« GEF-Western Indian Ocean marine highway development · PDF file« GEF-Western Indian Ocean marine highway development and coastal ... the tasks to be developed ... component of

GEF-WIOMHD – Environmental Component B& C

Post Completion report – Final – December 2012

1

« GEF-Western Indian Ocean marine highway development and coastal and

marine contamination prevention project, GEF-WIOMHD »

Environmental Components B & C

Post completion Report

December 2012

GEF-WIOMHD – Environmental components B& C

Post Completion report – Final – December 2012e

2

Acronyms Bunker Convention International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution

Damage, 2001 CLC 92 International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage, 1992 ESA Environmentally Sensitive Areas Fund 92 International Convention on the Establishment of an International Fund

for Compensation for Oil Pollution Damage, 1992 GIS Geographic Information System HNS Convention the International Convention on Liability and Compensation for Damage

in Connection with the Carriage of Hazardous and Noxious Substances by Sea, 1996

IMO International Maritime Organization IOC Indian Ocean Commission IPIECA International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association NOSCP National Oil Spill Contingency Plan NR Natural Resources OPRC 90 International Convention On Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response And

Co-Operation, 1990 OPRC-HNS 2000 Protocol on Preparedness, Response and Co-operation to Pollution

Incidents by Hazardous and Noxious Substances, 2000 OSCP Oil Spill Contingency Plan RCC Regional Coordination Centre ToR Terms of Reference



3

TABLE OF CONTENT

PRÉAMBULE ................................................................................................................................................. 5

1. PROJECT SYNTHESIS ......................................................................................................................... 6

1.1 OBJECTIVES OF THE PROJECT AND ITS DURATION ............................................................................... 6

2. COMPONENTS AND ACTIVITIES DESCRIPTION ACHIEVEMENTS ...................................... 8

2.1 COMPONENT 0 : SET-UP OF THE WIOMERC WEBSITE OF THE PROJECT ............................................. 8

2.1.1 Key objectives of the component: .............................................................................................. 8 2.1.2 Key events and major results developed during the project ...................................................... 8 2.1.3 Key issues of the situation at the end of the project (end of 2012) .......................................... 10

2.2 COMPONENT 1: IMPLEMENTATION OF FULL, TESTED AND OPERATIONAL NOSCP’S INCLUDING

REVISION OF POLICY ON DISPERSANT .......................................................................................................... 11 2.2.1 Key objectives of the component .............................................................................................. 11 2.2.2 Key events and major results developed during the project: ................................................... 11 2.2.3 Key issues at the end of the project (end of 2012) ................................................................... 14

2.3 COMPONENT 2: IMPLEMENTATION OF REGIONAL NOSCP AND ESTABLISHMENT OF RCC ............... 16 2.3.1 Key objectives of the component: ............................................................................................ 16 2.3.2 Key events and major results developed during the project: ................................................... 16 2.3.3 Key issues of the situation at the end of the project (end of 2012) .......................................... 20

2.4 COMPONENT 3-1: CAPACITY BUILDING- OIL SPILL PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE TRAINING (TIER 1

AND 2, TIER 3 AND TRAIN THE TRAINER)...................................................................................................... 21

2.4.1 Key objectives of the component: ............................................................................................ 21 2.4.2 Key events and major results developed during the project: ................................................... 21 2.4.3 Key issues of the situation at the end of the project (end of 2012) .......................................... 23

2.5 COMPONENT 3-2: CAPACITY BUILDING- ESA MAPPING IN SUPPORT TO NOSCP ............................. 25


2.6 COMPONENT 3-3: CAPACITY BUILDING- DEVELOPMENT OF A REGIONAL ECONOMIC ECOSYSTEM

VALUATION METHODOLOGY APPLIED TO NOSCP ....................................................................................... 30


3. KEY RECOMMENDATIONS AND ACTIONS ................................................................................ 32

3.1 RECOMMENDATION FOR REGIONAL WEBSITE CONTINUATION (RELATED TO COMPONENT 0) ............ 32 3.1.1 Handing over of the website project ........................................................................................ 32 3.1.2 Recommendation to the RCC in relation to website ................................................................ 32

3.2 RECOMMENDATIONS AND ACTIONS RELATED WITH NOSCP, NATIONAL PREPARADNESS AND

RESPONSE (RELATED TO COMPONENT 1 AND 3-1) ........................................................................................ 33

3.2.1 General recommendations for NOSCP, personnel and preparedness ..................................... 33

3.2.2 Recommendations for response command and resources ....................................................... 33 3.2.3 Recommendations for implementation and support ................................................................ 33

3.3 RECOMMENDATIONS AND ACTIONS RELATED WITH ESTABLISHMENT OF RCC AND DEVELOPMENT OF

REGIONAL ACTIVITIES (RELATED TO COMPONENT 2) .................................................................................... 35

3.3.1 Recommendation related with RCC structure and management ............................................. 35

3.3.2 Recommendations related with regional activities on Oil Spill and countries supports ......... 35

3.4 RECOMMENDATION FOR ESA MAPS (RELATED TO COMPONENT 3-2) .............................................. 36



4

3.4.1 Recommendation related with national maps and updates ..................................................... 36 3.4.2 Recommendations for regional maps harmonization .............................................................. 37

3.5 RECOMMENDATION ECONOMIC VALUATION METHODOLOGY APPLICATIONS (RELATED TO

COMPONENT 3-3) .......................................................................................................................................... 38

3.5.1 Recommendation with addressing national economic valuation in case of oil spill event ...... 38

3.5.2 Recommendation related with regional networking under a regional centre ......................... 39

3.5.3 Recommendations with update of the methodology requirements ........................................... 39

4. CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................................... 40

5. APPENDICES ....................................................................................................................................... 41

5.1 APPENDIX 1 : WEBSITE ARCHITECTURE SYNTHESIS .......................................................................... 41 5.1.1 General structure of the RCC website ..................................................................................... 41 5.1.2 Structure of the File Sharing tool ............................................................................................ 45

5.2 APPENDIX 2 : REVIEW OF NOSCP’S AND DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY ON DISPERSANT ...................... 46 5.2.1 General reviewed structure of the National organization ....................................................... 46 5.2.2 Geographic limits for dispersant spraying – Draft .................................................................. 55

5.3 APPENDIX 3 : EXAMPLE OF ESA MAPS PRODUCED – TACTICAL AND STRATEGIC ............................. 56

5.4 APPENDIX 4 - REGIONAL ECONOMIC VALUATION METHODOLOGY SUMMARY .................................. 72



5

PPRRÉÉAAMMBBUULLEE

The present report presents the review of all activities developed during the program by the technical assistance team of BRLi Otra in all components. It details:

■ The key objectives of each component

■ The key steps and missions developed

■ The main results

■ The recurrent and key difficulties encountered

■ The situation at the end of the program

■ The key recommendations to move forward based on the results obtained with an attention to the tasks to be developed under the Regional Centre RCC.

An Addendum in the course of the project allowed to adapt to evolution of the project and improve planning and activities linked with all components (see justifications of the addendum)

Note. Activities in Comoros were implemented by IOC with the support of France, (through La Réunion) almost one year after the beginning of the project.



6

1. PROJECT SYNTHESIS

1.1 OBJECTIVES OF THE PROJECT AND ITS DURATION The present project started in October 2009 with an inception report presented in April 2010 detailing the entire project. It was developed until the end of the year 2012 (end of December 2012) with last events in the end of November 2012 in Tanzania developing in country full scale trainings.

The program is organized according to the following objectives:

■ Development and update of NOSCP’s and testing of NOSCP’s through exercises and training of national representatives at all level. Development and adoption of national dispersant use policy.

■ Mapping of Environmentally Sensitive Areas and management of information in GIS format.

■ Development of an ecosystem valuation methodology.

■ Development of a Regional agreement, of a regional OSCP and of ToR for a regional coordination centre.

In more details the major objectives and milestones per component of the project can be summarized as the following

MAIN COMPONENTS OF THE PROJECT CORRESPONDING

CONSULTANT (see inception report and items)

Component 0 - Set-up of the Website of the project - Optional

(which will become the website of the RCC, once implemented) Consultant 1 & 4

Component 1 - Implementation of full, tested and op erational NOSCP’s

• 1st review of the NOSCP by the Consultant: production of the status report (on the NOSCP, based on the 10 questions to assess a NOSCP from IMO and of the level of preparedness of the country using an assessment table) and of the Action Plan to complete/ update/ implement the NOSCP and improve preparedness.

Consultants 1 (1, 2)

• Running of the 1st national workshop for the revision of the NOSCP, including the mission to work out the national dispersant use policy

Consultants 1

�NOSCP 1st revision, following the 1st national workshop including the audit of stockpile of oil spill response resources in each country

Consultants 1 (3)

• Development of ESA maps including the identification of most sensitive sites in each countries and validation of most sensitive sites at national level

Consultant 2 (all items except 4)

• Development and adoption of the National Policy for the use of dispersant in each country

Consultant 5 (all items)

• Running of the 1st national exercise including validation of the ESA maps

Consultants 1 (8)

�NOSCP 2nd revision (pre-final version), following the 1st national exercise and including feedback from National Coordinators, and integration of map of most sensitive sites and of national policy for the use of dispersant into the NOSCP’s

Consultants 1 (9)

• Running of the 2nd national exercise including the ESA maps and the final dispersant use policy

Consultants 1



7

�NOSCP final version following the 2nd exercise of the OSCP’s Consultants 1 (10, 11, 12)

Component 2 - Implementation of a regional OSCP

• Signature of a regional cooperation and assistance agreement Consultant 4 (assistance)

• Implementation of a regional OSCP, taking into consideration the NOSCP’s updated

Consultant 4 (assistance)

• Elements for establishment of the Regional Coordination Centre Consultant 4 (all items)

Component 3 - Capacity building

Oil spill preparedness and response training:

• Tier 1 and 2 training

• Tier 3 training

• Train the Trainers

Consultants 1 (4, 5, 6, 7)

• ESA mapping: training of inter-sectoral group on sensitive maps and data management

Consultant 2 (4)

• Development of a regional ecosystem valuation methodology and training

Consultant 3 (all items)

With the support of the French authorities (La Réunion)



8

2. COMPONENTS AND ACTIVITIES DESCRIPTION ACHIEVEMENTS

2.1 COMPONENT 0 : SET-UP OF THE WIOMERC WEBSITE OF THE PROJECT For further details see Appendix 15.1.

2.1.1 Key objectives of the component: BRLi-OTRA is developing a website to allow internal exchanges between national coordinators, IOC and BRLI-OTRA and for communication on the results and progress of the program and Project. The website is also dedicated to support communication for the future RCC.

2.1.2 Key events and major results developed during the project

KEY EVENTS, RESULTS AND PRODUCTS PRODUCED

■ Fist main event : Signature of an addendum for the establishment of a website for the WIOMH project and the future RCC in 2010

■ Second main event : Development of the website of the Western Indian Ocean Marine Pollution Regional Coordination Centre and for the Components B & C of the “GEF-Western Indian Ocean marine highway development and coastal and marine contamination prevention project”: (in French and English version) (see annex 5.1.1 for the description of website structure). The main actions done are:

• Development of quick, simple (not dynamic) and temporary version of the website for distributing first information and reports while the definitive website is in development.

• Choice of an address: http://www.wiomprcc-ioc.org

• Development of the design, the code and all functionalities:

o for the public website,

o for the dedicated website section to the countries (country profile consultation, production of Country Profile “on-the-fly and country profile update),

o for the interactive PDF POLREP form,

o for the administrative website allowing to manage the structure, the content of the public website, the country profiles and the access rights of each national focal point.



9

• Testing and updating of the website according to the issues identified and finalization of the website according to the comments and feedbacks of the following members: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];

• Transfer of the development version of the website onto the official internet address once finalized and approved

• Continuous integration of all relevant information for :

o the description of the project and the RCC:

o the documentation and guidelines with direct links to downloads from the “Documentation section”

o the activity reports, photos, dates of past and coming activities and other relevant documents for the project into the “News and Events”

o the country profile section according to the provided information.

• Definition of login and passwords for the national focal points and the website administrator

• Creation of two email account for the RCC:

o (Password: ka83gr44ef)

o (Password: *em68cy67-)

• Development of WIOMERC-IOC.ORG website instruction for use

■ Third main event : development of the COI File Sharing Tool, accessible via the WIOMPRCC-IOC.ORG website. This tool is aimed at facilitating the exchange of files (which cannot be sent by email due to their size) in the framework of the preparation of the Centre’s activities (training, workshop, consultancy, etc.) and in case of emergency to collect and disseminate relevant information for the incident management (report, maps, pictures, etc.). (see annex 5.1.2 for the description of website structure) The actions done are:

• Development of the design, the code to consult and to upload, to download, to manage the rights of the users into the system and in relation to the documents

• Testing, updating the website according to the issues identified and improving the system by implementing some user-friendly functions

• Hosting on the WIOMPRCC-IOC.ORG website

• Definition of login and passwords for the following users:

o the administrator (login: admin001 / password: 1234),

o the main managers (Raj PRAYAG, David DEMONBRISON, Lindsay PAGE-JONES, Darko DOMOVIC, Benoit LA PLANTE)

o the National Team Leaders (login: ntl01 / password: ntl1234),

o the visitor

• Uploading and sharing files for the Ecosystem Valuation project

KEY RECURRENT DIFFICULTIES

The major difficulties were To obtain some support document & photography’s from the stakeholders, especially the needed information to update the country profiles.



10

In this context the program did not manage to obtain the following results :

■ updating the country profiles.

■ The feedback of the project managers about the hosting services provider (Gomedia's server or SAMSA's server) ?

However we succeeded to:

■ Upload all available material and reports.

■ Identify the gaps and obtain missing material from the team and/ or Project Management Unit

■ Provide a continuous integration and a close relationship with the coordinator and the main managers of the project to assist them for the use and the updating of the websites

KEY LESSONS LEARNT

The key lessons learnt for the parties are

■ The need to develop the websites into a close relationship with the future users in order to refine and to respect their needs and to improve the functions of the tools

■ The importance to develop user-friendly and participative tools in order to improve the communication of the results and the knowledge of all stakeholders involved in the project

2.1.3 Key issues of the situation at the end of the project (end of 2012)

Situation and issues:

■ The websites (wiomprcc-ioc.org and the file sharing tool system) are currently hosted by GOMEDIA, a South African company (at Cape Town) specialised in the development of websites and hosting services..

■ OTRA has an hosting contract with Gomedia ending the 31th December 2012

■ According to the IOC Sub-Regional Project Coordinator (Raj Hemansing PRAYAG) request about the relocation of the Project Website from OTRA to the Regional Coordination Centre (mail sent the 21 June and 12 September 2012), OTRA proposed to SAMSA (or IOC) to support the hosting contract with Gomedia for the following reasons:

• The websites are correctly setup by Gomedia with their servers and the websites need some plug-in, software which are already used and bought by Gomedia.

• The migration of the websites on another the server will mean that SAMSA (or IOC) should buy some software and set up the website with the new server chosen.

■ The Gomedia’s hosting services rises to 4 010.00 / year,

• Hosting (p/m) : R285 p/month (R3 420.00 / year)

• Email hosting (p/m) : R10 p/mail box (R240.00 / year) (2 mail boxes already exist)

• Domain registration : once / year (R350.00 / year)

■ If the hosting contract is not supported from the 0 1/01/2013 by the IOC or SAMSA:

�� The websites should not be accessible from the 01/ 01/2013

�� The domain name (wiomprcc-ioc.org) could be buy by anyone and could not be used by the RCC



11

2.2 COMPONENT 1: IMPLEMENTATION OF FULL , TESTED AND OPERATIONAL NOSCP’S INCLUDING REVISION OF POLICY ON DISPERSANT The available reviewed national organizations and geographic limits for the dispersant spraying are presented in the Appendix 5.2.

2.2.1 Key objectives of the component ■ Review and/ or development of national policy for the use of dispersant product in the waters of

each country of the Project.

■ Review and update of the National Contingency Plans to manage accidental marine pollution during workshops, followed by tests of the updated documents during a table top exercise and a Full Scale Exercise in each country of the Project.

2.2.2 Key events and major results developed during the project:


Four type of national activities were planned with the respective objectives:

■ National workshop in each country for the review and update of the National Oil Spill Contingency Plan

• Present the provisions of the OPRC-HNS Protocol,

• Review and update the NOSCP (for IOC countries); review and complete the NOSCP (for Kenya, Tanzania and Mozambique),

• Review the structure of the national organization for oil spill preparedness and response,

• Review the alert, evaluation and mobilization procedures of the NOSCP, and the management process of oil spill response in country,

• Assess the operational capabilities of the country for oil spill response:

• Assess the Incident Command Centre location and equipment (for the national organization in charge of oil spill response) where the first national exercise should be carried out.

• Assess the level of oil spill response equipment in country.

• Prepare an Action Plan to update and implement the NOSCP (as required), and identify the priority actions for the organization of the first national exercise.

■ National workshop in each country for the development of the National Dispersant Use Policy

• Discuss the use of dispersant and initiate the drafting of a complete and updated National Policy for the Use of Dispersant.

■ National Oil Spill Response tabletop exercise in each countries

• Test the national organization in charge of oil spill response

• Test the updated National Oil Spill Contingency Plan

• Test the designated personnel of the national organization in charge of oil spill response

• Test the National Incident Command Post



12

■ National Oil Spill Response Full Scale Exercise

• Test the national system in charge of oil spill response management.

o Personnel of the national and provincial Command Posts,

o updated National Contingency Plan, coastal oil spill sensitivity maps and the national policy for the use of dispersant.

• Test the coordination between command posts, the communication processes and the decision making process within and between command posts (national/ local/ sector).

• Test the technical knowledge and of the members of the national and provincial command posts.

The activities were held at the following dates in the countries:

1- National workshop for the review and update of the National Oil Spill Contingency Plan And

2 - National workshop for the development of the National Dispersant Use Policy

National Oil Spill Response tabletop exercise

National Oil Spill Response Full Scale Exercise

Kenya 14-16 June 2010 6-8 December 2011 22-24 May 2012

Madagascar 6-7 May 2010 23-25 February 2011 9-11 November 2011

Mauritius 17-18 May 2010 17-19 May 2011 25-27 April 2012

Mozambique 2-4 June 2010 30 March-1 April 2011 30 October-1 November 2012

Seychelles 10-11 May 2010 28 February-1 March 2012

26-28 June 2012

South-Africa 4-6 April 2011 None planned in Project.

None planned in Project.

Tanzania 9-11 June 2010 18-20 July 2012 20-23 November 2012

Note. Activities in Comoros were implemented by IOC with the support of France, (through La Réunion).

The following results were achieved during the workshops on the NOSCP and Dispersant Policy:

■ Awareness raising about the Protocol on Preparedness, Response and Co-operation to Pollution Incidents by Hazardous and Noxious Substances, 2000 (OPRC-HNS 2000 Protocol), the International Convention on Liability and Compensation for damage in connection with the carriage of hazardous and noxious substances by sea, 1996 (HNS 1996 Convention - not yet in force) and the International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage, 2001 (Bunker 2001 Convention).

■ Clarification, in each country, of the national competent organizations and operational agencies and the roles and responsibilities of each stakeholder involved in preparedness and response in the various national organizations in charge of accidental marine pollution response; and update of the NOSCP accordingly.

■ Discussion in each country about the specific needs to improve the national strategy and to ensure the ports and industries fulfill their obligations regarding contingency plan, training, response capabilities, accordingly to the OPRC 90 Convention, to be able to face Tier I incidents, and have arrangements for larger incidents, integrated within the national contingency planning framework.



13

The workshops on the NOSCP and Dispersant Policy resulted in the development, in each country, of

■ Technical recommendations for the update of the NOSCP (regarding provisions about “oil spill preparedness and response” and developing provisions about “HNS preparedness and response”),

■ A first version of complete National Dispersant Use Policy and Technical recommendations to finalize the document (to be included in the NOSCP),

■ National Action Plan for the reinforcement of the national response capabilities comprising the main issues: Legislation, National Contingency Plan, Designation of authority, Trans-boundary and mutual assistance agreement, Training and exercise developed by the country, National resources.

The tabletop exercises allowed:

■ Testing and validating the structure of the national organization in charge of oil spill response laid out in the updated National Oil Spill Contingency Plans.

■ Raising awareness about the difficulties to

o coordinate efficiently the work of all sections of the National Command Post.

o manage the flow of information coming to the command post, and the need to response rapidly to external organizations.

o analyze rapidly the incident, prioritize the response objectives and define a response strategy.

The Full Scale Exercises allowed:

■ Training practically the personnel of the national Incident Command Post.

■ Testing the updated provisions of the NOSCP, and particularly the revised organization, the new National Dispersant Policy and the Sensitivity maps;

■ Testing the decision, coordination control and communication procedures;

The status at the end of the project is as follow:

■ The currently approved NOSCP’s of Madagascar, Mauritius, Mozambique and Seychelles have been reviewed and updated accordingly to the recommendations of the workshop

o Full review of the national organization, roles and responsibilities for each NOSCP

o Review of the response strategy for the Mauritius NOSCP

■ The currently approved NOSCP of South Africa has been discussed and reviewed to integrate the principle if Incident Command System (as the others NOSCP of the Region) and the development of Provincial OSCP’s. Work is in progress.

■ The currently draft NOSCP’s of Mozambique, Tanzania and Kenya have been reviewed, (some sections are in the process of being updated) accordingly to the recommendations of the workshop regarding the national organization and roles and responsibilities of each organization. The status of approval of the updated NOSCP’s is not known.

o The national organization of Kenya, already based on the Incident Command System was not modified.

■ All countries have developed a national policy for the use of dispersant (although some documents are still being finalized), still to be officially approved.

o Kenya. Development of a full document for a new national policy for the use of dispersant. To be enforced.



14

o Madagascar. The Ministry of Environment and Forest of Madagascar has prepared a decree with all relevant information: “DECRET N° XXX portant définition d’une politique nationale pour l’utilisation des dispersants dans les eaux maritimes de MADAGASCAR”. To be enforced.

o Mauritius. Development of a full document for a new national policy for the use of dispersant, including a comprehensive procedure on the approval of dispersant product for use in Mauritius waters. To be enforced.

o Mozambique. Development of a full document for a new National Policy for the Use of dispersants in Mozambique (Guião de Uso de Dispersantes Químicos no Mar). To be enforced.

o Seychelles. The National Policy for the Use of Dispersant includes all required provisions (limits for the use of dispersant, authorized products, etc.) and must be incorporated for enforcement into the reviewed Environmental Protection Act.

o Tanzania. Work in progress on the document for a new national policy for the use of dispersant.

■ Kenya, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mozambique, Seychelles and Tanzania have tested their NOSCP, as possible with the main proposed updates regarding the national organizations, during a tabletop exercise.

■ Kenya, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mozambique and Seychelles have tested their NOSCP during a Full Scale Exercise. A national exercise was organized in Tanzania (without the complete mobilization of the national organization).

Note. Status of the NOSCP and national Policy for the Use of Dispersant in Comoros is not known to BRLi-OTRA.

Note. South-Africa was not beneficiary of the tabletop and Full Scale exercises.

2.2.3 Key issues at the end of the project (end of 2012) The major difficulties encountered were

■ National Competent Authority for oil spill preparedness and response not always recognized by the major stake holders involved in oil spill preparedness and response in each country (because of recent changes or lack of authority).

■ National Competent Authority for oil spill preparedness and response not always recognized at international level (IMO, ITOPF) due to a lack of communication from the National Competent Authority.

■ Uncertain high level in-country support of the national technical working groups and of project activities: working group meeting, personnel and resources to continue work after the end of the project, logistical and financial support for preparedness.

■ Strong incertitude regarding the involvement and capabilities of the local actors: ports and industry.

■ Lack of technical expertise for the development/ review of response strategies, and assessment of suitable response resources (expertise, personnel, equipment, logistical support, etc.).

■ Important delays for the finalization and consolidation of the results of the workshop and recommendations into the NOSCP and other relevant documents.

■ Lack of

o suitable oil spill response and Health and Safety equipment for on shore operations (Mozambique).

o suitable location and facility for the national incident command team (in some countries).

o operational procedures in the National Contingency Plan.



15



16

2.3 COMPONENT 2: IMPLEMENTATION OF REGIONAL NOSCP AND ESTABLISHMENT OF RCC For further details see annex

2.3.1 Key objectives of the component: Key objectives of Component 2 of the project were the development of (i) a Regional agreement concerning the Regional Contingency Plan, of (ii) a Regional Contingency Plan for preparedness for and response to major marine pollution in the Western Indian Ocean, and of (iii) the Terms of Reference of a Regional Coordination Centre.

Specific objectives included:

■ Signature of a regional cooperation and assistance agreement;

■ Implementation of a Regional Contingency Plan, taking into consideration the NOSCP’s updated under Component 1 of the Project; and

■ Implementation of the Regional Coordination Centre.



The program succeeded in developingXXXXXXX: Résults, products, national documents, workshops, agreements, etc… actions by the governments, etc….

Dededede

dedededededededede

■ Preparation and dissemination to the competent national authorities in the nine countries of:

o Draft Agreement on the Regional Contingency Plan fo r preparedness for and response to major marine pollution incident s in the Western Indian Ocean (submitted to IOC by mid April 2010, for onward transmission to the countries);

o Questionnaire concerning the hosting of the Regiona l Coordination Centre (prepared and submitted for distribution to the nine countries in May 2010).

■ Filling in the questionnaire by national authorities and its return it to IOC and/or the Consultants (summer 2010).

■ Analysis (summer 2010) of Regional Agreements adopted in other Regional Seas in the world and existing Regional or Sub-regional Contingency Plans and comparison with the existing Agreement and the SRCP for the Western Indian Ocean Islands.

■ Preparation and dissemination to IOC and to the competent national authorities in the nine countries concerned, as well as to IMO, UNEP and REMPEC (during July/August 2010), of:

o Draft Regional Contingency Plan;



17

o Draft Terms of Reference for the future Regional Coordination Centre;

o Draft Decision on the establishment of the Regional Coordination Centre;

o Explanatory Note concerning the establishment of the Regional Coordination Centre.

■ Preparation, discussion and approval (end of July/beginning of August 2010) of the programme of the First Regional Workshop on the Regional Contingency Plan and the Regional Coordination Centre, and its dissemina tion (beginning of September 2010), as well as the revision of objectives and expected outcomes of the Workshop (in consultation with IOC) and adjustment of the road map for the implementation of this component.

■ Organization of the First Regional Workshop for Reg ional Cooperation for combating Oil Spills and Marine Pollution in the Western Indian O cean (also quoted as First Regional Workshop on the Regional Oil Spill Contingency Plan and the setting up of a regional Coordination Centre), held in Ebene, Mauritius, 26-28 October 2010, comprising;

o Amendment, adoption and signing of the Agreement on the Regional Contingency Plan, including the adoption of the Regional Contingency Plan;

o Approval of a “road map” for the completion of the remaining activities envisaged under the Component 2 of the project; and in particular for the selection of the host country for the Regional Coordination Centre and for the subsequent setting up of the Centre.

■ Preparation (November 2010) of the following additional documents requested at the Workshop by the representatives of the countries concerned:

o Revised ToR for the Regional Coordination Centre , reflecting discussions at the Workshop;

o Detailed description of human and material resource s considered necessary for the RCC;

o A proposal of the work plan of the RCC for biennium 2011-2012 ;

o A budget estimate for 2011 for the RCC ; and

o An estimate of financial contributions of the Western Indian Ocean countries required for the functioning of the RCC and for the implementation of the proposed work plan.

Representatives of all nine Western Indian Ocean countries concerned, IOCas well as the representatives of REMPEC/IMO, Nairobi Convention RCU Secretariat and the Consultant attended the Workshop and actively participated in it.

The First Regional Workshop discussed information and documents provided, amended, adopted and partly signed the Agreement on the Regional Contingency Plan and approved a “road map” for the completion of the remaining activities under the Component 2 of the project.

■ At the Project Steering Committee (PSC) held in Johannesburg, South Africa, in July 2011 Kenya and South Africa announced their intention to offer to host the RCC in addition to Kenya, Madagascar and Mozambique who expressed their interest in hosting the RCC at the First regional Workshop in Ebene in October 2010.



18

■ The PSC Meeting also decided to modify the originally planned procedure for the selection of the host country, namely that the RCC Evaluation Committee will be chaired by IOC and comprise IMO, REMPEC (Regional Marine Pollution Emergency Response Centre for the Mediterranean Sea), UNEP/RCU and The World Bank. The Meeting also approved a set of the evaluation criteria to be used by the evaluators.

■ By the end of July 2011 France/Reunion, Kenya, Madagascar and South Africa officially informed IOC of their offers to host the RCC and submitted all required documentation.

■ Offers evaluated by the Evaluation Committee (August 2011) and South Africa selected to host the RCC. IOC subsequently informed all parties of this decision and received no complaints concerning the selected host country.

■ South African Maritime Safety Authority (SAMSA) und ertook (autumn 2011) all necessary works at its Centre for Sea Watch and Response (CSW R) which will host the RCC in order to make the operation of RCC possible by the beginning of 2012.

■ Signature of the Regional Agreement on Co-operation on the Regional Oil Spill Contingency Plan by Mauritius (July 2011) and Kenya (26 October 2011). With Kenya being the sixth signatory, the Agreement officially entered into force on 26 November 2011.

■ BRLi-OTRA accepted the suggestion of IOC (autumn 2011) to replace the planned Second Regional Workshop by a Special PSC Meeting that wou ld have the mandate to take all necessary decisions regarding the establishment of the RCC. The Consultant responsible for Regional CP and the setting up of the Regional Centre was requested to attend the PSC Meeting convened in Cape Town, South Africa on 13-14 December 2011 and, during the same mission, provide technical assistance to the Centre for Sea Watch and Response (CSWR) of the South African Maritime Safety Authority (SAMSA) which was the institution selected to host the RCC.

■ Review by the Consultant (November 2011) of (a) the proposal of the work programme of RCC, (b) the Centre’s budget estimate for the first years of operation and (c) estimated annual financial contributions of the WIO countries for the operation of RCC, and the preparation of the operational plan of the Centre including the es timated budgets for each envisaged activity .

■ The Special PSC Meeting was held in Cape Town, South Africa, 13-14 December 2011 and was attended by delegations of all 9 WIO countries participating in the Project as well as by the representatives of IOC, IMO, UNEP/RCU, other relevant international organizations and The World Bank. The relevant results of the Meeting were:

o Adoption of the programme of activities, budget, estimated countries’ annual contributions and the operational plan of RCC;

o Signing by Tanzania , as the 7th signatory, of the Regional Agreement on Co-operation on the Regional Oil Spill Contingency Plan;

o Adoption of the text of the “Host Country Agreement for the Regional Coordination Centre for Preparedness and Response t o Oil, Hazardous and Noxious Substances Pollution in the Western Indian Ocean (“the Centre” )”, to be hosted by SAMSA in South Africa;

o Signing by heads of all national delegations of the official Conclusions of the Meeting, inter alia confirming their willingness to establish the RCC in Cape Town and pledging to sign the Host Country Agreement as soon as South Africa does so; and

o Including into the budget of the Project the costs of activities envisaged in the work programme of RCC for 2012.



19

■ Prior to and after the Special PSC Meeting the BRLi-OTRA Consultant visited the premises allocated to the RCC (CSWR/SAMSA), had several meet ings with the Management of CSWR/SAMSA and verified that CSWR complied with all requirements regarding personnel, office space and equipment, communications equipment and information technology necessary for the proper functioning of the RCC, and that the major part of activities included in the work plan for 2012/13 could be carried out by the CSWR personnel designated to work at RCC.

■ As requested and agreed at the Special PSC Meeting the BRLi-OTRA Consultant offered at distance assistance to the Director designate of RC C regarding the setting up of the Centre’s library and other relevant advice concerning the operation of RCC (winter/spring 2012)


Besides the various difficulties mentioned bellow the regional centre was adopted and is hosted in one of the countries and various agreements have been successful in the end with some delays on the schedule. The major difficulties encountered on the progress were :

■ Repeatedly belated receipt by IOC and BRLi-OTRA respectively, or not receiving at all, of requested information, comments and suggestions required for timely carrying out activities envisaged under Component 2 of the project, in particular the lack of written comments concerning draft Agreement on the Regional Contingency Plan, draft Regional Contingency Plan and draft Terms of Reference for the RCC.

■ Delays by the WIO countries in presenting their offers to host the Regional Coordination Centre, and submitting the required technical, personal and financial information, which resulted in postponing the validation and selection of the RCC host country.

■ Rescheduling of activities planned during the inception phase of the project (namely Regional Workshops). In particular, the envisaged Second Regional Workshop on Regional Cooperation (Contingency Plan and the Regional Coordination Centre) was not organized as planned, in the spring of 2011 and eventually had to be replaced by the Special PSC Meeting.

■ Requesting by the WIO countries that BRLi-OTRA Consultant prepares, develops and distributes various additional technical, financial, legal, etc. documents which were not originally envisaged under the project.

■ Non compliance by the WIO countries with the roadmap adopted by the First Regional Workshop on the Regional Contingency Plan and the Regional Coordination Centre.

■ Delayed signature of the Regional Agreement on Co-operation on the Regional Oil Spill Contingency Plan.

■ Difficulties in undertaking the final revision of the Regional Contingency Plan due to almost complete lack of comments by the WIO countries.

■ Non approval by the WIO countries of their estimated annual contribution for the RCC.

KEY LESSONS LEARNT


■ Previous existence of National Contingency Plans for marine pollution incidents, and general experience in the field of contingency planning at national level, should be considered an essential prerequisite for efficient contingency planning at regional level.

■ Organization of a specialized regional workshop on contingency planning, for a group of designated national experts who would be responsible for such activities at both national and regional levels, prior to the start of relevant project activities would have been beneficial for implementation of activities related to regional contingency planning.



20

■ Obtaining, prior to the project, from all countries participating in the project, a strong commitment concerning their expected financial support for the operation of the Regional Coordination Centre would facilitate implementation of activities related to the establishment of the RCC.

■ It is essential that participants in the meetings planned under the project, or one of its components, have sufficient power to take decisions on behalf of their countries and to sign relevant documents, if such meetings are expected to decide on issues of regional significance. It is advisable that senior officers of Ministries of Foreign Affairs are included in national delegations for such meetings.

■ Support for all countries by a neutral party in the analysis and predisigning of the documents was of great help as well as high political exchange between key players in the PMU and IOC offices in order to make feasible the regional agreements.


■ The Regional Agreement on Co-operation on the Regional Contingency Plan has officially entered into force on 26 November 2011. Seven WIO countries have signed the agreement by the end of 2011. The current status of signature by all Parties participating in the project to be provided by IOC.

■ Since the adoption of the Regional Contingency Plan there were no opportunities to test it in a real spill situation that would require joint intervention by two or more countries concerned. The possibility of organizing a large scale spill simulation exercise somewhere in the region, and the possibility of ensuring required financial resources for such an exercise, should be explored with the World Bank / GEF.

■ The RCC budget allocation by the countries and work planning shall be revised and adopted regionally to sustain the efforts engaged in the project and keep the dynamic developed.



21

2.4 COMPONENT 3-1: CAPACITY BUILDING- OIL SPILL PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE TRAINING (TIER 1 AND 2, TIER 3 AND TRAIN THE TRAINER)

2.4.1 Key objectives of the component: Train key personnel in the countries using the feedback of the workshops for National Contingency Plan review and development of a national policy for the use of dispersant, to prepare them for the tabletop and full scale exercises.


KEY EVENTS AND RESULTS AND PRODUCTS PRODUCED

Two national and two regional training activities were planned with the respective objectives:

■ National training of onsite responders and On Scene Commanders (Tier I training)

• Familiarization with the NOSCP and the incident management response organization

• Training on the main types of response techniques offshore and onshore, safety during the operations, set-up of a clean-up site, waste management, maintenance of the equipment.

• Practical exercise (day 2) in a port area or on a beach or on a rocky area for the containment and recovery of oil, for the cleanup of the site, for the organization of the working site, for the safety of workers, for the management of waste.

■ National training of personnel of the National Incident management organization (Tier II training)

• Familiarization with the NOSCP and the incident management response organization.

• Training on the incident management procedures for each Cell of the National Organization (Evaluation/ Planning, Operations, Logistics, Finance).

• Presentation of the main types of response techniques offshore and onshore, and of relevant tools, reporting forms and reference documents.

■ Regional “Train the Trainers”

• train delegates of the countries to enable them to train:

o Personnel in charge of coordinating the response operations on site, e.g. At Sea and On shore On Scene Commanders and Response Team Leaders (with a stronger focus on shoreline operations, as At Sea personnel is often already trained for offshore operations),

o Personnel member of the National Incident Management Organization (Planning cell, operation cell, Logistics cell and Finance/ Admin Cell).

■ Regional Oil spill response and preparedness Tier III Training

• to train the high level personnel for decision making during a crisis.



22

• Discuss various issues regarding the general level of preparedness in the region, the management of operations and the development of the Regional Plan:

o General level of preparedness in the region and management of response operations

o Development and approval of the national contingency plans in the region and technical considerations on response operations

o Coastal vulnerability maps developed and National Dispersant Use policy developed (and considerations for its implementation)

o Cooperation at regional level, and implementation of the Regional Contingency Plan and implementation of the RCC

o Status of the WIOMHD Project, and planning/ organization of the exercises for 2011

The activities were held at the following dates in the countries:

National training of

- onsite responders and On Scene Commanders and

- personnel of the National Incident management organization

Regional “Train the Trainers”

Regional Oil spill response and preparedness Tier III Training

Kenya 8-10 November 2010

7-10 December 2010 13-15 December 2010

Madagascar 13-15 September 2010

Mauritius 21-23 September 2010

Mozambique 28-30 March 2011

Seychelles 7-9 September 2010

South-Africa 21-23 June 2011

Tanzania 3-5 November 2010

Note. Activities in Comoros were implemented by IOC with the support of France, (through La Réunion).

Note.

The Tier I & II trainings allowed to:

■ improve the knowledge of the participants about the structure of the national organization in charge of oil spill management, and the competent organization designated for each function,

■ Discuss the implementation of the main types of oil spill response techniques, as well as aerial surveillance and shoreline survey and oil spill waste management.

■ Be aware of the requirements for a typical organization of a shoreline clean-up site, including waste management, staging area and decontamination/ catering area and plan to purchase the required equipment.

■ Acknowledge the need for a minimum of Health and Safety equipment for the operations, additional oil spill response equipment and plan to purchase the required equipment.

■ Acknowledge the need for additional oil spill response equipment (for some countries).

■ Acknowledge the gaps regarding the operational capabilities for the recovery of oil at sea (using booms and skimmer), and the storage of recovered oil at sea, and the transfer to the shore.



23

■ Acknowledge the need to organize real at sea/ on shore oil spill response exercises (and not demonstration) and to improve the decision making procedures to allow fast and effective first response operations.

The Tier III trainings allowed to:

■ Complete and share their knowledge and personal experience on oil spill response and preparedness, and on HNS maritime incidents preparedness.

■ Clarify the existing international system of international instruments (from IMO) on accidental oil pollution preparedness and compensation and better understand the scope of each instrument.

■ Better understand all the issues to be managed at national level, in case of a large Tier III.

■ Be aware of the limited offshore oil spill response capabilities in the countries and at regional level, and the need for international assistance.

■ Be aware of the logistical, technical and management challenges represented by large scale shoreline cleanup operations.

The “Train the Trainers” session allowed to:

■ Identify suitable and motivated participants with, for most of them, oil spill knowledge, that could efficiently act as trainers in their respective countries for basic oil spill response training.

■ Provide each participant a training material package consisting in a complete set of Powerpoint presentations and support documents encompassing all issues related to oil spill response, organized in two main levels (1. On Scene Commanders and Response team leaders, 2. Personnel of the National Incident Management Organization).


The major difficulties encountered were (mainly for the Tier I & II training in country):

■ Lack of suitable oil spill response and Health and Safety equipment for on shore operations.

■ In some countries: lack of equipment for storage, decantation and transfer of oil recovered at sea and/ or lack of suitable vessels to deploy the available offshore oil spill response equipment.

■ Lack of suitable location and facility for the national incident command team (in some countries).

■ at varying degrees in the countries: no official designation of the organization participating in the national incident command team, no empowerment of the agencies, limited competencies and knowledge of the representatives of the agencies about their responsibility in case of a marine pollution.

■ Lack of operational procedures in the National Contingency Plan.

■ Little consolidation of the results of the previous workshops for the update of the national Contingency Plan by the national technical committee.

■ Difficulties to organize the Tier I and II trainings in Eastern Africa countries due to a lack of communication with the national coordinators.


Regular exercises are the only way to maintain and improve the level of accidental maritime pollution response preparedness in the countries.



24

The exercises have to be planned, organized, ran and evaluated with all stakeholders involved (national, local, sectorial: port and industry).

Each country should set-up a yearly exercise program with all stakeholders, including exercises of different levels of different levels (alert and notification, mobilization, tabletop, equipment deployment, full scale exercise).

In country, the national coordinator for accidental maritime pollution preparedness should be in charge of the exercise planning and organization. Adequate funding must be allocated to the organization of the exercise.

External expertise should be considered to organize the equipment deployment exercises and the full scale exercises (to be sourced by the National Coordinator directly or with the assistance of the IOC).

It is essential that each exercise is correctly evaluated by dedicated observers and that corrective actions are implemented accordingly to the feedback of the exercise.



25

2.5 COMPONENT 3-2: CAPACITY BUILDING- ESA MAPPING IN SUPPORT TO NOSCP

For further details see APPENDIX 3 : Example of ESA maps produced – Tactical and Strategic.

2.5.1 Key objectives of the component: The production of ESA maps is based on national working groups that are supported by BRLi-OTRA ESA maps expert during 2 in countries missions with the first one for presentation of the method. The second mission is dedicated to training and technical inputs with adapted time for each country according to its capacity in producing and understanding the process. Longer mission duration was agreed with the management Unit in many countries in order to ease understanding and development of clarification on product expected and maps.


KEY EVENTS AND RESULTS AND PRODUCTS PRODUCED

The program succeeded in supporting the countries to develop or update their oil spill coastal sensitivity maps and many progress was done.

The following activities were developed :

■ Defining regional methodology and harmonization training tools and precising with the countries the requirements and establishment of working groups guidelines in order to develop ESA maps.

■ Developing regional working groups around a recognize office in charge of developing-updating ESA maps

■ Developing first in country missions: Ensure in countries missions for training on regional methodology, agreeing and transferring guidelines for ESA maps, building National action plans and roadmaps to produce ESA maps, alert the project on material needs for the national offices.

■ Following from office development of ESA maps and recall for transfer of datas to all countries officers.

■ The harmonization of the maps would be a target of the RCC when established. Responsibility to implement and improve the maps to finalization and validation of various officials was dedicated to the countries responsibilities (It was decided in accordance with IOC in the course of the project that no third mission is planned as per initial contract and no regional workshop shall be planned for harmonization of the maps in order to strengthen the second missions).

■ Developing second longer in country training and ESA maps intensive workshops to assist in improving national ESA maps. In Comoros, la Reunion Island authorities took in charge follow up on the maps however the first mission showed strong advances in finalizing the maps. Most of the maps produced are the results of the national workshops implemented during the second missions and efforts by nationals after the missions.

■ Following from office and asking for transfer of data and updated maps.

■ All national workshops and missions reports were transferred to the PMU.

First in country mission : presentation of regional harmonized methodology, ESA Maps and GIS mapping assessment and ESA maps national action plan and roadmap to produce the ESA maps in support to NOSCP

Second in country mission workshops: training and supporting improvements in developing the maps

Dates including in country preparation/relations post session



26

Dates including in country preparation/relations post session on each session with nationals (workshop durations)

on each session with nationals (workshop durations)

Comoros 21-24 September 2010 (4 days intensive workshop)

La reunion management

Kenya 10-12 June 2010 (3 days) 19-26 February 2011 (5 days intensive workshop)

Madagascar May 2010 (2 days) 15-20 September 2010 (3 days intensive workshop)

Mauritius 13-15 May 2010 (1 day) 6-8 dec 2011 (1 day)

Mozambique 29 may -2nd June 2010 (3 days) 24 sept – 1st October 2011 (6 days intensive workshop)

Seychelles 10-12 May 2010 (2 days) No second in-country mission was planned for Seychelles and none could be organised either due to lack of response over emails.

South-Africa Will produce its own operational maps without TA

Tanzania 6-9 June 2010 (2 days) 1-7 October 2011 (5 days intensive workshop)

The status of ESA Maps per country, based on the latest information provided during the tabletops and full scale exercises and in relation with datas gathered after are as follow :

Countries Status

Comoros Base maps and Resource & Tactical maps : finalized

Strategic maps: finalized

Operational maps: Completed beside site-specific operational maps

First set of maps (tactical 1:50000, and strategic 1:100 000) produced by the GIS department (ex-CEFADER). First version was printed.

All maps developed but still remains to be finalized and validated at the national level.

Kenya Base maps and Resource & Tactical maps : finalized


Operational maps: mostly developed

First set of map produced by KMFRI (tactical, based on an update of the current oil spill coastal sensitivity atlas). First version was printed for the tabletop exercise.

All maps developed with some works still required over the operational maps as some detailed data like access roads and site specific operational maps still need to be digitized and moreover all the maps need to be finalized and validated at the national level.



27

Madagascar Base maps and Resource & Tactical maps: finalized

Strategic maps: Under Development

Operational maps: Under Development

First set of maps (tactical) produced by the Office National de l’Environnement of Madagascar (ONE)

The resource maps have been developed for the whole island while the strategic and operational maps have unknown progress status. There shall be the need for finalization and validation of maps at the national level. Progress of the development of maps from Madagascar has been difficult to obtain as response from the coordinator is low.

Mauritius Base maps and Resource & Tactical maps: finalized



First set of maps for Mauritius (tactical and strategic) and one operational map for Port-Louis produced by the Ministry in charge of Housing

The operational maps are being developed and finalisation and validation of maps at the national level still remains.

Mozambique Base maps and Resource & Tactical maps: finalized



First set of coastal resources maps produced (very small scale) and strategic maps produced by the Instituto Nacional de Hidrografia e Navegação (INAHINA).

The Tactical and strategic maps have been developed, however due to unavailability of detailed data the operational maps still remains to be completed through the generation of new data by digitization. Finalisation and validation of maps would eventually have to be undertaken at the national level.

Seychelles Base maps and Resource & Tactical maps: finalized for many islands

Strategic maps: finalized for many islands

Operational maps: almost finalized or Under Development

Development of 5 set of maps for Praslin, La Digue and Mahé: Baseline maps, environmental maps, strategic maps, operational and tactical maps (work by the Department of the Environment and the Ministry of Land Use and Habitat).

Note: Until maps are developed for the outer coralline islands, they are considered “Highly Sensitive”. Seychelles have appropriate data and technical knowhow to develop maps. Response from the coordinator was low during a long period.



28

Tanzania Base maps and Resource & Tactical maps: finalized



First set of coastal resources maps produced (but at a very small scale) and strategic maps produced.

The Tactical and strategic maps have been developed, however due to unavailability of detailed data the operational maps still remains to be completed through the generation of new data by digitization. Finalisation and validation of maps would eventually have to be undertaken at the national level.


The major difficulties were

■ lack of resources in country (personnel and funding),

■ lack of leadership for this task and in country high level support,

■ lack of recent baseline data (coastline, soil occupation etc.).

■ The main reason for no completing the operational maps for most country is due to lack of detailed data of the shore and inland features like rivers and roads etc.

■ The countries had difficulties to address priorization of sites and defining specific in site operational plans especially when large coasts are concerned (time, means, coordination,…. See bellow key lessons learnt)

■ Delays and various national problems independent of the BRLi-Otra team affected the production of the maps and the data base as per the scheduled plan. Main reasons for all the countries have lack of manpower and political support; disagreements between stakeholders in the provision of data, or lack of response from officers in charge. In this sense No database was transferred to the BRLi-Otra team beside various demands to see progress situation and build up data base situation.

KEY LESSONS LEARNT

The key lessons learnt for the parties are:

■ The maps needs to be produced by a working group composed of GIS specialist, of coastal environmentalist, of specialist of the coastal activity and economics, and of oil spill responders and supervised by the national authority.

■ The maps can be developed – most of the time – with available data and knowledge of in country experts.

■ The maps must stay remain simple to understand and to use in emergency situations, must be focused on the needs of the end users (i.e. oil spill responders and decision makers) and operational, i.e. be a real decision support tool and on site operation assistance aid.

■ A minimum of resources, personnel and high level support is instrumental, as well as a good coordination with the other tasks and groups involved in oil spill preparedness (e.g. update of the NOSCP, development of the national policy for the use of dispersant, oil spill responders etc.).



29

■ other key lessons learnt for TA : difficulties to address progress and get informations or develop the data implies that more frequent missions on site and adapted planning capacity in the program is developed in order to be able to support one country with longer time workshops missions allowing resolving also some data governance issues. To be able to collect and receive data on regional projects (with purpose of regional data base), the regional project officers or donors shall get a formal approval prior to project implementation confirming transfer of data to the projects enabling production of regional databases.

■ The most sensitive sites, requiring high priority protection, if and when feasible – have not been identified in most of the countries. This is mainly due to the following facts

o The coastal resources maps, tactical maps, and general strategic maps have first to be produced, to collect general knowledge on the coastal environment.

o The identification of the most sensitive sites requires precise knowledge of the very sensitive coastal features that could be protected by floating booms for example. This is achievable in the countries with limited coastline, but more challenging in countries with very long coastlines.

o The identification of the most sensitive sites, requiring high priority protection, requires the participation of oil spill responders, to evaluate the feasibility of the protection of each site: how to deploy the boom? How to anchor the boom? What length of boom is required? What type of boom is best suited? What other equipment is needed? Etc.


All countries have developed a set of tactical maps, and most countries have developed completed strategic maps.

Many countries developed operational maps at national levels but the major needs to produce a real operational set of maps in each country are:

■ Identify and approve the most sensitive sites (addressing better a priority effort on very sensitive sites) requiring high priority protection, and specifically those can be effectively protected (e.g. using floating booms). This requires to give strong attention to practical aspects and feasibility to mobilize actors and materials in support to highly sensitive sites

■ Develop site-specific operational maps which should be developed in order to facilitate the work of response teams during an emergency. This requires another type of work going more into details with local authorities and develop more detailed maps that could support emergency action plans.

An effort for the regional harmonization of the maps and sharing of the results between countries should also be envisaged especially in relation with RCC (see recommendations).



30

2.6 COMPONENT 3-3: CAPACITY BUILDING- DEVELOPMENT OF A REGIONAL ECONOMIC ECOSYSTEM VALUATION METHODOLOGY APPLIED TO NOSCP

For further details the project product “Regional ecosystem valuation Methodology”

2.6.1 Key objectives of the component: The production of the regional Economic valuation methodology is based on the establishment of national working groups leaded by an environmental economist that will produce with BRLi-Otra and national experts a regional validated method adapted to Oil spill infrastructure and coastal harbors event (not boats incidents). Only two 2 workshops are targeted by the project to produce this method. After the first workshop (presentation of the methods) the working groups will test the method chosen in order to reach the second workshop with some lessons learnt and valid the best regional methodology.



The economic valuation component succeeded in developing the following activities

■ A 5-day workshop (Workshop 1) organized with validation of IOC projects officers was held in November 2010 in Port Louis (Mauritius). The overall objective of Workshop 1 was to develop an economic valuation methodology which can be applied and pilot tested by all countries following the completion of the workshop.

■ Case studies were conducted in 5 countries of the region applying the economic valuation methodology presented and discussed in the course of Workshop 1. The BRLi-Otra Consultant supported the national teams with adequate literature and home office advises at distance.

■ A 4-day workshop (Workshop 2) organized with validation of the IOC project officers was held in July/August 2012 in Dar es salaam. In the course of Workshop 2, each participant country team presented the results of their case studies. A total of seven (7) case studies were presented. Lessons learned were shared in the course of Workshop 2 and supported the validation of the regional methodologies to apply in relation with the project objectives.

The key results of the component are the following.

■ Production of guidelines and synthesis of applicable regional methodologies to combine in case of necessity to develop economic valuation in case of oil spill in the region. The regional methodology is effective.

■ Targeted training (2 regional workshops) to national experts on various subjects of economic valuation (see workshops programs and minutes reports);

■ Comprehensive exchange with experts on economic valuation methodologies;

■ A number of original case studies of economic valuation of coastal ecosystems;

■ The first case of application of the contingent valuation methodology in Mauritius;

■ An increase awareness of the role of economic valuation in the decision-making process



31


The major difficulty was the lack of significant and dedicated financial resources for the national teams to implement case studies of economic valuation.

In this context the program did not manage to pilot test the economic valuation methodology in the Seychelles and in South Africa. However we succeeded in supporting the development of case studies in 5 countries of the region and in raising understanding and capacity of the economic valuation methodology in these countries.

KEY LESSONS LEARNT ON ECONOMIC VALUATION METHODOLOGY


■ For building regional methodology: While the economic valuation of coastal ecosystems goods and services will require the expertise and guidance of an economist, an economist cannot undertake such valuation without access to a wide range of expertise (such as expertise on fisheries, coral reefs, mangroves, oil spills impact on water quality, water sanitation, recreation, etc.). The economic valuation of coastal ecosystems goods and services requires a team of experts – determined by the issue at hand – and not the sole expertise of an economist

■ For developing national methods to address economic valuation linked with oil spills: There is no one single economic valuation methodology better or superior to all other ones. All methodologies have advantages and disadvantages. In particular, no single methodology can provide a complete assessment of the economic value of the goods and services produced by coastal ecosystems. The nature of the issue at hand, including those which may arise as a result of oil spill, will determine the nature of the most appropriate methodology to select

■ For developing regional harmonization between economists of the regions - The need are to establish an electronic library of case studies on economic valuation. These case studies could be grouped by the nature of the economic valuation methodologies (e.g. travel cost methodology, contingent valuation methodology, etc.) and / or by the the nature of the coastal ecosytems goods and services being valued (e.g. fisheries, recreation, etc.)


The regional methodology is produced in accordance with regional workshop agreements. The recommendations (see bellow) inform on how to use it and what kind of regional activities could be developed.



32

3. KEY RECOMMENDATIONS AND ACTIONS

Based on the experience and results at the end of the technical assistance in December 2012, the BRLi-OTRA Team provide the following recommendations.

3.1 RECOMMENDATION FOR REGIONAL WEBSITE CONTINUATION (RELATED TO COMPONENT 0)

Based on the situation at end of 2012, we recommend the following actions to support best use of the results of the programme:

3.1.1 Handing over of the website project OTRA will facilitate the handing over of the website project by

■ Facilitating the relationship between the RCC and Gomedia for the hosting service contract

■ Resending the “WIOMERC-IOC.ORG website instruction for use” to the RCC to allow them to update and to manage the content of the websites.

3.1.2 Recommendation to the RCC in relation to webs ite BRLi-OTRA recommends to the RCC to :

■ Establish an hosting contract with Gomedia who manages the domain name of the website and the associated email accounts

■ Improve the knowledge of national stakeholders by:

• Regularly updating the “News and Events” section according to the activities realised and upcoming by the RCC,

• Keeping informed the countries of the international events (conference, incident) related to the oil spill preparedness and response (using the news and Events section)

• Regularly updating the home page (section latest news and events) according to the information defined into the website

• Updating the Document section with updated and relevant documents and websites

■ Facilitate the sharing the national resources information by:

• Training the national focal point to update their Country profile from the website or at least to send the Country Profile template information sheet filled (note: the Project Management Unit should resend the Country Profile template information sheet to each country and urge them to send it back fill up)

• Control the information inputted, especially for the response resources, emergency contact and Trans boundary arrangement procedures



33

3.2 RECOMMENDATIONS AND ACTIONS RELATED WITH NOSCP, NATIONAL PREPARADNESS AND RESPONSE (RELATED TO COMPONENT 1 AND 3-1) Refer to the specific national reports for the main recommendations of the last activity (Full Scale Exercise).

3.2.1 General recommendations for NOSCP, personnel and preparedness The key recommendations regarding this component for the parties are:

■ To ensure all relevant international conventions from IMO regarding preparedness and response to oil spill and HNS marine pollution are ratified and that the national legal framework is updated accordingly, especially regarding the conventions related to compensation.

■ To ensure that the National Competent Authority for oil spill and HNS marine pollution preparedness and response is empowered, recognized by all national stakeholders and known by all international organizations.

■ To finalize the update of the NOSCP, the coastal sensitivity maps and the national dispersant policy and approve the NOSCP, including the official designation of the key personnel, e.g.

o National Incident Commander,

o Leaders of the main sections of the national team (Planning, Operations, Logistics, Finance).

■ To identify the key personnel to follow regular and specific trainings and attend to realistic exercises, including Port Authorities and the private sector.

3.2.2 Recommendations for response command and reso urces The key recommendations regarding this component for the parties are:

■ To assess the needed improvements at the National Incident Command Post or Centre (organization, running procedures, support documents, etc.);

■ To audit the existing oil spill response equipment, identify the key missing equipment and renew and/ or improve accordingly the stockpile of national oil spill response equipment (for on shore and at sea response);

■ To improve the equipment and logistical support for operations at sea and on the shore, including Health & Safety equipment (e.g. PPE’s) and support documents and tools for the command Post,

■ To improve the Decision, Command, Control and Coordination procedure at the Command Post and on the field.

3.2.3 Recommendations for implementation and suppor t Four items are instrumental for the management of the key issues above:

■ National coordinator for oil spill preparedness officially designated in each country with the competence, authority and resources

■ The high level in country support (e.g. Ministry)

■ Adequate funding for the preparedness activities and improvement of resources and equipment



34

■ External expertise when needed (mobilized through the relevant organizations IOC, IMO, IOPC, ITOPF, oil spill consultancy companies etc.).

In each country, the National Coordinator should identify the key priority objectives, and organize the missions to manage these objectives, with external expertise of and when needed.



35

3.3 RECOMMENDATIONS AND ACTIONS RELATED WITH ESTABLISHMENT OF RCC AND DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL ACTIVITIES (RELATED TO COMPONENT 2)

3.3.1 Recommendation related with RCC structure and management ■ The sustainability of the results of the project should be ensured by regularly organizing

meetings of the competent national authorities of the countries concerned, at least once every two years, possibly back-to-back with the meetings of UNEP/ Nairobi Convention RCU.

■ The RCC budget allocation by the countries and work planning shall be revised and adopted regionally to sustain the efforts engaged in the project and keep the dynamic developed.

■ Adapted manpower and revision of missions shall be adopted regionally to address regional key issues regarding supporting national NOSCP revisions and trainings

3.3.2 Recommendations related with regional activit ies on Oil Spill and countries supports

■ Since the adoption of the Regional Contingency Plan there were no opportunities to test it in a real spill situation that would require joint intervention by two or more countries concerned. The possibility of organizing a large scale spill simulation exercise somewhere in the region, and the possibility of ensuring required financial resources for such an exercise, should be explored with the World Bank / GEF.

■ Periodic updating national and regional workshop should ease data updating on the weakest countries on ESA maps and improving harmonization of ESA maps.

■ Integrate the various recommendations of other components on activities that could be taken in charge by the RCC.



36

3.4 RECOMMENDATION FOR ESA MAPS (RELATED TO COMPONENT 3-2)

3.4.1 Recommendation related with national maps and updates

The main recommendations for the maps are as follow:

■ Ensure the organizations in charge of carrying out the mapping work in each country has sufficient competencies and resources.

■ Ensure that personnel with oil spill response expertise are involved into the identification of high priority sites and the development of site-specific operational maps.

■ Ensure additional efforts in priorization of sensitive sites, relation with regional authorities and expertise (especially in large countries) and ensure that following actions are carried out in each country to produce site specific operational maps.

■ Improve sensibilization on the interest of transparency and sharing information between offices and actors especially on data bases and maps

Countries High priority actions

Comoros Identify and approve the most sensitive sites requiring high priority protection, and specifically those can be effectively protected (e.g. using floating booms).

Develop site-specific operational maps which should be developed in order to facilitate the work of response teams during an emergency.

Validation of maps at the national level and transfer to regional RCC (datas and maps)

Kenya Identify and approve the most sensitive sites requiring high priority protection, and specifically those can be effectively protected (e.g. using floating booms).

Finalize general operational maps and develop site-specific operational maps which should be developed in order to facilitate the work of response teams during an emergency.


Madagascar Develop strategic and operational maps, improve national commission work and better address responsabilities and co-production between national offices and develop relations with regional working groups to improve the operational maps.

Identify and approve the most sensitive sites requiring high priority protection, and specifically those can be effectively protected (e.g. using floating booms).



Mauritius Identify and approve the most sensitive sites requiring high priority protection, and specifically those can be effectively protected (e.g. using floating booms).





37

Mozambique Pursue the efforts and improve datas digitalization and national maps precisions (higher precision scale)

Final improve of strategic maps with higher precision and finalize operational maps as bellow.



Seychelles Continue the development of the maps for all islands.




Tanzania Pursue the efforts and improve datas digitalization and national maps precisions (higher precision scale)

Final improve of strategic maps with higher precision and finalize operational maps as bellow.



■ Officially approve and validate the list of sensitive sites, the set of maps and documents and integrate them into the NOSCP, as operational Appendix.

■ Ensure an update program is implemented (on a 3 to 5 years period).

3.4.2 Recommendations for regional maps harmonizati on The regional harmonization of the coastal sensitivity maps would be a great advantage for the region. This implies

■ Having similar mapping methodology between country. This is already the case due to the training and methodology diffuse by BRLi-Otra during this technical assistance. A recall on logos and colour harmonization for securing common use could be done during a regional workshop session to finalize the harmonization. Presence of key GIS and data base administrator of each countries would be required. Updating national officers ion regional methodology could be of interest but could be done through regional workshops related with RCC meetings.

■ Building and sharing the main maps and data base at a regional level (e.g. types of coast, most sensitive sites).

These actions could be implemented with the support of the RCC and could be one of the animation tasks to be developed by the RCC centre if commonly agreed.



38

3.5 RECOMMENDATION ECONOMIC VALUATION METHODOLOGY APPLICATIONS (RELATED TO COMPONENT 3-3) The regional methodologies proposed have been shared and key specialist of the region confirmed they are appropriate to the region. They produced produced a series of recommendations addressed both to practitioners and key national officers. The key recommendations below refer to the most important ones that came out from the second regional workshop.

3.5.1 Recommendation with addressing national econo mic valuation in case of oil spill event ■ General recommendations on the methodologies

o The economic valuation methodologies are appropriate within the overall theme of this consultancy on coastal and marine contamination prevention project;

o There is no one single economic valuation methodology better or superior to all other ones. All methodologies have advantages and disadvantages. In particular, no single methodology can provide a complete assessment of the economic value of the goods and services produced by coastal ecosystems. The nature of the issue at hand will determine the nature of the most appropriate methodology to select; and

o While the economic valuation of coastal ecosystems goods and services will require the expertise and guidance of an economist, an economist cannot undertake such valuation without access to a wide range of expertise (such as expertise on fisheries, coral reefs, mangroves, oil spills impact on water quality, water sanitation, recreation, etc.). The economic valuation of coastal ecosystems goods and services requires a team of experts – determined by the issue at hand – and not the sole expertise of an economist.

■ The recommendations for the countries authorities are the following:

o To pursue the development of additional studies of economic valuation of key coastal ecosystems potentially threatened by oil spill events before such events occur. It is important to raise awareness of policy-makers not only with the specific results of these specific case studies but also and perhaps more importantly that coastal ecosystems produce a wide variety of goods and services which have an economic value and the economic value of these goods and services must be accounted for by policy-makers.

o It would be of interest to conduct national workshops to present to policy-makers the outcome of the case studies;

o Centralize and develop data collection on coastal zone ecosystems and activities and make it available to economists, since an important caveat being that data and information are not easily accessible;

o To facilitate additional training and capacity building among experts of the region. Different national teams have different levels of expertise, capacity, interest and commitment to undertake a comprehensive economic valuation of coastal ecosystem goods and services. There is a strong need to undertake considerably more economic valuation studies such as those which were undertaken in the course of the project;

■ The recommendations for economical practitioners mobilized

o To identify a group of experts on the subject of economic valuation of coastal ecosystems and on the potential physical impacts of oil spill on coastal ecosystems which could be quickly mobilized in the event of an oil spill.



39

3.5.2 Recommendation related with regional networki ng under a regional centre

■ Recommendations for key future steps to strengthen the regional capacity in economic valuation

o It would be of interest to conduct national workshops to present to policy-makers the outcome of the case studies: It is important to raise awareness of policy-makers not only with the specific results of these specific case studies but also and perhaps more importantly that coastal ecosystems produce a wide variety of goods and services which have an economic value and the economic value of these goods and services must be accounted for by policy-makers.

o All countries would benefit if it were possible to share a “virtual library” of the theoretical and empirical literature on coastal ecosystems economic valuation around the world and in the region specifically;

o It would be of interest to set in place a network of regional experts which could support the conduct of more economic valuation studies throughout the region. This network could include the participation of international experts in the field; and

o Where appropriate, opportunities should be used to insert the need for economic valuation in national environmental regulations themselves.

3.5.3 Recommendations with update of the methodolog y requirements

To update the method the main recommendation is that national officers should receive additional training on drafting of Terms of Reference for the conduct of economic valuation studies. Government officers should also receive additional training on reviewing economic valuation studies produced by consultants.

Increase exchange between economist’s practitioners and developing a network related with measuring environmental services and economic valuation in the region would ease developing updating of the method based on experiences.



40

4. CONCLUSION

Beside various difficulties (planning, postponing of missions, changing situation in the national offices,…) the project succeeded in developing the activities expected and even some more thanks to the capacity of adaptation of the team, the project officers.

The recommendations proposed in this report will support the RCC in addressing the issues and develop new activities strengthening national capacities and exchange of information and best practices.



41

5. APPENDICES

5.1 APPENDIX 1 : WEBSITE ARCHITECTURE SYNTHESIS

5.1.1 General structure of the RCC website The RCC website is composed by two sub-websites:

• A public website for the consultation of the information by the public (general information) and by the national focal point (private information)

• An administrative website for the management of the structure and the content of the public website



42

�� Public website

Menus SubMenus Description

HOME – First page of the website with a general presentation of the site, purpose of the website, and: a map displaying the area of interest of the project, the latest news and: link to the GEF IWLEARN website

About us

– Context of the website project – About the centre – Objectives – Preamble of the RCC – Functions ( – Personnel (staff)

This section provide the:

– Legal framework for the WIOMP-RCC, establishment of the WIOMP-RCC

– Specific missions and the function of the WIOMP-RCC

– List of the staff of the project and the contact of the project coordinator

News & Events

– Events 2010 – Events 2011 – Events 2012 – Calendar – Procurement Notice

– Tables of realized and upcoming news and events with an access to the reports, program and photo and other relevant document for these event (classified by year)

– Calendar of all news and events

Activities – General functions – Preparedness & Response – Prevention

– General functions and activities of the RCC related to the preparedness (at national and regional level), to the response operations in case of marine pollution and to the prevention actions

Country plans & profiles

– National Oil Spill Contingency Plans – Sensitivity maps – Waste management plan – International Conventions – National position on use of dispersant – Oil spill response equipments – Country profiles – Regional Marine Contingency Plan

– Regional table summarizing the status of • The NOSCP of each country • The Sensitivity maps of each country • The waste management plan of each country • The ratified conventions of each country • The oil spill equipment in each country

– Access to the Country profile of each country with the main information related to preparedness and response

– Description and Link to the ROSCP document



43

Menus SubMenus Description

Emergency (only available by the focal points, the administrator of the website once logged)

– Emergency contact – Emergency notification – Assistance – Response resources

– List of the : • Emergency contacts the RCC (24h/24) Country lead / operational agencies • Emergency contacts of country lead/ operational agencies

– Access to the emergency notification form – Identification of the General RCC Procedure and the table summarizing the specific procedures for

the request of countries assistance – List of the:

• response equipment in the region that could be mobilized for trans-boundary assistance • trained personnel by country en by IMO training course level

• Response experts in the region

Documentation

– Documents and guides – Specialized organizations

documentation – Operational Tools – Educational Tools – Links

– List of downloadable documents and guides International Conventions, Operational Guideline, Annual Reports of the RCC, National legislation and regulations and Incident reports

– List of downloadable documents of specialized organizations (IPIECA, Cedre REMPEC, IOPC) – List of Operational and Educational tools – List of useful Links (Institutional & International organizations, International agreements and

conventions, Maritime safety, Research and development agencies, Oil spill response companies)

Private section (Specific to a country and only available by the focal point of this country once logged)

– One sub menu per section of the country profile:

– Access to the national section to update the country profile (General information / Contact list / Status of the National Marine Contingency Plans (NOSCP, Dispersant use policy, Sensitivity mapping, Waste management plan) / Conventions & Agreements / Training / Expertise and resources / Trans boundary arrangements)

�� Administrative website

Module Description

menu Module to manage the menus. To build the structure of the menus content Module to manage the content of each menu. To define the information of each menus users Module to manage the users. To manage the rights of each users files Module to manage the files uploaded on the server (pictures, PDF) galleries To manage each gallery photo country profile Module to manage the structure, the data of the Country Profiles language To translate some sections of the websites



44

Home page of the public website Administrative website – section to update an article


45

5.1.2 Structure of the File Sharing tool The File Sharing tool is organized in two sections with specifics functions (see the table below).

View and Upload documents

This section allows to download, to upload document and to manage the access of the user to the documents. These functions are available or not according to the user rights of the member. (see the below picture)

The interface displays in the three column the list of Topics, the list of SubTopics of the topic selected and the list of documents of the SubTopics chosen.

Manage files and Users

Only available by the website administrator, this section allows to manage

• The users (login, password and type of user and its right into the system),

• the access rights to documents for each user

The users of the system are classified into 4 categories :

• Visitors: can read authorized files

• Registrer Users: can read authorized files and upload files.

• Members of the Western Indian Ocean Marine Pollution Response Coordination Centre: can read files, upload and manage files and create topics and subtopics to class the files

• Administrator of tool: can manage all files, topic and subtopic and can manage the user's rights

Interface to download / upload and manage the document and the user’s rights to these document



46

5.2 APPENDIX 2 : REVIEW OF NOSCP’S AND DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY ON DISPERSANT

5.2.1 General reviewed structure of the National or ganization

5.2.1.1 Kenya Current draft version – not modified during the Project.

Incident Command Team Structure

5.2.1.2 Madagascar

Current approved version of the national structure – not modified during the Project.

National On-Scene Commander

Operations Manager

Planning Manager

Logistics Manager

Finance Manager

Historian


47



48

Current draft version of the national team –modifie d during the Project.


49

5.2.1.3 Mauritius

Current draft version of the national structure – m odified during the Project.



50



51

5.2.1.4 Mozambique Current draft version of the national team – not mo dified during the Project.

Centro Nacional de Coordenação

Coordenador Nacional Director Geral Do INAMAR

Finanças Logística Operações Planeamento

R.Públicas



52

5.2.1.5 Seychelles



53


5.2.1.6 South-Africa

Document under review.



54

5.2.1.7 Tanzania



55

5.2.2 Geographic limits for dispersant spraying – D raft

Information based on the latest reports. Refer to the specific texts for the products that are planned to be approved in each country.

Comparison of the different geographical limits for dispersant use decided in the countries through the GEF project

Tier 3 Tier 1&2 Possibilities to implement or to modify

MADAGASCAR >100 t

30 m & 24 NM

Tier 1 :0 – 10 t

20m & 2 NM

Groupe de travail

Tier 2 :10 – 100 t

30m & 12 NM

SEYCHELLES >200 t

20 m & 1 Km

<200t

10 m & 0.5 Km

Commission

MAURITIUS >100 t

20 m & 1 NM

<100 t

10 m & 0.5 NM

Ministry Environment + stakeholders

MOZAMBIQUE >200 t

20 m & 1 Km

<200t

10 m & 0.5 Km

Commission

TANZANIA >200 t

20 m & 1 Km

<200t

10 m & 0.5 Km

Commission

KENYA >200 t

20 m & 1 Km

<200t

10 m & 0.5 Km

Technical committee



56

5.3 APPENDIX 3 : EXAMPLE OF ESA MAPS PRODUCED – TACTICAL AND STRATEGIC

5.3.1.1 Comoros


57

5.3.1.2 Kenya



58


59



60

5.3.1.3 Madagascar

5.3.1.4 Mauritius


61



62


63

5.3.1.5 Mozambique



64


65

5.3.1.6 Seychelles



66


67



68


69



70

5.3.1.7 Tanzania


71



72

5.4 APPENDIX 4 - REGIONAL ECONOMIC VALUATION METHODOLOGY SUMMARY

5.4.1.1 Content of the regional economical valuation methodology report

Part A presents an overall introduction to the economic valuation of ecosystem goods and services. Chapter 2 presents the general framework guiding the economic valuation. Issues common to all valuation methodologies are discussed in Chapter 3. Part B presents the various methodologies available for the economic valuation of ecosystems goods and services in general but more specifically as these goods and services may be impacted by development projects. Chapter 4 introduces the methodologies. Chapters 5 to 8 discuss the methodologies in detail and provide specific recommendations to researchers / analysts and Government officers regarding the conduct and the review of such economic valuation. Specifically, Chapter 5 focuses on the change of productivity methodology; Chapter 6 on revealed preferences methodologies; Chapter 7 on stated preferences methodologies; and Chapter 8, on the benefit transfer methodology. Chapter 9 briefly discusses the presentation of survey results in economic valuation studies, and Chapter 10 provides a brief compendium of the recommendations to researchers / analysts.

5.4.1.2 Synthesis of the report The development of this report took place over a period of approximately 2 years, from November 2010 until November 2012. This period was characterized by the following 3 steps:

■ Step 1 : A 5-day workshop (Workshop 1) organized with validation of IOC projects officers was held in November 2010 in Port Louis (Mauritius). The overall objective of Workshop 1 was to develop an economic valuation methodology which can be applied and pilot tested by all countries following the completion of the workshop.

■ Step 2 : Case studies were conducted in 5 countries of the region applying the economic valuation methodology presented and discussed in the course of Workshop 1.

■ Step 3 : A 4-day workshop (Workshop 2) organized with validation of the IOC project officers was held in July/August 2012 in Dar es salaam. In the course of Workshop 2, each participant country team presented the results of their case studies. A total of seven (7) case studies were presented. Lessons learned were shared in the course of Workshop 2 and supported the validation of the methodologies to apply in relation with the project objectives.


73

WITH RESPECT TO THE METHODOLOGIES Participants in this activity and actively involved in the development of the case studies have reached a number of important and significant conclusions with respect to the economic valuation methodology. These conclusions, shared in the course of Workshop 2 are the following:

■ The economic valuation methodologies presented in the course of Workshop 1 and then (some of which) implemented in the participating countries are appropriate to the region, an important caveat being that data and information are not easily accessible;

■ The economic valuation methodologies are appropriate within the overall theme of this consultancy on coastal and marine contamination prevention project;

■ There is no one single economic valuation methodology better or superior to all other ones. All methodologies have advantages and disadvantages. In particular, no single methodology can provide a complete assessment of the economic value of the goods and services produced by coastal ecosystems. The nature of the issue at hand will determine the nature of the most appropriate methodology to select; and

■ While the economic valuation of coastal ecosystems goods and services will require the expertise and guidance of an economist, an economist cannot undertake such valuation without access to a wide range of expertise (such as expertise on fisheries, coral reefs, mangroves, oil spills impact on water quality, water sanitation, recreation, etc.). The economic valuation of coastal ecosystems goods and services requires a team of experts – determined by the issue at hand – and not the sole expertise of an economist.

WITH RESPECT TO WAYS FORWARD the Workshop 2 confirmed that:

■ Different national teams have different levels of expertise, capacity, interest and commitment to undertake a comprehensive economic valuation of coastal ecosystem goods and services;

■ There is a strong need to undertake considerably more economic valuation studies such as those which were undertaken in the course of the project; and

■ It is important to raise awareness of policy-makers not only with the specific results of these specific case studies but also and perhaps more importantly that coastal ecosystems produce a wide variety of goods and services which have an economic value and the economic value of these goods and services must be accounted for by policy-makers.

As such, it was determined that:

■ It would be of interest to conduct national workshops to present to policy-makers the outcome of the case studies;

■ All countries would benefit if it were possible to share a “virtual library” of the theoretical and empirical literature on coastal ecosystems economic valuation around the world and in the region specifically;

■ It would be of interest to set in place a network of regional experts which could support the conduct of more economic valuation studies throughout the region. This network could include the participation of international experts in the field; and

■ Where appropriate, opportunities should be used to insert the need for economic valuation in national environmental regulations themselves.