marine ecoregions differ in terms of characteristics and challenges, the umbrella programme will include an additional demonstration site (Godavari
River Estuary from the Eastern India ecoregion).
9/ 11

29.
This is a timely initiative as India has recently undertaken a review of its approach to managing the coastal zone. The approach has heretofore been purely regulatory with there being significant challenges to implementation as development pressures mount. Building on earlier work, GoI is currently developing a National Coastal Zone Management Programme.
This offers the momentum and foundation to build in additional measures for biodiversity conservation into this framework through the present programme. GEF resources will contribute to this process by demonstrating effective approaches to mainstreaming specifically by removing policy, institutional and behavioral barriers to mainstreaming.
Investments in making changes to production practices that reduce impacts on biodiversity will be cofinanced by the relevant economic sectors.
G . I NDICATE RISKS , INCLUDING CLIMATE CHANGE RISK , WHICH MIGHT PREVENT THE PROJECT OBJECTIVE FROM
BEING ACHIEVED , AND IF POSSIBLE INCLUDING RISK MEASURES THAT WILL BE TAKEN :
Risks
Level of interest among the line departments and agencies whose jurisdictions fall within the project area may differ depending on the benefits expected from the project.
Low level of engagement and participation among mining industry players
Local communities may not be willing to participate in the conservation and protection of coastal and marine ecosystems unless the project addresses their livelihood needs.
Historically, communities have questioned the establishment of the sanctuary and have not been involved in discussions and decision-making processes with regard to the sanctuary and surrounding areas.
As stated in India’s National Communication to the UNFCCC, future climate change in the coastal zones is likely to be manifested through erosion, flooding, submergence and deterioration of coastal ecosystems, such as mangroves, and salinization. In many cases, these problems are either caused by, or exacerbated by sea level rise and tropical cyclones.
Mitigation Measures
Building awareness among officials regarding the contribution of wellpreserved coastal & marine ecosystems on the Malvan coast to economic activities
Creating a common platform that involves all line departments with government recognition may help to address jurisdictional overlaps
UNDP will ensure that the process of engaging the mining industry is done in a highly professional way (using qualified consultants that understand the industry) and on an informed basis, e.g. by carrying out a detailed industry profile study during the PPG phase. Furthermore, the project’s efforts to engage mining industry players will benefit from the growing trend of corporate responsibility as a factor in industry activities, as well as awareness among mining players of the links between environmentally responsible practices, their corporate reputations and public and political pressure. The project will benefit from UNDP’s institutional experience in this regard.
Community representation in discussions and decision-making processes will be ensured
Awareness and capacity building programmes will be developed for he communities clearly outlining the benefits to them of mainstreaming biodiversity conservation considerations in economic activity
Traditional knowledge and crafts of the coastal population and their contribution to the conservation of ecologically sensitive areas, as well as their usufruct rights will be recognized in developing any resource use plans and regulations
Specific measures will be undertaken to diversify local incomes while reducing pressures on the fisheries resource base.
By catalyzing a long-term process for reducing the adverse impacts of production activities on the coastal and marine ecosystems in Malvan’s estuarine and rocky beach ecosystems, the project will help increase the resilience and coping capacity of coastal areas and coastal communities to climate change and climate variability.
H . DESCRIBE , IF POSSIBLE , THE EXPECTED COST EFFECTIVENESS OF THE PROJECT :
30.
The competing scenarios for coastal and marine biodiversity conservation are as follows. One option might be to continue with the business as usual scenario of pursuing conservation through the existing marine sanctuary. However, given the escalating threats from anthropogenic activities in the wider landscape, this scenario could result in irreparable losses of existence values, options values and future use values. A second option could be to expand the territorial extent of the protected area, which would provide greater security for biodiversity values. However, this scenario would be unrealistic given the development pressures in Malvan. Therefore, the project focuses on a third option, which is to lay the foundation and demonstrate the possibilities for integrating biodiversity conservation into land use planning and decision making in production sectors located in the coastal and marine environment that jeopardize ecologically critical areas and also to adopt ecosystem approach to fisheries, which is the major economic sector dependant on the coastal and marine
10/ 11

resources. This third option is considered to be the most cost-effective deployment of GEF resources because it will ensure that investments in the marine sanctuary are not undone by indirect threats and, in line with the precautionary principle, it will avoid degradation of ecosystem values and services, which once lost could be prohibitively costly to restore. In developing the project, lessons learned from similar initiatives will be analyzed and incorporated into project design to ensure that GEF resources are efficiently deployed.
I.
JUSTIFY THE COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE OF GEF AGENCY
:
31.
UNDP has a wealth of international experience in integrated policy development, human resources development, institutional strengthening, and non-governmental and community participation. Within the GEF Biodiversity Focal Area,
UNDP is considered to have a comparative advantage in capacity building and technical assistance for projects that are particularly concerned with both the sustainability of protected area systems as well as with mainstreaming biodiversity conservation concerns within production landscapes/ seascapes and sectors.
32.
UNDP-India has been working on issues concerning biodiversity conservation and natural resource management, governance and poverty reduction for several years. In close consultation with the national, state and local level government partners, UNDP works with the most marginalized communities in different states of India, particularly those with low human development ratings, focusing on natural resource management and local alternative livelihood generation. Through these strong partnerships, UNDP has been also to make significant technical and policy interventions, such as the development of the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, supporting preparation of
National Reports to the CBD, National Communication to the UNFCCC, etc.
33.
UNDP is a key partner in the GEF Multifocal Area Sustainable Land and Ecosystem Management (SLEM)
Programme in India. UNDP India has considerable understanding of a number of development issues relating to the coastal zone and marine biodiversity development as a result of its implementarion a GEF project to strengthen landscape level manage of the Gulf of Mannar Biosphere Reserve as well as working on a sustainable livelihoods project in the
Sunderban Islands of West Bengal. Additionally, UNDP India is engaged in the development and implementation of the
UN Tsunami Recovery Framework Programme since March 2005. Along with IUCN, UNDP is a co-chair of the Regional
Steering Committee of Mangroves for the Future (MFF) initiative, which comprises a partnership of seven tsunamiaffected Asian countries, including India, along with several international agencies and NGOs, including UNEP, FAO,
CARE, Wetlands International and WWF.
PART III: APPROVAL/ ENDORSEMENT BY GEF OPERATIONAL FOCAL POINT AND GEF AGENCY:
A.
R ECORD OF E NDORSEMENT OF GEF O PERATIONAL F OCAL P OINT ON B EHALF OF THE G OVERNMENT : (Please attach the country endorsement letter(s) or regional endorsement letter(s) with this template).
Mr. Hem Pande, Joint Secretary and GEF Operational Focal Point,
Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF),
Government of India, Paryavaran Bhawan, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi
Date :
19/03/09
Tel: 011-24362551
B.
GEF A GENCY C ERTIFICATION :
This request has been prepared in accordance with GEF policies and procedures and meets the GEF criteria for project identification and preparation.
Agency
Coordinator,
Agency Name
Mr. Yannick
Glemarec, UNDP
Executive
Coordinator
Signature Date (month, day, year)
May 21, 2009
Project contact person
Anna
Tengberg,
Telephone
+66 (2) 288
2730
Email address anna.tengberg@undp.org
11/ 11