UNITED
NATIONS
EP
United Nations
Environment
Programme
Report of the meeting
Version 2
20 January 2004
Towards a UNEP Module for the Assessment
of the Coastal and Marine Environment1
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module
for the Assessment of the Coastal and Marine Environment
Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
1
This document has been produced without formal editing.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................... 3
PART I. STOCKTAKING ................................................................................. 4
Item 1. Partners ..................................................................................... 4
Item 2. Existing Assessments and Programmes of UNEP ....................................... 4
Item 3. Assessment Users .......................................................................... 6
PART II. COMMENTS ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MODULE ...................................... 7
APPENDIX 1. LIST OF PARTICIPANTS................................................................. 9
APPENDIX 2. UNEP’S MODULE FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF THE COASTAL ....................... 12
AND MARINE ENVIRONMENT
Introduction ...................................................................................... 12
Scope .............................................................................................. 13
Expected Outputs................................................................................ 15
Methodology ...................................................................................... 15
Structure and Governance ..................................................................... 16
Capacity building and support to sub-global assessments ................................. 17
Financial and administrative consequences ................................................. 17
Potential Partners of the UNEP Coastal and Marine Module............................... 18
APPENDIX 3 SHORT PAPERS FROM CBD, GPA, RSP, CAR/RCU, MA,
UNEP-WCMC & GESAMP ............................................................... 19
APPENDIX 4. ACRONYMS ............................................................................. 34
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 2 of 35
INTRODUCTION
1. Mr. Ivar Baste, Chief of the Assessment Branch, DEWA, welcomed participants and
opened the meeting. He began by describing the mandate of UNEP in keeping the world
environmental situation under review and ensuring that emerging problems are considered
by Governments. He explained that the increasing complexity of environmental
degradation requires enhanced capacity worldwide in scientific assessment monitoring and
early warning. To improve such capacity, UNEP Governing Council Decision 22/1/I,
Strengthening the Scientific Base of UNEP, was adopted in February 2003. The decision is
being implemented through Science Initiative and Global Environment Outlook (GEO)
processes to improve UNEP’s ability to monitor and assess global environmental change,
and to support sub-global and thematic assessments and capacity building at global,
regional and national levels. To avoid overlapping of initiatives and exhausting the
scientific community, UNEP must have a strategy in undertaking a number of scientificbased assessments and promoting interaction between science and policy, and between
different assessments. A coherent modular partnership approach can assist UNEP in
systematically addressing needs and gaps in environmental assessment and contribute to
GEO, GPA, CBD, RSP and GMA.
2. In relation to the assessment of the coastal and marine environment, Mr. Baste further
explained that Decision 22/1/II from the same session of the UNEP Governing Council also
requested the Executive Director of UNEP to arrange for the active participation and
appropriate contribution to the establishment by 2004 of a regular Global Marine
Assessment (GMA); to identify programmatic and budgetary resources in support of GMA;
to establish a trust fund for the participation of developing countries; and to report on
UNEP’s contribution to UN Secretary General in 2003 and to the UNEP GC/GMEF in 2004.
Therefore, the aim of the present meeting is to develop a multipurpose coastal and
marine environment assessment module building on science and experience from GEO,
GIWA, MA, and UNEP/WCMC as well as inputs from experts in order to strengthen the
integrated UNEP global assessments and to contribute to the overall GMA.
3. Mr. Baste provided the objectives of the meeting as follows:
1) Plan how a coastal and marine assessment module can help strengthen the
scientific base of UNEP in its assessment and monitoring of global
environmental issues.
2) Identify areas of co-operation with key partners outside UNEP in the context of
the GMA.
3) Plan for a strengthened programmatic contribution to GMA in the GEO context,
but not consider the design of GEO and GMA.
4) Consider how current assessments can contribute to a UNEP’s Module.
5) Identify user needs from UNEP’s relevant policy instruments, e.g. CBD, GPA.
6) Consider the key elements of the module and provide advice for the
formulation of a module.
7) Consider the modular partnership approach in general.
4. The participants introduced themselves (See Appendix 1 for List of Participants) and
nominated Mr. Robert Duce as the chair for Agenda Item 1, Partners; Mr. Patricio Bernal
for Item 2, and Ms. Manuwadi Hungspreugs for Item 3. Ms. Pinya Sarasas was appointed as
rapporteur.
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 3 of 35
PART I. STOCKTAKING
Item 1. Partners
5. As potential partners to the Module of UNEP, the organisations with marine interests,
e.g. IOC/UNESCO, LME and GESAMP, were invited to give a short presentation on their
activities. Mr. Patricio Bernal, the Executive Secretary of UNESCO/IOC brought the
attention of the meeting to his presentation on the use of marine data and information
for the protection of the Ocean: Ocean Sciences for Knowledge and for Management. He
introduced the Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS) as an international programme that
gathers and processes data about the oceans to enable the generation of useful products
and services, particularly the assessment of the coastal and marine environment. Apart
from the operational GOOS, IOC is also planning for Coastal GOOS which would help
monitor the long-term effects of human activities and timely detect environmental
changes in the coastal zone. Coastal GOOS will incorporate operational programmes such
as GLOSS, GIPME, GCRMN, UNEP Regional Seas Programmes and CalCOFI.
6. Mr. Brad Brown, representative of Large Marine Ecosystem, explained the LME concept
and how it operates. The project aims at reducing coastal pollution, restoring damaged
habitats and recovering depleted fish stocks. Four criteria determining area extent of an
LME are bathymetry, hydrography, productivity, and trophodynamics. In the LME
assessment, the Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis (TDA) is applied to the five modules in
the LME: 1) Pollution and Ecosystem Health, 2) Productivity, 3) Fish & Fisheries, 4)
Socioeconomics and 5) Governance. Up to date, the LME Assessment and Management
projects are funded mainly by GEF. They have involved 126 developing countries,
particularly their governmental units, in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and Eastern Europe.
7. Mr. Michael Huber, Chairman of GESAMP, gave a presentation on the New GESAMP. He
outlined the new strategies of GESAMP in providing scientific advice to UN agencies and
governments to support the protection and sustainable use of the marine environment. He
described GESAMP’s approach in giving policy advice. It is two-tiered: 1) undertaking
independent scientific analysis and assessment; and 2) performing analysis of policy
implications and options with stakeholders and policy makers.
Item 2. Existing Assessments and Programmes of UNEP
8. The representatives from existing assessments and programmes of UNEP presented
their activities in terms of scope, methodology and outputs, and how they could
contribute to the assessment of coastal and marine environment. Ms. Marion Cheatle,
head of GEO Section in DEWA, gave an overview of the GEO as being a long-term,
consultative, participatory, capacity building process for global environmental assessment
and reporting. In terms of thematic cover, it is primarily land-oriented with a part on
coastal and marine environment. The assessment is done through GEO’s collaborating
centre network, global and regional consultations, international working groups (data,
policy scenarios). GEO provides information on the state and trends, impacts and
responses, emerging issues, outlook and policy options primarily at regional and subregional levels. Target audience of GEO range from UNEP GC/GMEF, policy advisors in
relevant Government ministries, UNEP Committee of Permanent Representatives, to
scientific community and civil society. Besides producing a comprehensive GEO every 5
years, next steps are to make Annual GEO Statements, early warnings of emerging threats,
info exchange and GEO products at sub-regional, national and city levels.
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 4 of 35
9. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) presented by Mr. Neville Ash is an
international scientific assessment of the ecosystem services, function, and consequences
of ecosystem changes for human well-being. Concerning possible contribution of MA to an
assessment of coastal and marine environment, Mr. Ash pointed out that the conceptual
framework of MA especially methodology, and assessment findings from coastal and
marine systems chapters could be a key contribution. Furthermore, the institutional
arrangements of the MA could provide some insight to guide the collaborative process
required to establish and conduct the work of the module.
10. Mr. Juan Carlos Belausteguigoitia presented the Global International Waters
Assessment (GIWA) which analyses both freshwater and marine systems and, importantly,
a clear link between the two systems. He considers GIWA as a screening mechanism which
identifies priority problems in each region and possible policy options to be taken to
mitigate the environmental problems. The potential contribution of GIWA to the UNEP
module includes: 1) marine component of the regional and global assessments (regional
reports, global policy report, databases, gap identification); 2) GIWA methodology; 3)
Lessons learned; and 4) regional task teams and focal points.
11. UNEP-World Conservation Monitoring Centre(WCMC), according to GC decision 22/1
III, is continuously supported for the work in providing data and information on
biodiversity in cooperation with the CBD and in support of the WSSD Plan of
Implementation. Mr. Ed Green, Head of Marine & Coastal Programme, UNEP-WCMC,
further added that the Centre holds the World Database on Protected Areas which links to
other databases on biodiversity and ecology, and is currently preparing a UN list of
Protected Areas. In relation to the inputs of the Centre to the assessment of coastal and
marine environment, he indicated that the quantitative data on biodiversity (taxonomic
and geographic) and other online databases will be of use to the assessment process as
well as newly planned or revised assessments and technical reports on, for example,
mangroves, high-seas, alien species.
12. Mr. Morten Sørensen, programme manager of Global Resource Information Database
Centre (GRID) - Arendal, presented the work of the Centre in relation to UNGA Resolution
57/141 paragraph 38 on the delineation of the outer limits of the continental shelf.
Through its data and information system, the Centre is assisting coastal States in
delineating and establishing the outer limits of their continental shelf on the basis of
supporting scientific and technical data. It is to make use of existing regional data centres
and existing mechanisms under IOC and IHO. Coastal States that have ratified the UN
Convention on the Law of the Sea before 1999 must make its submission by May 2009.
13. To address the assessment needs of different user groups, experts from developing
countries in particular were invited to exchange their views. It was identified that lack of
financial resource and of scientific and technical capacity are key factors constraining
developing countries in conducting assessments. Existence and sustainability of the
assessment activities depends greatly on available funding. Governments consider
development and poverty alleviation as their priority. Environmental monitoring and
assessment whose findings could supposedly hinder the short-term socio-economic
development of the countries are, therefore, sometimes not given enough priority. There
is a need to ensure that governments see a clear link between human well-being and the
need to keep track of environmental change. It was suggested that any assessment
process has to be policy-driven, e.g. through international/regional agreements and
conventions. There was also a concern that certain data cannot be shared due to political
reasons. To build new capacity or enhance existing human resources, technical assistance
and technology transfer is quite crucial to the process. Such assistance could be done not
only through north-south cooperation, but also south-south links within region.
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 5 of 35
Item 3. Assessment Users
14. Users of the coastal and marine assessments, e.g. CBD, RSP and its coordinating units,
were asked to give their view on the needs of a regular assessment in a short term and a
long term. Ms. Marjo Vierros from the Secretariat of the CBD elaborated on specific needs
of the Convention for the conservation and sustainable use of marine and coastal
biological diversity. The CBD is in the process of adopting more specific global outcomeoriented targets which should be measurable and achievable. The level of targets ranges
from ecosystems and habitats to species and genomes. The targets also touch upon social
and political aspects in terms of effectiveness of legal and policy instruments, benefit
sharing, local livelihoods, and indigenous knowledge. She further added that the CBD also
would like to see that the assessments at global, regional and national levels are relevant
for the development of recommendations for response measures, future forecast and
emerging issues.
15. Mr. Ellik Adler, coordinator of the Regional Seas Programme (RSP), gave an overview
of the programme, and its priorities and key areas of activities including land-based and
marine-based pollution, impact of coastal development on coastal ecosystems,
management of marine resources, overexploitation of living marine resources, monitoring
and assessment of the coastal and marine environment. The Programme aims at
promoting monitoring and assessments, integrated management and sustainable
development of coastal areas through appropriate technical, institutional and financial
measures. Mr. Adler emphasised keys to success of the programme including political
commitment of member States, efficient secretariat, solid legal and financial bases, and
access to external funding mechanisms. Concerning RSP’s needs and interest in the
coastal and marine assessment, the Programme would like to see an establishment of a
monitoring and assessment system at national level which would lead to a regional system,
as well as the capacity building at both levels.
16. The Caribbean Regional Coordinating Unit of the RSP (CAR/RCU) has played a
supportive role in regional assessments, such as GEO and GIWA, explained Mr. Luc StPierre. The CAR/RCU’s areas of interest in accordance with the Cartagena Convention and
Protocols include sources of marine pollution and water quality (e.g. sewage, industrial
waste, non-point source, marine-based). In terms of process, the Unit is also interested in
permanent mechanism for networking, data and information management, reporting and
provision of policy guidance. In relation to the involvement of regional assessments, such
as the CAR/RCU, in the global assessment, Mr. St-Pierre indicated that the integration of
existing regional assessments is crucial at the beginning of any global assessment in
promoting regional scientific capacity. He also emphasised that the global assessment
mechanism and outputs should be adaptable to fit with the regional capacity and needs.
17. Mr. Yihang Jiang from East Asian Seas Regional Coordinating Unit (EAS/RCU) gave his
observation on the monitoring and assessment in Asia. He pointed out that the long-term
monitoring is a key to understanding marine and coastal environment, and requires
substantial investment that countries with economic difficulties, however, are not willing
to commit. The scale of assessment is another issue to consider when a fine-resolution is
needed for management at local or national levels as opposed to a large-scale assessment
at regional and global levels. Concerning the regional needs for coastal and marine
assessment, Mr. Jiang expressed his concern over the need to clarify the similarities and
differences of various ongoing assessments and initiatives which often end up exhausting
the same experts in the region. There is also a critical need for better coordination
especially among similar projects by different donors. He further emphasised the
importance of data quality and control as well as the national and regional ownership of
data and of the assessment as a whole.
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 6 of 35
PART II. COMMENTS ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MODULE
18. Mr. Gotthilf Hempel, Mr. Baste, Mr. Salif Diop and Ms. Sarasas briefly presented
section-by-section the background paper, Towards a UNEP Module for the Assessment of
the Coastal and Marine Environment, as a basis for discussion and comments on the
development of a Module. See Appendix 2 for the newly outlined structure of the module
in light of the discussion.
19. Comments were given extensively on each section of the background paper to
construct a module. It was expressed that scope of the module should not overlap with the
mandates of other organisations; however, a link with open ocean should be established.
The module could consider a thematic assessments for ecosystem-based management.
Analysis at different scales (e.g. national, regional, global) should be taken in to account
as well as the duration of the assessment process. Rapid assessment could be one of the
options.
20. The structure of the module has to be light, flexible, and developed over time. It
was pointed out that GEO and MA has a strong global structure; whereas, GIWA has a more
robust regional structure. To be policy legitimate and relevant, the module should involve
and interact with all stakeholders, particularly governments in identifying assessment
needs and priorities and in adopting assessment findings. The LME and TDA are an example
of the assessments that get a broad buy-in from countries. However, it is of crucial
importance for the scientific credibility of the assessment to ensure scientific
independence in the assessment process.
21. To mobilise experts for the assessment, the module should establish criteria and a
process for selecting experts, whether new or from the existing pools of
GEO/GIWA/MA/RSP, and independent and government-nominated scientists. Level of
participation and commitment of experts or institutions should be identified, as well as
regional and gender balance. For the review mechanism, the module could draw from the
experience of existing mechanism, such as MA’s review process which has planned two
rounds of review by governments and independent reviewers.
22. The design and methodology development for an integrated international
environmental assessment is time-consuming and should be based on the experience of
existing assessments. GIWA methodology with some adaptations may work well at regional
level, while those of GEO and MA have important features both for the global and subglobal levels. Any method used by the module should be flexible enough for different
regions to adapt for their own assessments. In terms of data and information for
assessment, quality control of data is critical. Further, the module should anticipate the
problem that may arise when dealing with the data policy of different countries.
23. Web-based clearing house, conceptual frameworks and methodologies training,
technical assistance, and institutional links with regional bodies were suggested for the
capacity building component of the module. Ways and means in delivering the message
from the science to policy makers is very important to be considered. In some cases
where capacity building mechanisms do exist, there is a lack of coordination and ability to
retain the already-built capacity and human resource. Within a region, capacity building
at national level is more important than at the regional level because of the difference in
countries’ needs and priorities. Regional Seas Programme was suggested to serve as a
platform for capacity building.
24. It was agreed that it is very important to mobilize partners for the module regardless
whether they develop their own modules or not. As far as the proposed module is
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 7 of 35
concerned, there may be gaps in high seas and SIDS, which may be filled by other
programmes of partners. Products of different partners, however, may need to be
translated to fit into the module’s product. A number of organisations were suggested as
potential partners, e.g. ICSU/SCOR, IGBP/LOICZ, GCRMN, Ramsar Convention, CITES,
NEPAD, ASEAN, etc.
25. The meeting was concluded by Mr. Steve Lonergan, Director of UNEP/DEWA, by
emphasising the need for further development of the module in partnership with other
agencies and interested organisations.
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 8 of 35
APPENDIX 1. LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
EXPERTS
ICSU/ Scientific Committee for Oceanic
Research (SCOR)
Mr. Ahmad Abu Hilal
Department of Earth and Environmental
Sciences, Faculty of Science
Yarmouk University
Irbid, JORDAN
Tel: +962 2 721-1111 Ext.2920
Fax: +962 2 724-7983
Email: abuhilal44@yahoo.com
Mr. Robert A. Duce
President, SCOR
Depts. of Oceanography and Atmospheric
Sciences, Texas A&M University
3146 TAMU, College Station,
TX 77843-3146 USA
Tel: +1 979 845-5756
Fax: +1 979 862-8978
Email: rduce@ocean.tamu.edu
Mr. Larry F. Awosika
Nigerian Institute for Oceanography and
Marine Research (NIOMR)
PMB 12729, Victoria Island, Lagos
NIGERIA
Tel: +234 1 261-9517
Fax: +234 1 261-9517
Email: nomr@linkserve.com.ng
larryawosika@yahoo.com
Mr. Gotthilf Hempel
Freie Hansestadt Bremen
Tiefer 2, D-28195 Bremen, GERMANY
Tel: +49 421 361-2005
Fax: +49 421 361-10990
Email: ghempel@marketing.bremen.de
Ms. Manuwadi Hungspreugs
Department of Marine Science
Faculty of Science
Chulalongkorn University
Bangkok, THAILAND
Tel: +66 2 218 5394
Fax. +66 2 255 0780
Email: Manuwadi.H@chula.ac.th
Mr. Kwame Koranteng
Marine Fisheries Research Division
P.O. Box BT-62, Tema GHANA
Tel: +223 22 208-048
Fax: +223 22 203-066
Email: kwamek@africaonline.com.gh
Mr. Sergey M. Shapovalov
Center for Coordination of Ocean Science
Russian Academy of Sciences
36 Nakhimovsky Ave.
117997 Moscow RUSSIA
Tel: +7 95 124-5981
Fax: +7 95 124-5983
Email: smshap@sio.rssi.ru
GESAMP
Mr. Michael Huber
Global Coastal Strategies
P.O. Box 606, Wynnum
QLD 4178 AUSTRALIA
Tel: +61 7 3893-4511
Fax: +61 7 3893-4522
Email: mhuber@bigpond.net.au
IOC of UNESCO
Mr. Patricio Bernal
Executive Secretary
Intergovernmental Oceanographic
Commission (IOC) of UNESCO
1 rue Miollis, 75015, Paris, FRANCE
Tel: +33 1 4568-3983
Fax: +33 1 4568-5810
Email: p.bernal@unesco.org
Large Marine Ecosystem
Mr. Bradford E. Brown
NOAA Contractor LME Programme
11266 SW 166 Terrace
Miami, Florida 33157 USA
Tel: +1 305 253-4991
Fax: +1 305 234-9152
E-Mail: Brad.Brown@noaa.gov
The Convention on Biological Diversity
Ms. Marjo Vierros
Programme Officer
Secretariat of the CBD, World Trade
Centre, 393 Saint-Jacques Street
Suite 300, Montreal, Quebec H2Y 1N9
CANADA
Tel: +1 514 287-7036
Fax: +1 514 288-6588
Email: marjo.vierros@biodiv.org
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 9 of 35
UNEP-WCMC
UNEP-Regional Seas Programme
Mr. Ed Green
Head, Marine and Coastal Programme
UNEP-WCMC, 219 Huntingdon Road
Cambridge CB3 0DL U.K.
Tel: +44 12 2327-7314
Fax: +44 12 2327-7136
Email: ed.green@unep-wcmc.org
Mr. Ellik Adler
Regional Seas Programme Coordinator
Division of Environmental Conventions
UNEP, P.O.Box 30552, Nairobi, KENYA
Tel: +254 20 624-033, 624-544
Fax: +254 20 624-618
Email: Ellik.Adler@unep.org
GRID-Arendal
Ms. Hanneke van Lavieren
Programme Officer
Regional Seas Programme
Division of Environmental Conventions
UNEP, P.O.Box 30552, Nairobi, KENYA
Tel: +254 20 624-052
Fax: +254 20 624-618
Email: Hanneke.VanLavieren@unep.org
Mr. Morten Sørensen
Manager, Capacity Building Unit
UNEP/GRID-Arendal
Longum Park, Service Box 706
N-4808 Arendal, NORWAY
Tel: +47 3 7 03 57 15
Fax: +47 37 03 50 50
Email: morten.sorensen@grida.no
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA)
Mr. Neville Ash
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
Conditions Coordinator
UNEP-World Conservation Monitoring
Centre, 219 Huntingdon Road, Cambridge
CB3 ODL U.K.
Tel: +44 12 23 277-314
Fax: +44 12 23 277-365
Email: ash@millenniumassessment.org
Global International Waters Assessment
(GIWA)
Mr. Juan Carlos Belausteguigoitia
Global International Waters Assessment
(GIWA)
SE-391 82 Kalmar, SWEDEN
Tel: +46 480 44 73 54
Fax: +46 480 44 73 55
Email: jc.belaus@giwa.net
UNEP-GEF
Ms. Marie Prchalova
Programme Officer
Division of GEF Coordination
UNEP, P.O.Box 30552, Nairobi, KENYA
Tel: +254 20 624-085
Fax: +254 20 624-041, 042
Email: Marie.Prchalova@unep.org
Mr. Ulises Munaylla Alarcon
Comision Permanente del Pacifico Sur
(CPPS)
Av. Carlos Julio Arosemena, Km. 3
Edificio Inmaral - 1er Piso
Guayaquil, EQUADOR
Tel: +593 4 22 21 202 or 203
Fax: +593 4 22 21 201
Email: cpps_pse@cpps-int.org
Mr. Prasantha Dias Abeyegunawardene
Interim Coordinator South Asian Seas
Programme
South Asia Cooperative Environment
Programme (SACEP)
No. 10 Anderson Road, Off Dickman's
Road, Colombo 5, SRI LANKA
Tel: +94 11 2 589-787 or 596-442
Fax: +94 11 2 589-369
Email: pd_sacep@eureka.lk or
pandasas@hotmail.com
Mr. Yihang Jiang
Senior Expert
East Asian Seas RCU
UNEP GEF Project in the South China Sea
United Nations, Rajdamnern Ave.
Bangkok 10200, THAILAND
Tel: +66 2 288 2084
Fax: +66 2 281 2428
Email: jiang.unescap@un.org
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 10 of 35
Ms. I'o-A-Te-Are-Tini Tuakeu Lindsay
Programme Delivery Manager
South Pacific Regional Environment
Programme (SPREP)
P.O. Box 240, Apia SAMOA
Tel: +685 21 929
Fax: +685 20 231
Email: iotuakeu@sprep.org.ws
Ms. Pinya Sarasas
Associate Programme Officer
Division of Early Warning and Assessment
(DEWA), UNEP
P.O. Box 30552, Nairobi 00100, KENYA
Tel: +254 20 624-228
Fax: +254 20 622-798
Email: Pinya.Sarasas@unep.org
Mr. Luc St Pierre
Caribbean Environment Programme
Regional Co-ordinating Unit (CAR/RCU)
(Cartagena Convention)
14-20 Port Royal Street
Kingston JAMAICA
Tel: +1 876 922 9267/8/9
Fax: +1 876 922 9292
Email: lsp.uneprcuja@cwjamaica.com
Ms. Pravina Patel
Division of Early Warning and Assessment
(DEWA), UNEP
P.O. Box 30552, Nairobi 00100, KENYA
Tel: +254 20 623-504
Fax: +254 20 624-269
Email: Pravina.Patel@unep.org
UNEP-DEWA
Mr. Ivar Baste
Chief, Environment Assessment Branch
Division of Early Warning and Assessment
(DEWA), UNEP
P.O. Box 30552, Nairobi 00100, KENYA
Tel: +254 20 623-373 or 623-267
Fax: +254 20 624-269 or 623-495
E-mail: Ivar.Baste@unep.org
Ms. Marion E. Cheatle
Head, GEO Section
Division of Early Warning and Assessment
(DEWA), UNEP
P.O.Box 30552, Nairobi 00100, KENYA
Tel: +254 20 623-520
Fax: +254 20 623-944
E-mail: Marion.Cheatle@unep.org
Mr. Jörn Heppeler
Intern
Division of Early Warning and Assessment
(DEWA), UNEP
P.O. Box 30552, Nairobi 00100, KENYA
Tel: +254 20 624-192
Fax: +254 20 622-798
Email: dewa.intern01@unep.org
Mr. Tobias Kühne
Intern
Division of Early Warning and Assessment
(DEWA), UNEP
P.O. Box 30552, Nairobi 00100, KENYA
Tel: +254 20 624-192
Fax: +254 20 622-798
Email: dewa.intern02@unep.org
Mr. Salif Diop
Chief, Water Unit
Division of Early Warning and Assessment
(DEWA), UNEP
P.O. Box 30552, Nairobi 00100, KENYA
Tel: +254 20 622-015
Fax: +254 20 622-798
Email: Salif.Diop@unep.org
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 11 of 35
APPENDIX 2. UNEP’S MODULE FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF THE COASTAL
AND MARINE ENVIRONMENT
Introduction
Following the environmental targets set out in Agenda 21, the Millennium Development
Goals (MDGs), the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) targets in 2002, and
the Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) such as the CBD, there is a need for
UNEP to focus on coastal and marine environmental issues in a coherent way and to assess
the main alterations of the coastal and marine ecosystems worldwide as caused by natural
and man-made changes in the driving forces, e.g. climate change; fisheries; pollution;
destruction of habitats; introduction of alien species. Those alterations have serious socioeconomic consequences and hence require policy actions on local, national, regional, and
global levels. To ensure a continuous process in the assessment of the coastal and marine
environments, UNEP has developed the idea of the UNEP Coastal and Marine Assessment
Module.
The development of a coastal and marine module is intended to mobilize and streamline
the contribution of UNEP in the area of assessment of the coastal and marine
environment. In addition, the module concept could potentially serve also for other kinds
of environmental assessments such as freshwater, land, forest assessment modules within
and outside UNEP.
As for the linkage to the wider global marine assessment, it is envisaged that the module
would be part of the contribution of UNEP to the Global Marine Assessment process which
is being coordinated by the UNDOALOS under the guidance of the UNGA.
A comprehensive broad ecosystem approach is essential as applied by the MA and GIWA,
based on the best available scientific information and being participative with leading
international and national experts as in the GEO, GIWA and MA networks. Short, medium
and long term perspectives should be provided for use by policy makers. Multidisciplinary,
regional, global and sub-global as well as thematic approaches should address all aspects
of the interaction between coastal and marine ecosystems and human society.
At present, UNEP´s major efforts in assessing the state of the world’s coastal and marine
environments are scattered over three projects – GEO, GIWA, and MA. None of them is
exclusively dedicated to the coast and sea. Further, GIWA and MA are approaching
completion in less than two years from now leaving GEO as the main global environmental
assessment within UNEP. GEO is a long-standing process but does not currently have a
strong component on the coastal and marine environment.
Objective of the UNEP Coastal and Marine Module
The overall objective of the UNEP Coastal and Marine Module is to provide on a regular
basis an independent and critically peer-reviewed assessment of the status and trends of
the major coastal and marine ecosystems (species included) and their role in sustaining
human well-being and livelihoods. Root causes should be analysed and options for
mitigatory actions should be proposed. The module is to be based on a scientifically
credible, salient, relevant, legitimate and integrated assessment process and
methodology.
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 12 of 35
The aims of the module are to:
1. Build on and contribute to a conceptual understanding of the interaction
between society and ecosystems, focusing on the vulnerability of people to
changes in ecosystem goods, services, stress, and non-use values;
2. contain a nested set of activities and outputs building on existing assessment
activities and experiences and promoting new assessments to fill in gaps. The
set of activities should range from global syntheses of ecosystem assessments
and thematic assessments to regional and sub-global assessments.
3. contribute to the wider objective of keeping the world environmental situation
under review, in particular through the Global Environmental Outlook process
and address inter-linkages with the terrestrial biomes of the world;
4. address how the marine environment can contribute to and how its degradation
can hinder the Millennium Development Goals and WSSD targets2.
5. address inter-linkages to assessment of social and economic activities
undertaken by other agencies, and the establishment of a regular process for
the assessment and reporting on the marine environment.3
6. support capacity building and mobilize scientific expertise (experts and
institutions) from relevant disciplines and geographic regions of the world to
identify the current state of knowledge.
7. ensure that the assessment identifies areas of scientific consensus and
disagreements reflecting majority and minority views, gaps in knowledge,
indicators, models and scenarios including estimates of their uncertainties, as
well as policy response options.
8. ensure that processes under the module will facilitate interaction between
scientists and the stakeholders including the major relevant environmental
policy instruments4 to address their needs.
Scope
Without overlapping with other organisations’ mandates, the Coastal and Marine Module
should cover coastal and marine systems including the impacts of land-based and seabased activities particularly taking into account the impacts and feedback related to
coastal and marine ecosystem goods and services. The consequences of those processes
should be considered in relation to the sustainable use and conservation of marine
resources and other socio-economic interaction with the coastal and marine environment.
The scope of the marine module will be defined in relation to the four dimensions outlined
in the UNEP multidimensional model in Fig. 1.
2
3
4
Relevant Millennium Development Goals: ensure environmental sustainability; and
relevant WSSD targets in protection/managing natural resource base of socio-economic development:
Target 10 Encourage the application of the ecosystem approach by 2010, noting the Reykjavik Declaration
on responsible fisheries in the marine ecosystem and decision 5/6 of the Conference of the Parties to the
Convention on Biological Diversity; Target 14 Advance implementation of the GPA with particular emphasis
in the period 2002-2006 on municipal waste water, physical alteration and destruction of habitat nutrients;
Target 15 Make every effort, to achieve substantial progress by the next GPA conference in 2006 to protect
the marine environment from land-based activities; Target 16 Establish by 2004 a regular process under
the UN for global reporting and assessment of the state of the marine environment; and Target 19 A more
efficient and coherent implementation of the three objective of the convention and the achievement by
2010 of a significant reduction in the current rate of loss of biological diversity.
UNGA Resolution 57/141 paragraph 45
The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the Global Plan of Action for Protection of the Marine
Environment from Land-based Activities (GPA) and the Regional Seas Programme (RSP).
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 13 of 35
global
International
Environmental
Assessments
tn
t2
local
data & science
policy
t1
baseline, t0
environment
development
Figure 1. The UNEP multidimensional model for defining the scope of integrated
international environmental assessments
The major aquatic concerns vary considerably between regions and even within regions.
Therefore, regional assessments shall be the first occupation of the coastal and marine
module and shall provide the basis for various types of global assessments and scenarios.
The geographical structure of the assessment has to flexible and based on natural,
political and institutional realities. Existing geographical and programmatic structure such
as LMEs, GIWA regions, deep-sea living and non-living resource management systems
should be used where appropriate.
The geographical entities such as LMEs consist of a number of ecological subsystems which
are more or less intimately connected. Nevertheless, the pelagic and benthic systems in
the open ocean and the neritic zone have to be considered somewhat separately. In
coastal waters, an even larger variety exists including, for example, coastal wetlands,
estuaries and deltas, mangroves, coral reefs, seagrass beds. Certain systems are not yet
covered by existing assessments including the oceanic water column, deep sea floor, deep
sea coral reefs, continental slopes, seamounts and hydrothermal vents. These systems
require different kinds of assessments because of inherent differences in their temporal
and spatial scales of natural variability and human impacts. Nevertheless, generalisations
over major parts of each region and over the entire region are required for transboundary
management purposes.
While the coastal and marine part of GEO provides a broad overview at global level, an
indication of priority concerns in the various regions of the world’s coasts and oceans can
be obtained from GIWA. The LME projects with their five modules on productivity, fish
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 14 of 35
and fisheries, pollution and ecosystem health, socio-economy, and governance provides a
broad basis for advice on priority actions required to mitigate the impacts of
environmental changes.
Aspects to be considered in each ecosystem include, inter alia:
 Status, trends, scenarios and predictions in ecosystem conditions, goods, services,
stress and non-use values to humans and vulnerability, resilience, and adaptability.
 Human activities, driving forces and pressures on the ecosystems.
 Response developments and options.
Based on the ecosystem-oriented assessments, theme oriented reports might be required
on crosscutting issues, such as ecosystem-based management of living marine resources
and conservation of biodiversity. Analyses at different levels, e.g. national, regional,
global, and developments over time will be considered.
Expected Outputs
Products of the Coastal and Marine Assessment Module could include a series of
assessment reports (printed and web-based including data portal and clearing house of
info, training programmes/materials) such as thematic reports at regional and global
levels as well as synthesis reports, summaries for policymakers and vital graphics, in-depth
global and sub-global assessments, which could be presented and discussed at
international, regional and national workshops involving a wide range of stakeholders,
and, importantly, at different policy fora.
Methodology
Global and regional reporting and assessment requires a methodology which provides
consistency across the regions but at the same time sufficient flexibility in addressing the
specificities of different regions. The assessments cannot be encyclopedic but should focus
on selected issues and on hot spots of particular global and/or regional importance. The
assessment methodology should ensure credibility, saliency, legitimacy, transparency,
participation, cost effectiveness, and financial and institutional continuity. The
methodology needs to be based on experience gained from previous and on-going
assessment activities as well as flexible enough for different regions to adapt for their own
assessments. An assessment methodology for aquatic systems has been developed and
tested by GIWA to produce equivalent assessments across the world. Other methodologies
have been developed in global programmes like LMEs, LOICZ, GEO and MA. Globally
applicable indicators for changes in the state of the marine environment have to be
identified. Cost efficient methods for monitoring those indicators have to be developed.
In addition, the broad marine ecosystem approach, the bio-geographical approach, socioeconomic assessment including cost-benefit analysis and use of indicators should be
considered in the further development of the methodology. The module could also learn
from the experience of developed regions like HELCOM and OSPAR.
It is important to ensure the quality control of monitoring data and other information
sources. There are a number of existing guidelines in place (i.a. from IPCC and MA). A
proper peer review process is critical in ensuring the credibility and legitimacy of the
assessment. The editing process is also of vital importance to the quality of the
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 15 of 35
assessment. More work is needed on the methodology design as well as on the critical
analysis and synthesis of existing methods. Further, the module should anticipate the
problem that may rise when dealing with the restrictive data policy of different countries.
For its regional and composite global reports and assessments, information and expertise
can be found in the three major assessments of UNEP and their global networks covering
all coastal, near shore and shelf waters and their hinterland and watersheds. The RSP
provides policy-oriented information on specific regions.
Structure and Governance
To meet the need for coastal and marine focus in UNEP, it is proposed to pull the coastal
and marine parts of GEO, GIWA and MA into a common structure under UNEP/DEWA.
When GIWA and MA projects will come to an end in 2004/2005, marine-oriented parts of
their global networks and of their secretariats should, as far as possible, be retained and
merged with marine elements of GEO. It will form a strong UNEP Coastal and Marine
Module with, for example, a secretariat, a steering group as well as a scientific/technical
advisory panel and a consolidated network of regional teams and focal points. The
structure will have to be light, flexible and compatible and complementary to other other
related structures such as the wider GEO and GMA process. Mechanisms have to be
established to ensure that other activities within UNEP (e.g. GPA, RSP, UNEP-WCMC, GRID,
CBD) work closely with the Module. The secretariat should be empowered to establish
direct links to external partners, e.g. within the UN system and ICSU.
The module should involve and interact with all stakeholders, particularly governments in
identifying assessment needs and priorities and in adopting assessment findings. A
separation of government’s influence from science is, however, needed. The governance
structure of the module will be designed to ensure scientific credibility, saliency,
relevance, and legitimacy of the assessments.
Possible components to be considered are, inter alia:
a) Secretariat of the process/Reporting Unit
b) A multi-stakeholder steering group giving overall guidance on the activities
of the module and represented by different user groups from regions,
governments, IGOs and civil society groups.
c) A scientific/technical advisory panel overseeing the assessment process.
d) Regional teams and focal points forming a consolidated network.
e) Working groups for the assessment of specific topics.
f) Review mechanism possibly overseen by a review panel and guided by an
agreed procedure for independent expert review and government and
stakeholder review.
To mobilise experts for the assessment, the module should establish criteria and a process
for selecting experts, whether new or from the existing pools of GEO/GIWA/MA/RSP, and
independent and government-nominated scientists. Level of participation and
commitment of experts or institutions should be identified, as well as regional balance.
For the review mechanism, the module could draw from the MA’s review process which
plans to have two rounds of review by governments and independent reviewers.
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 16 of 35
Capacity building and support to sub-global assessments
Developing regions as well as countries with economies in transition are poorly covered by
assessment programmes due to the lack of capacity (human, scientific, financial,
institutional and legal) at national and regional levels. Issues like identifying assessment
needs, establishment of basic monitoring systems, data and information networking,
exchange of scientists, training, institutional and technical/operational development in
laboratories and scientific institutions are the basic building blocks for the establishment
of reliable and sustainable monitoring and assessment systems. Therefore, a
comprehensive and effective regional assessment process should initially be based and
focus on building the capacity at national and local levels. This national level capacity
building on monitoring systems, will serve, primarily for national (sometimes even local)
needs and later on as a ‘building block’ for the following regional assessment activities.
The module should integrate capacity building component in all phases and build on
existing national and regional capacities. The module should also aim at a better
coordination of the hitherto fragmented assistance for capacity building through different
ongoing assessments by various organizations. It is critical to ensure that the coordinated
effort will be continuous and sustainable. Development of conceptual framework,
assessment tools, methodologies, and best practices as well as establishing of fellowship
programmes for young scientists from developing countries should be considered.
By involving scientists from the existing networks of GEO, GIWA and MA, and recruiting
new experts from academia and governments of developing countries, the module could
strengthen and build new human and scientific capacities at national and regional levels.
Such involvement at country level could, in return, fill geographical gaps in regional
assessments and, thus, complete the global picture of environmental outlook. Exchange
and transfer of knowledge and information through the assessment between countries and
regions also helps build networks and partnership within and between regions. This
participation will be a critical factor determining the success of the global assessment.
As a backbone of reliable assessment, monitoring and information management at subnational and national levels should also be supported where possible. This requires
institutional and financial capacities in putting in place and maintaining the monitoring
and information management systems. In support of the sustainability of a long-term
process, the module should also facilitate the building of financial, institutional and legal
capacities in assessment. Programmes such as RSP could be used as a platform for
building institutional and legal capacities in different regions.
To facilitate the participation of developing countries and regions in the GMA, and as part
of the contribution of UNEP to global marine assessment, a trust fund has been
established, as called for by the UNEP GC decision 22/1 II. A long term financial backing
and support should be ensured. Partnerships and financial sustainability mechanisms
should be established for developing regions and countries, but responsibilities should be
handed over after some years from external funding to the respective governments.
Financial and administrative consequences
Most of the funding will have to be mobilized as extrabudgetary resources to the
Environment Fund. Following the development of a more detailed assessment
methodology and taking into account the ongoing assessments, a plan of implementation
will be developed. The current financial implications are related to the development of
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 17 of 35
the module and adapting outputs from the ongoing assessments to the module. The
financial implications of establishing the module will be outlined in the plan of
implementation.
Potential Partners of the UNEP Coastal and Marine Module
As mentioned before, no module of this kind can work in isolation. Geographically UNEP’s
focus falls mainly on the coasts and continental shelves, and thematically on ecosystems
and biodiversity. The open ocean as well as its seabed and the ocean-atmosphere
interface are not included in GIWA or RSP. To enhance a complete picture of global
assessments, the Module must find partners internally and externally. As for external
partners, there are quite a number of programmes/projects within and outside the UN
system that have been working in this area for decades and could potentially be
complemented by the module of UNEP, and vice versa. Key partners of the UNEP module
should include UNESCO/IOC (with GOOS), IAEA/the Marine Environmental Laboratory in
Monaco (IAEA/MEL), GEF/LME, GESAMP, and ICSU with SCOR, IGBP/LOICZ, GLOBEC.
Potential partners are regional intergovernmental bodies, NGOs, and the private sector.
Products from different partners are not always readily available and have to be
translated to suit the assessments under the UNEP Module. Hence, the communication
and co-ordination with the partners should be improved to ensure synergy and avoid
duplication of efforts and redundancy.
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 18 of 35
APPENDIX 3.
SHORT PAPERS FROM CBD, GPA, RSP, CAR/RCU, MA,
UNEP-WCMC AND GESAMP
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 19 of 35
Convention on
Biological Diversity
Secretariat
The Convention on Biological Diversity and
the Global Marine Assessment
1. Background
Accurate assessments of the status and trends of biodiversity are central to the successful
implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity. At the present time, the need for
such assessments is greater than ever, due to the adoption by the Convention of the target of
achieving by 2010 a significant reduction of the current rate of biodiversity loss at the global,
regional and national level. This target was adopted as part of the Convention’s Strategic Plan
and endorsed in the Plan of Implementation of the World Summit on Sustainable
Development. The Global Marine Assessment could be an invaluable tool for measuring
progress made towards this target in the marine environment.
The Convention is also in the process of considering a number of more specific outcomeoriented sub-targets, which would refer to specific, marine and coastal-oriented goals, such as
the development of a global system of marine and coastal protected areas, making fisheries
and mariculture sustainable, blocking the pathways of alien invasions, and increasing
ecosystem resilience to climate change. These targets will still need to be endorsed by the
Conference of the Parties at its seventh meeting in February 2004. However, regardless of the
exact nature and language used in these targets, the Convention will need to be able to
reliably assess progress made in achieving these targets through a variety of indicators.
2. User needs
In order to assess progress made towards the 2010 target, the Secretariat would need regular
information of the status of biodiversity at the ecosystems, species and genetic levels. Some
potential areas to be covered might include (but not be limited to) the following:


Status of biodiversity on the ecosystem and habitat level (both in areas inside and
outside of national jurisdiction), including
o Extent of and changes in marine ecosystems and habitats (including degree of
habitat modification and loss)
o Trophic integrity of marine ecosystems
o Major threats
o Percentage and effectiveness of protection
Status of biodiversity on the level of species, including
o Inventories of all marine species
o Number of threatened and endangered species and changes in such numbers
o Identification of life history characteristics that make marine species
vulnerable to extinction
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 20 of 35






Status of biodiversity on the level of genes/genomes
o Genetically effective population size of marine and coastal species (if
possible)
o Range contraction of marine and coastal species
o Degree of selective pressure (including selective harvesting techniques)
applied on marine and coastal species
o Genetic diversity of fish stocks, marine turtles and other well-studied species
Major threats to marine and coastal biodiversity and their status
o Number and severity of alien invasions in marine and coastal ecosystems
o Severity of land-based and ship-based pollution
o Severity of climate change induced effects
Effectiveness of legal and other instruments, including gaps
o Effectiveness of measures for controlling unintentional introductions of alien
species
o Effectiveness of fisheries management regimes
o Degree to which the ecosystem approach is implemented for management of
marine resources
o Effectiveness of integrated coastal and ocean management regimes
o Management of high seas resources
Livelihoods of local communities dependent on marine and coastal resources
o Trends in local community livelihoods
o Degree of participation of local communities in resource management
o Utilization of traditional knowledge in resource management
Recommendations for response measures
o What actions should be undertaken as priorities in order to halt/reduce the loss
of biodiversity?
Future forecasts/scenarios
o What would happen if things continues as they are? What would happen if
certain response measures are implemented?
3. Available information at the Secretariat, which could contribute to the GMA
Article 26 requires the Parties to present reports to the Conference of the Parties on measures
taken to implement the Convention and the effectiveness of those measures in meeting the
Convention’s objectives. The reporting process is key to enabling the Conference of the
Parties to assess the overall status of the implementation of the Convention. To date, two sets
of national reports have been received, and all of them are available on the Convention’s web
site at http://www.biodiv.org/world/reports.aspx. A third national report will be due in May
2005. National reports are due approximately every four years. In addition, a number of
thematic reports have been submitted on topics such as protected areas and alien species.
The national reports contain information on activities that countries have undertaken to
implement the Convention. Increasingly, however, there are initiatives to include indicators
of status (and changes in status) of biodiversity into the national reports. The seventh meeting
of the Conference of the Parties in February 2004 will need to consider the format of the third
national reports. Depending on the outcome, it is possible that some information regarding
the status and trends of marine and coastal biodiversity will be available in the third national
report in 2005.
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 21 of 35
Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine
Environment from Land-based Activities (GPA)
The needs of a regular assessment seen and foreseen by GPA
The needs of GPA for further assessments include the following items which should be
taken into consideration when drafting the objectives of the UNEP coastal and marine
assessment module and preparing a GMA.
1. At the global level, new data is the major issue. We do not need yet another
rehash of existing data and information.
2. It would be very useful to track progress in implementing the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs) and commitments of the WSSD that are related to
the environment, e.g collection, treatment, reuse and reallocation of municipal
wastewater in coastal cities, sewage contamination in coasts, etc.
3. Similarly it would be very useful to monitor progress in the implementation of
specific components of the GPA (Nine pollutant source categories5) including
the targets set at the GPA-Intergovernmental Review and WSSD.
4. As implementation is the key imperative after WSSD, it would be very useful to
identify hot spots where urgent action is needed. Any new initiatives including
financial investments should make full use of the TDA and SAP which have been
produced for many regions.
5. A global compilation and analysis of the TDA/SAP funded by the GEF would be
useful. The results thereof should be combined with other global assessment
results, such as the GEO, GIWA, MA, etc.
6. It is important that the future activities go further than generic global
assessment and, at least for certain locations, is specific enough to guide
action and to help in assessing how effective action has been.
7. For the later, it is important to come up with indicators that can be used to
monitor progress (or lack thereof) and go much further than the Sea of Trouble
publication.
5
1) Sewage (WHO as lead agency); 2) Persistent Organic Pollutants (UNEP); 3) Radioactive Substances
(IAEA); 4) Heavy Metals (UNEP); 5) Oils (Hydrocarbons) (IMO); 6) Litter (IMO); 7) Nutrients (FAO);
8) Sediment Mobilization (FAO); 9) Physical Alterations & Destruction of Habitat (UNEP)
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 22 of 35
UNEP’s Regional Seas Programme
The UNEP Regional Seas Programme
The UNEP Regional Seas Programme was initiated in 1974 as a global programme
implemented through regional components. Since it’s inception, 13 regional Action Plans
have been established under UNEP auspices: the Black Sea, Caribbean, East Africa, East
Asia, the ROPME Sea Area (Kuwait region), Mediterranean, North-East Pacific, North-West
Pacific, Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, South Asia, South-East Pacific, South Pacific, and West
and Central Africa. Plans for the South-West Atlantic are in development and similar
independent agreements are in place in the Antarctic, Arctic, Baltic, Caspian and North-East
Atlantic. Altogether, more than 140 countries participate in at least one regional Action Plan.
Action Plans are adopted by member governments in order to establish a comprehensive
strategy and framework for protecting the natural environment and promote sustainable
development. In 12 of the regional programmes, the Parties have also adopted a legallybinding convention setting out what governments must do to implement the Action Plan.
Each regional action plan is formulated according to the needs of the region as perceived
by the governments concerned. These regional agreements have been effective in
engaging governments in protecting the environment. Their limited geographic focus
enables them to channel the energies of a wide range of interest groups into solving
interlinked problems. An action plan outlines the strategy and substance of a programme
based on the regions particular environmental challenges as well as its socio-economic and
political situation and is usually made up of the following components:





Environmental assessment.
Environmental management.
Environmental legislation.
Institutional arrangements.
Financial arrangements.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
This concerns assessing and evaluating the causes of environmental problems as well as their
magnitude and impact on the region. Emphasis is given to such activities as: baseline studies,
research and monitoring of the sources levels and effects of marine pollutants, ecosystem
studies, studies of coastal and marine activities and social and economic factors that may
influence, or may be influenced by, environmental degradation, and the survey of national
environmental legislation. Monitoring and assessment activities provide a scientific basis for
setting regional priorities and policies. and the status and effectiveness of national
environmental legislation.
A Future Direction
In the wake of the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development the Regional Seas
Programme is undergoing a major strategic shift. The regional programmes were originally
conceived to protect and conserve the marine and coastal environment. Changing socioeconomic values, dynamic processes and human needs have led us to realign our focus in
the direction of ‘sustainable development’ endorsed by the nations of the globe at the
World Summit.
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 23 of 35
The new direction aims to use the Regional Seas programmes as a vehicle for cooperation in
the field of sustainable development and to use them as an exisiting, effective platform for
improved and coordinated regional implementation of international agreements,
programmes and initiatives related to oceans, seas, coasts and the catchments affecting
them. Enhancing the RS prgrammes contribution to sustainable development requires
collaboration with other programmes and partners in regions towards common well-defined
goals. The Regional Seas programme aims at increasing regional and inter-regional
collaboration by promoting horizontal ties among the Acton Plans and partner programmes.
The limited geographic focus of the Regional Seas Action Plans and Conventions enables
them to channel the energies of a wide range of interest groups towards a global puropose:
preserving the world's ocean and coastal ecosystems and the human livelihoods they
secure. The programme is flexible and responsive to evolution and change in the
international agenda.
In early 2002 the Regional Seas Conventions and Action Plans identified several problems of
particular concern to all of them, one of which was the need for more accurate scientific
and technical information, through better monitoring and assessment of the quality of the
marine environment and to manage the coastal zone in a comprehensive and integrated
way. The Regional Seas Programmes offer an effective platform on which to address these
priorities and improve the implementation of global conventions and programmes related to
oceans and seacoasts and the catchment areas affecting them.
Changes in the global development and environmental agenda, the worrying state of the
coastal and marine environment, the international policy frame work, scientific knowledge
as well as socio-economic realities and trends, constitute further challenges that the Regional
Seas Programmes must meet.
Recognizing this, the UNEP Governing Council requested in its Resolution 22/2 III the
development and strengthening of the Regional Seas Conventions and Action Plans in
promoting the conservation and sustainable use of the marine and coastal environment and
requested UNEP to encourage and support these regional programmes to incorporate new
strategic elements in their programmes of work, bringing those elements to the attention of
their respective Member States through governing bodies and other relevant fora.
In order to effectively address evolving challenges and the priorities identified in UNEP GC
Decision 22/2 III , and in order to contribute in reaching the relevant targets of Agenda 21,
the WSSD Plan of Implementation and the Millennium Development Goals, the Regional Seas
Programme must be strategically adaptive and proactive. The following are the Strategic
Guidelines for the Regional Seas Programme, as agreed by the representatives of Regional
Seas Conventions and Action Plans Secretariats, at their 5 th Global Meeting in Nairobi, Kenya
26-28 November 2003:

Increase Regional Seas contribution to Sustainable Development, through national
and regional partnerships with relevant social, economic and environmental actors.

Enhance the sustainability of RS through increasing country ownership, translating
Regional Seas Conventions into national legislation and regulations, involving civil
society and private sector, and ensuring financial sustainability.

Increase Regional Seas visibility and impact in global and regional policy setting,
reflecting and sharing a common vision.

Enhance the use the of Regional Seas as a platform for the coordinated
implementation of global Conventions, initiatives and programmes.

Promote appropriate monitoring and assessment systems on the national and
regional levels.

Promote the eco-system
environment.
based management
of the
marine
and
coastal
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 24 of 35
The Role of the Caribbean Regional Coordinating Unit (CAR/RCU)
and the Needs of the Caribbean Environment Programme (CEP)
by
Luc St-Pierre, CEPNET Programme Officer
UNEP-CAR/RCU, Kingston, Jamaica
The Caribbean Regional Coordinating Unit (CAR/RCU) is the Secretariat to the Cartagena
Convention and its Protocols, serving 28 nations and territories of the Wider Caribbean
Region. Implementation of these legal instruments at the national level is a major
challenge to the Member States and the Secretariat. CAR/RCU has a supportive role in the
execution of the main marine and coastal assessment of UNEP, including the various
Global Environment Outlook (GEO) volumes and Global International Waters Assessment
(GIWA) (region 3 and 4). This was limited to facilitating the identification of regional
experts, acquisition of specific datasets, revision of draft documents and participation at a
few workshops.
In the interest of the Member States of the Caribbean Environment Programme (CEP) and
assessment quality, the Regional Units of the Regional Seas Programmes must have a much
deeper involvement in the design, implementation, review and dissemination of global
assessment based on regional components.
Regional Coordinating Units have access to a wealth of information and are themselves
generators of sectoral assessments. For example: overviews of land-based sources of
pollution; state of the coast reports; clearinghouse for the Global Programme of Action
(GPA); reef assessment; and national thematic assessment (e.g. Integrating Watershed and
Coastal Area Management (IWCAM)). Specifically, if given resources, CAR/RCU could also
better support on-going regional assessments such as the Caribbean Sea Ecosystem
Assessment (CARSEA), part of the Millennium Assessment.
A global assessment is built with regional blocks that must also serve the regions
themselves, in their own specific ways. In the Caribbean there is need for:
 information on sources of marine and coastal pollution;
 development of networks of experiences, expertise and contacts;
 information for National Programmes of Action (NPA/GPA);
 guidance for national policies;
 contingency plans;
 etc.
CAR/RCU recommends that a permanent global assessment promote regional
scientific/technical capabilities and knowledge, first to improve its own impact. Financial
resources for such an assessment must be regionalized through the Regional Seas
Programme or others. This will help make an assessment much more suitable (design,
implementation and output) to specific regional needs.
For this CAR/RCU wishes to be a “closer” partner to the GMA process, from its inception.
We thank the organizers of this Meeting for having invited us as this is the first step
towards this partnership.
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 25 of 35
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
Background paper for input to development of UNEP module for the assessment of the marine
environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) is an international work program designed to meet the
needs of decision makers and the public for scientific information concerning the consequences of
ecosystem change for human well-being and options for responding to those changes. The MA will
help to meet assessment needs of the CBD, CCD, Ramsar Convention, and the CMS, as well as needs
of other users in the private sector and civil society. If the MA proves to be useful to its stakeholders,
it is anticipated that assessment processes modeled on the MA may be regularly conducted at a range
of scales.
The MA focuses on ecosystem services (the benefits people obtain from ecosystems), how changes in
ecosystem services have affected human well-being, how ecosystem changes may affect people in
future decades, and response options that might be adopted at local, national, or global scales to
improve ecosystem management and thereby contribute to human well-being and poverty alleviation.
The specific issues being addressed by the assessment have been defined through consultation with the
MA users, and include an assessment of coastal and marine systems (and island and polar systems),
and the ecosystem services derived from these systems.
The MA will:
 Identify priorities for action;
 Provide tools for planning and management;
 Provide foresight concerning the consequences of decisions affecting ecosystems;
 Identify response options to achieve human development and sustainability goals;
 Help build individual and institutional capacity to undertake integrated ecosystem assessments
and to act on their findings.
The MA synthesizes information from the scientific literature, datasets, and scientific models, and
makes use of knowledge held by the private sector, practitioners, local communities and indigenous
peoples. All of the MA findings undergo rigorous peer review.
A Board comprised of representatives of international conventions, UN agencies, scientific
organizations and leaders from the private sector, civil society, and indigenous organizations governs
the MA. A 13-member Assessment Panel of leading social and natural scientists oversees the
technical work of the assessment supported by a highly distributed secretariat, with offices in Europe,
North America, Asia, and Africa and coordinated by UNEP. More than 500 authors are involved in
four expert working groups preparing the global assessment and hundreds more are undertaking more
than a dozen sub-global assessments. All findings from the MA will undergo two rounds of peerreview, involving more than a 1000 additional scientists, and decision-makers.
The MA is a “multiscale” assessment, consisting of interlinked assessments undertaken at local,
watershed, national, regional and global scales. The MA sub-global assessments directly meet needs
of decision-makers at the scale at which they are undertaken, strengthen the global findings with onthe-ground reality, and strengthen the local findings with global perspectives, data, and models. Subglobal assessments that have been approved or are being planned as components of the MA, and
which include coastal or marine elements include: Arafura and Timor Seas; Coastal British Columbia,
Canada; the Caribbean Sea; Sinai Peninsula, Egypt; Indonesia; small islands of Papua New Guinea;
Portugal; Saudi Arabia; Sweden; and Trinidad and Tobago.
Within the MA global assessment, marine issues are being addressed inter alia in the following ways:
Condition and Trends Working Group
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 26 of 35
The Condition Working Group assessment report contains a chapter addressing the current condition
and trends for each of coastal systems and marine systems (also for island systems and polar systems),
in terms of their ability to provide ecosystem services. For each of these systems, and the various
subsystems, information is presented on the most important ecosystem services derived from the
system, the condition and trends in these services, the most important drivers of change in the
systems, the trade-offs, synergies and management interventions in the system, and on the causal
linkages between changes in the system and associated human well-being.
Scenarios Working Group
A range of global and regional marine and fisheries models has been run to contribute quantitative
information to the storylines of the Scenarios Working Group. Three regional models are being run
specifically: for the Gulf of Thailand (coastal shelf system); Central North Pacific (pelagic system);
and the Benguella Current (upwelling system). Each of these regional models will reflect the 4
scenarios being developed through the MA, will derive a biodiversity index of fishery landings, and
will allow for a discussion on plausible changes at the regional scale for a number of subsystem types.
The four storylines include plausible futures of fisheries and aquaculture, including landing changes
and the value of the landings for the regional models for each scenario. There will also be a general
narrative of plausible changes on a global scale, such as shallow systems warming, reduction in coral
reefs and increase in disease, and species distributions shifting in open ocean systems.
Responses Working Group
The responses working group will provide an assessment of the effectiveness of various management
interventions, including of Marine Protected Areas, and ICZM. Policies relating to marine fisheries
and coastal protection from floods and storms will also be assessed.
A report describing the approach and methods used in the MA – Ecosystems and Human Well-being:
A Framework for Assessment – has recently been published. The technical assessment reports
produced by each of the four MA working groups will be published in 2005, along with short
syntheses distilling the findings for ease of use by specific audiences. Each of the MA sub-global
assessments will produce additional reports to meet the needs of their own audiences. All printed
materials will be complemented by an information- and data-rich Internet site, capacity-building
activities, and briefings and workshops designed to help communicate the findings, tools and methods
of the assessment.
A summary of MA contributions to the regular assessment of the marine environment:
1: Conceptual Framework linking ecosystems and people
2: Global assessment findings for marine systems and subsystems
 Baseline information on condition and trends of marine (sub)systems
 Impacts of changes in marine systems on people
 Plausible futures of marine systems
 Effectiveness of policies relating to marine systems
3: Ongoing multiscale, multidisciplinary assessments of marine and coastal systems
4: Process and institutional arrangement delivering credible, legitimate and salient findings
5: Building capacity for assessment of marine systems and ecosystem services
 For conducting assessment and using assessment findings
 Capacity through individual scientists and institutions
 Capacity through sub-global assessments and networks
Additionally, the MA is collaborating with GIWA via an MoU, in which all MA coastal and marine
authors are made aware of the GIWA reports as they become available, and GIWA will be inputting
to the review of the MA draft findings.
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 27 of 35
UNEP-WCMC Background Paper
UNEP-WCMC Marine Biodiversity Assessments
Prepared for the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP
Module for the Assessment of the Marine Environment, Nairobi,
Kenya, 19-21st November 2003.
5th November 2003
Ed Green, Head of Marine and Coastal Programme, UNEP-WCMC
Gerardo Fragoso, Head, Species Programme, UNEP-WCMC
Stefan Hain, Head, UNEP Coral Reef Unit
Kristian Teleki, Acting Director, ICRAN
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 28 of 35
I.
Introduction
The UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) was established in 2000
as the world biodiversity information and assessment centre of the United Nations
Environment Programme. In this capacity UNEP-WCMC provides information for policy
and action to conserve natural resources with activities including assessment studies of forest,
dryland, freshwater as well as marine ecosystems. Research on endangered species and
biodiversity indicators provide policy-makers with vital knowledge on global trends in
conservation and sustainable use of wildlife and their habitats. Extensive use is made of
geographic information systems and other analytical technologies that help to visualise
trends, patterns and emerging priorities for conservation action. Employing around 60 staff,
UNEP-WCMC has a broad range of experience in biodiversity information and management.
Key assessment skills include:
 Specialists in our programme areas: marine biologists, zoologists, geographers,
botanists & foresters;
 Knowledge Management Specialists: designing and managing information systems,
including GIS;
 Locating information from disparate sources and use of electronic communications
networks;
The remit of the Centre was enshrined in UNEP GC Decision 22/1.II, particularly substantive
paragraphs
(1) Provision of biodiversity information, in cooperation with the CBD and in support of
the WSSD PoI
(2) Establishment of a network of collaborating centres in developing countries
II. Marine Biodiversity Assessments at UNEP-WCMC
Assessments of marine biodiversity are coordinated by the Marine and Coastal Programme at
UNEP-WCMC, with some assessments of marine species of particular interest to CITES and
CMS (e.g. marine turtles) being lead by the Species Programme. The work on coral reefs and
associated ecosystems is broadened and strengthened by two units hosted by UNEP-WCMC,
the UNEP Coral Reef Unit and International Coral Reef Action Network, focussing on policy
and on-the-ground action respectively, as well as the provision of Secretariat services to the
UK-Seychelles Joint Secretariat of the International Coral Reef Initiative (ICRI).
Scope
Although UNEP-WCMC marine biodiversity assessments have, in the main, focussed on
tropical ecosystems and species, the scope of assessments is not restricted by any aspect of
the Centre’s remit and it remains a strategic priority to extend the methodologies to
biodiversity assessments at higher latitudes. Assessments of genetic diversity have, however,
not been carried out so far. The scope of this work covers:
 marine ecosystems e.g. mangroves, coral reefs, seagrasses and, most recently, deep
and cold water coral reefs (CRU discussion paper for ICRI)
 species e.g. turtles (distribution of nesting beaches), coral reef aquarium species (trade
volumes and ecology), population trends (20 species of concern), dugongs
(conservation action plan)
 threats to marine biodiversity e.g. regional & global models of risk to coral reefs from
human activities.
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 29 of 35


present levels of ecosystem protection (calculation of the proportion of the world’s
coral reefs which are inside existing Marine Protected Areas (MPAs), lists of MPAs
containing mangroves and seagrasses)
ecological sensitivity analyses in the Mediterranean, Caspian, Baltic and Black Seas
Methodologies
Various methods are employed, but UNEP-WCMC’s core strength in assessments is locating,
compiling and standardising data from disparate information sources, worldwide. The
Centre’s networks in academia, conservation groups (e.g. IUCN SSC groups), conventions
(e.g. the national focal points of the CBD) and amongst international, national and local
NGOs are a key resource in achieving this. The networks of collaborating centres in
developing nations to be developed in response to GC Decision 22/1.II will further
consolidate these existing assessment partnerships. Data are analysed spatially and
statistically. Two examples serve best to illustrate two different types of approaches used.
(1) World Atlas of Seagrasses (2003). Prior to this project no global data on the distribution
or status of seagrasses existed. UNEP-WCMC therefore conducted a review of scientific and
grey literature, as well as requesting donations of data in the form of maps and reports. Paper
based data were digitised, standardised with electronic maps and used to produce draft
regional seagrass distribution and diversity (distribution of species) maps. Twenty seagrass
experts, mostly members of the World Seagrass Association (WSA), from around the world
were invited to prepare a status report on seagrasses for their research areas and to review the
draft UNEP-WCMC maps during a workshop in 2001. Further data submission and revision
was facilitated by posting the maps on the UNEP-WCMC Interactive Map Service (IMAPS):
the final dataset is based on more than 500 referenced sources. More seagrass scientists
offered status reports for other areas of the world. All reports were revised and edited into
chapters for a global atlas. UNEP-WCMC produced a global overview of seagrass drawing
from the resultant global databases. The World Atlas of Seagrasses consists of this overview
and 24 regional/national chapters written by 58 authors.
(2) The Living Planet Index (LPI) was first developed in 1997 by WWF and WCMC as an
attempt to answer the question, “how fast is nature disappearing?” by making effective and
quantitative use of available yet imperfect data. The LPI is an aggregation of three separate
biome indexes (the marine index includes 217 bird, mammal, reptile and fish species, from
both open-water and coastal ecosystems) each based on an underlying dataset of population
trends in a large number of animal species. The trend line represents the average change
within the entire collection of population samples within the study period, giving equal
weight to each species, whether common or rare, and to small and large populations. To
generate the index, the geometric mean change in all populations is calculated by averaging
the logarithm of all data points for each five-year interval and then finding the anti-logarithm.
This approach avoids unequal weighting due to population size and the asymmetry associated
with using percent change. An arbitrary baseline at the start of the period analysed is then set
(in the case of the LPI the baseline is set at 100 for year 1970) and the population change
calculated for each successive five-year interval.
The advent of cost-effective imagery, software and hardware means that remote sensing is
now a major resource for biodiversity assessments. UNEP-WCMC has the capacity to carry
out some remote sensing in house but increasingly is collaborating with specialist
organisations in this field, e.g. NASA.
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 30 of 35
Outputs
 Books: World Atlases of Mangroves (1997), Coral Reefs (2001), Biodiversity (2002),
Seagrasses (2003)
 Scientific papers in the peer-reviewed literature (e.g. papers in Science, Ambio, Coral
Reefs, Biological Conservation, Tropical Coasts)
 Reports, including the UNEP-WCMC Biodiversity Series: e.g. Living Planet Index,
From Ocean to Aquarium, Mangroves of East Africa, Reefs at Risk
 On-line maps and databases: e.g. Oil Spill Emergency Response and Planning System
 Field guides: e.g. A Field Guide to Coral Diseases and Mortality in the Wider
Caribbean
 Educational materials for teachers: e.g. WorldWatch lesson guides and posters
III. Contributions to the Global Marine Assessment
UNEP-WCMC’s experience and expertise will ensure that marine biodiversity is
appropriately taken into account in the GMA, via assistance with:
Inputs: UNEP-WCMC will provide the GMA with quantitative biodiversity data of the
highest quality. Not only would existing databases be updated and made available but
planned future assessments of mangroves, alien species, small island biodiversity and the
impact of high-seas fishing would generate new data. The latter two are gaps in the coverage
of existing marine assessments. The establishment of networks of collaborating biodiversity
assessment centres in developing nations will catalyse access to marine biodiversity data
which has largely been absent from previous and existing assessments, and ensure that these
areas – which in many cases are hotspots of marine biodiversity – are covered by the GMA as
equally as the more intensively surveyed waters of developed nations. This will most likely
be achieved through making different databases interoperable across the internet. Models of
threats will assist the development of scenario and predictions of future change in marine
biodiversity.
Outputs: UNEP-WCMC will help disseminate the biodiversity findings of the GMA via
specialist technical reports, provision of on-line access to interoperable databases and through
the production of landmark publications such as a potential Marine Biodiversity Atlas.
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 31 of 35
GESAMP Background Paper
GESAMP6 is a multi-disciplinary group of experts, established in 1969, that advises the
United Nations (UN) system on scientific aspects of marine environmental protection.
GESAMP exists first to satisfy the international policy requirement for a cross-sectoral,
interdisciplinary, and science-based approach to marine environmental affairs, and second to
meet the practical need for coordination and cooperation among UN agencies.
GESAMP consists of up to 30 experts in natural and social scientific disciplines relevant to
marine environmental protection who act in an individual capacity and not as representatives
of governments, institutions, or organizations. Particular projects are usually carried out by
specialist working groups including experts who are not current members of GESAMP. This
broadens the network of experts involved in GESAMP activities and allows expertise to be
tailored to projects.
GESAMP's mission is "to provide authoritative, independent, interdisciplinary scientific
advice to organizations and governments to support the protection and sustainable use of the
marine environment" and its functions are, in response to requests, to:
1. Integrate and synthesise the results of regional and thematic assessments and
scientific studies to support global assessments of the marine environment;
2. Provide scientific and technical guidance on the design and execution of marine
environmental assessments; and
3. Provide scientific reviews, analyses, and advice on specific topics relevant to the
condition of the marine environment, its investigation, protection, and/or
management.
And on a regular basis, to:
4. Provide an overview of the marine environmental monitoring, assessment, and related
activities of UN agencies and advise on how these activities might be improved and
better integrated and coordinated; and
5. Identify new and emerging issues regarding the degradation of the marine
environment that are of relevance to governments and sponsoring organizations.
GESAMP has produced 4 broad assessments of the state of the global marine environment,
most recently in 2001. A recent independent evaluation concluded that these assessments
have been among its most influential work. In addition, GESAMP has conducted some 43 indepth technical studies and thematic assessments on a range of topics including marine
environmental assessment. Thus, assessment of the marine environment is at the core of
GESAMP's mission, activities, and expertise.
In the emerging picture of the GMA it is clear that the process should be rooted in national
and regional assessments. A scientific panel at the global international level, however, is
required for the scientific design of the global assessment process, the synthesis of regional
assessments into periodic global scientific reports, and to interact with governments and other
major stakeholders in the production of global assessment reports ("policy oriented" reports.)
6
the IMO/FAO/UNESCO- IOC/WMO/WHO/IAEA/UN/UNEP Joint Group of Experts on the Scientific
Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 32 of 35
GESAMP is well-placed for a lead role in this global scientific panel. Its scientific credibility
as "a source of agreed, independent scientific advice7" has been acknowledged by CSD and is
further demonstrated by the frequent citation of GESAMP reports in the peer-reviewed
scientific literature8. GESAMP's status as the only existing interagency mechanism for
scientific cooperation on marine environmental assessment within the UN system enhances
its legitimacy, another essential characteristic of effective assessments. The approach to the
delivery of policy-relevant scientific advice regarding the marine environment in the newly
developed strategic vision for GESAMP is very much in line with the two-tier approach
envisioned for the GMA9, in which the preparation of an independent scientific report is
separated from the development of a policy report through consultation with governments
and other stakeholders.
GESAMP does not envision the global scientific panel undertaking or taking a leading role in
the regional assessments that should drive the GMA, which must become part of the routine
work of national and regional bodies for the GMA to be a regular process. Nonetheless there
should be strong links between the global panel and regional assessment mechanism both to
ensure that the global design is relevant and feasible at the regional level and to foster the
comparability of regional assessments and their utility for the purposes of global assessment.
To this end GESAMP is strengthening its regional ties, for example through participating in
regional conferences and workshops and soliciting nominations to the GESAMP expert pool
from regional organizations. GESAMP also offers the scientific expertise to provide scientific
guidance and backstopping in support of national regional assessments and to conduct indepth analyses of specific sectoral and technical issues as required by the GMA.
7
CSD, Report on the Fourth Session, doc. E.CN.17/1996/38, decision 4/15, para 45c.
Cordes, unpubl. ms. 2002. Is grey literature ever used? A case study of publications of GESAMP, an
international non-governmental scientific organization. Dalhousie University.
9
Proceedings of the Technical Workshop for Establishing a Regular Process for the Global Assessment of the
Marine Environment. Bremen (Germany): 18-20 March 2002, para. 57.
8
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 33 of 35
APPENDIX 4. ACRONYMS
ASEAN
The Association of South East Asian Nations
CalCOFI
California Cooperative Oceanic Fisheries Investigations
CAR/RCU
The Caribbean Regional Coordinating Unit of the Regional Seas Programme
CBD
Convention on Biological Diversity
UNCCD
United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification
CITES
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
DEWA
Division of Early Warning and Assessment of UNEP
EAS/RCU
East Asian Seas Regional Coordinating Unit of the Regional Seas Programme
FAO
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
GBA
Global Biodiversity Assessment
GCRMN
Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network
GEF
Global Environment Facility
GEO
Global Environment Outlook
GESAMP
Joint Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental
Protection
GIPME
Global The Global Investigation of Pollution in the Marine Environment
GIWA
Global International Waters Assessment
GLOBEC
Global Ocean Ecosystem Dynamics
GLOSS
Global Sea Level Observing System
GMA
Global Marine Assessment
GOOS
Global Ocean Observing System
GPA
Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from
Land-based Activities
GRID
Global Resource Information Database centre
HELCOM
Helsinki Commission (Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission)
IAEA
International Atomic Energy Agency
ICSU
International Council for Science
IGBP
International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme
IGOs
Intergovernmental Organisations
IHO
International Hydrographic Organisation
IMO
International Maritime Organisation
IOC/UNESCO
Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 34 of 35
IPCC
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
LME
Large Marine Ecosystems
LOICZ
Land-Ocean Interactions in the Coastal Zone of IGBP
MA
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
MDGs
The Millennium Development Goals
MEAs
Multilateral Environmental Agreements
NEPAD
The New Partnership for Africa’s Development
NGOs
Non-Governmental Organisations
OSPAR
Oslo and Paris Commission for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the
North-East Atlantic
RSP
Regional Seas Programme
SAP
Strategic Action Plan
SCOR
Scientific Committee for Oceanic Research of ICSU
TDA
Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis
UNCED
United Nations Conference on Environment and Development
UN DOALOS
United Nations Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea
UNEP
United Nations Environment Programme
UNEP-DEWA
UNEP Division of Early Warning and Assessment
UNEP GC/GMEF
UNEP Governing Council/Global Ministerial Environment Forum
UNEP-WCMC
UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre
UNESCO
United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization
UNGA
United Nations General Assembly
WSSD
World Summit on Sustainable Development
WHO
World Health Organisation
Report of the Planning Meeting on the Development of a UNEP Module for the Assessment of the Coastal and
Marine Environment, Nairobi, 19-21 November 2003
Page 35 of 35