FINAL REPORT Terminal Evaluation - Global Sustainable Supply Chains for Marine Commodities (GMC) Project

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2019-2022, Ecuador
Evaluation Type:
Project
Planned End Date:
09/2021
Completion Date:
08/2021
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
20,500

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document Annex 1- TOR - TE GMC - publicar.pdf tor English 433.00 KB Posted 604
Download document 1. Consolidated TE GMC final.pdf report English 2702.51 KB Posted 570
Title FINAL REPORT Terminal Evaluation - Global Sustainable Supply Chains for Marine Commodities (GMC) Project
Atlas Project Number: 00090199
Evaluation Plan: 2019-2022, Ecuador
Evaluation Type: Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 08/2021
Planned End Date: 09/2021
Management Response: Yes
Focus Area:
  • 1. Poverty
  • 2. Sustainable
  • 3. Others
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021)
  • 1. Output 1.2.2 Enabling environment strengthened to expand public and private financing for the achievement of the SDGs
SDG Goal
  • Goal 12. Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns
  • Goal 13. Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts
  • Goal 14. Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development
  • Goal 15. Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss
  • Goal 17. Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the Global Partnership for Sustainable Development
SDG Target
  • 12.4 By 2020, achieve the environmentally sound management of chemicals and all wastes throughout their life cycle, in accordance with agreed international frameworks, and significantly reduce their release to air, water and soil in order to minimize their adverse impacts on human health and the environment
  • 13.2 Integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies and planning
  • 14.5 By 2020, conserve at least 10 per cent of coastal and marine areas, consistent with national and international law and based on the best available scientific information
  • 15.1 By 2020, ensure the conservation, restoration and sustainable use of terrestrial and inland freshwater ecosystems and their services, in particular forests, wetlands, mountains and drylands, in line with obligations under international agreements
  • 17.16 Enhance the Global Partnership for Sustainable Development, complemented by multi-stakeholder partnerships that mobilize and share knowledge, expertise, technology and financial resources, to support the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals in all countries, in particular developing countries
Evaluation Budget(US $): 20,500
Source of Funding: GEF
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): 20,500
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Nationality
Joe Ryan Consultant
GEF Evaluation: Yes
GEF Project Title: Global Sustainable Supply Chains for Marine Commodities (GMC) Project
Evaluation Type: Terminal Evaluation
Focal Area: International Waters
Project Type: FSP
GEF Phase: GEF-5
GEF Project ID: 5271
PIMS Number: 4754
Key Stakeholders: Ministerio del Ambiente, Ministerio de Agricultura Ganaderia y Pesca, Secretria Nacional de Planificación y Desarrollo, ONG internacionales.
Countries: ECUADOR
Lessons
1.

Lesson 1: Regardless of whether management plans are based on poor data or purely unsupported evidence used for politically motivated decisions, they require measurable actions, robust assumptions, clearly designated responsibilities assigned, and most importantly, measurable outcomes and development impacts.


Tag: UNDP management

2.

Lesson 2: A financially, institutionally, socially, and environmentally sustainable FIP requires transparent, vertical and horizontal dialogue that creates trust in the process, as well as government responsiveness to act on the group’s recommendations.


Tag: UNDP management

3.

Lesson 3: Overlooking critical assumptions on causative links along a results chain leading to expected fishery outcomes and the triple bottom-line targets of sustainable development impede the systematic application of adaptive management principles. This is a critical gap that is likely to prevent the development of an applied real-time M&E platform that can help correct mistakes and build on success during implementation, rather than compiling those lessons at the end of a project when it might be too late. While the GMC’s reconstructed Theory of Change offered a clear snapshot of the project, the lack of assumptions prevented such real-time adaptation and learning. While it is fine to experiment with, and test alternative marine commodity supply chain approaches and not be afraid of making mistakes, unless critical assumptions and risk-reducing measures are built into those approaches, they are likely to fall short of their targets. The important point is not the outcomes, but for the 4 countries to consider that “You never lose - you either win or you learn, but you lose when you don’t learn”. By avoiding repeated mistakes and sustainability, the replication of good fishery administration practices can be scaled up more efficiently and effectively with new global partners. This will also help future fishery commodity supply chain initiatives sustain positive outcomes in partner countries through the application of adaptive management and learning.


Tag: UNDP management

4.

Lesson 4: Building trust among all participants in a Commodity Platform requires clear objectives and guidelines for achieving them to convince stakeholders that consultations and decisions brought to the government by the platform are not only respected, but that they receive feedback about whether action was taken on their inputs into the decision-making process. The absence of interactive dialogue can break this trust and lead to government actions (e.g., policies, management measures) that undermine achieving triple bottom line impacts throughout the fishery value chains. It can also create perverse incentives that drive opposition or evasion of those undemocratic actions, as well as noncompliance with traceability throughout marine commodity supply chains. Without government trust and leadership, it is unlikely that the private sector will contribute to drive the activities that must be taken to produce the substantial changes (e.g., reliable a reporting, science-based decision-making, adhering to Regional Fisheries Codes of Conduct) required to improve sustainable seafood ratings.


Tag: UNDP management

5.

Lesson5.1: While the governance platforms are an important communication tool for producing open dialogue, it should not be the ultimate goal because the platform is always a transitional structure, and evolving space for innovation. Without consensus and leadership, it is difficult to build trust, and it is impossible to overcome the barriers that prevent a transition to certified-driven fisheries market. Joseph Stiglitz’s quote on trust reverberates loudly as one of the key ingredients for the successful Platforms and FIPs.


Tag: UNDP management

6.

Lesson5.2: A good, participatory root cause analysis with multiple stakeholders and disciplines is an essential requisite to complete before embarking on any FIP. This requires fisheries-specific criteria and not a simple, linear checklist focused on a relatively simpler supply chain like that adopted by the GPC’s methodology, which uses a different root cause diagnosis and has a very different vision. Furthermore, the creation of parallel FIP Governance Platform committees (Platform Steering committee and Project committee) is almost always going to be inefficient, govern that it simply adds an extra layer of checks and balances that is not only in redundant and ineffective, but it is also likely to confuse the platform stakeholders.


Tag: UNDP management

7.

Lesson5.3: Understanding impact should not only focus on the material improvement sustainability standards to be attained (Miller et al. 2015), but also how interactions and conflicts over the definition and implementation of standards hinders innovation contributing to sustainable triple bottom-line impacts.


Tag: UNDP management

8.

Lesson5.4: Developing Fishery Management and Action Plans requires a multidisciplinary team with peripheral vision, experts who understand how to formulate such plans and especially important, good facilitation skills and experience to lead a transparent dialogue process resulting in effective management plans, as was the case with the Philippines, Ecuador and Indonesia. .


Tag: UNDP management

9.

Lesson5.5: Failure to focus on all three dimensions of environmental sustainability is a multidimensional (physical-chemical, biological ecological resilience) ignores the core of the GMC’s objectives and other integrated seafood supply chain projects. The generation of data and information is fundamental for building supply and demand for sustainable fisheries, as is the collection of meaningful biological and ecological data using participatory processes involving other stakeholders, like the artisanal fishers are going with scientists in Ecuador. Especially pertinent are reliable data on the ecological and trophic responses of overfishing apex predators, which may be critical components in the food webs in certain fisheries and ecosystems. Otherwise, it leaves fishery managers, politicians and fishers much less informed about the status of pelagic ecosystems and closes the window of opportunity to design more sustainable approaches to reducing bycatch and the destruction of productive, living bottom habitats (such as longline and net set sites, timing, duration, gear types, and so on) that could reduce the mortality rates for bycatch species such as billfishes, turtles, sea birds, and sharks (Kitchell et al., 2002)


Tag: UNDP management

10.

Lesson5.6: Lessons from multiple projects (failed and successful) highlight that in general, biodiversity contributes to the productivity and stability of ecosystem processes that generate ecosystem services. Invariably, the more diverse ecosystems are more resilient to overfishing and to long-term threats such as climate change, and maintaining resilient marine biodiversity is a major component of those ecosystem services that directly support the full enjoyment of human rights. The Ecosystems approach to Fisheries is so far the best tool available for addressing these complexities, uncertainties and unpredictability of the human interactions with ecosystem dynamics.


Tag: UNDP management

Findings
1.

Finding (Relevance)1.1: The Global Marine Commodities model was highly satisfactory in its relevance for contributing good practices and replicable country experiences to the global knowledge and strengthening Global Partnerships to transform markets whose consumers value sustainably harvested and processed seafood throughout sustainable marine commodity sourcing value chains. Furthermore, the model promotes country ownership, transparency, stakeholder trust by creating synergies for public-private funding investments. It also contributed to six SDGs (#1,2,5,12,14 and #17), GEF and UNDP Outcomes, and GEF additionality criteria.


2.

Finding (Design)1.2: There is no question that the project design was Satisfactory in mainstreaming sustainability into GMC supply chains and the results confirm this finding. While the implementation framework presented in the Project design helped build upon and improve corporate sustainable purchase policies, sustainable marine commodities platforms (SMCPs), fisheries improvement projects (FIPs), as well as developed national capacities and generating good practices and other lessons to be shared worldwide the, Theory of Change presented in the GMC Implementation Report (Orellana et al. 2020) lacks many of the key assumptions that are fundamental for driving the systematic application of adaptative management principles.


3.

Finding (Overall Outcomes)2.1: The GMC Project model was effective in facilitating the application of market mechanisms and improved tools (FIPs, Governance Platforms) to mainstream sustainability into global seafood supply chains, while introducing good practices and promoting multi-stakeholder dialogue to craft science-based, as well as consensus-driven policies for improving the administration of the targeted fishery subsectors. It was not only effective in addressing some of the historical barriers to be overcome to improve fisheries management through shared decision-making and implementation arrangements leading to better legislated and institutionalized fishery management processes that lead to, but it met most of its expected results.


4.

Finding (Overall Outcomes)2.2: Overall, the effectiveness of the overall outcome was highly satisfactory. However, the degree to which the four countries met the TE’s evaluation criteria, results and assumptions varied between the two GMC implementation models, and their effectiveness for improving fishing performance on the water, mainstreaming policies that aimed to curb bycatch and scientific data, rather than maintaining politically motivated management actions, as well as unforeseen new cofinancing income depended on whether the multi-sectoral stakeholder recommendations presented in FIP Roundtable dialogue spaces created trust among the participating members.


5.

Finding (Adaptive Management)3.1: The GMC adapted to most design shortcomings and the unexpected results further contribute to emerging models aiming to sustain new and existing global fisheries. Not only did it adapt to unforeseen bottlenecks such as the absence of a strategy to incorporate gender aspects, testing a hybrid GMC model in Costa Rica and the need to create COREMAHI to fill in coordination in reducing bycatch and gaps in the IATTC’s mandate that is singularly focused on tuna fisheries and associated bycatch, the latter output produced and an immediate outcome in which fishers, in collaboration with scientists, collected empirical data and conducted monitoring related to stock assessments.


6.

Finding (Effectiveness)4.1: Three of the countries passed the expected results, which should be replicated and scaled up. First, the GMC model implemented in three countries demonstrated that the Platforms and FIP Dialogue Tables described explicitly in the ProDoc were based on transparency, dialogue, and trust, resulted in reciprocal government actions that responded to stakeholders’ concerns, which led to a consensus in most cases. At the end of the project, the GMC met all but one of its 16 indicators and surpassed nine of them. While added late in the project, gender awareness and activities had fed into the Sustainable Marine Commodity Platforms to promote multi-stakeholder fishery governance.


7.

Finding (Efficiency)4.2: Overall, the GMC efficiency is rated as Highly Satisfactory, despite some delays in requested audits. The project was efficiently implemented, and the Ecuador Office did an excellent job of administering the project in the four countries, while the Philippines and Indonesia provided the requested audit information and provided reporting on a timely basis. For relatively little money, three countries (Ecuador, Indonesia and the Philippines) have exceeded expectations and the GMC achieved significant results - and the financial shortcoming was made up by additional investments that were 45% higher than anticipated in the three countries.


8.

Finding (Added Value)5a: Although funding was limited for 4 countries, the evidence suggests that this resulted in innovative approaches for attracting additional funding and contributing to the overachievement of the expected results in three countries, which might not have occurred had there been a larger budget. Co-financing from the Public and Private sector has been a key factor in the achievement of results.


9.

Finding (Incipient Impacts)5b: The TE examined incipient signs of achieving triple bottom line impact in terms of embarking on a path to achieve social, economic and environmental conditions. The evidence indicates that economic conditions have improved for many fishers, particularly for the GMC-supported Asian fisheries, scientific studies have helped quantify several stocks and identify genetic differences that are the key to sustainable fishery management, while concerted efforts have been made by Ecuador to reduce bycatch, which helps protect the resilience of biodiversity resilience and other marine ecosystem services. However, the results regarding Costa Rica’s contribution to these efforts fell short of expectations.


10.

Finding (Unexpected Results)5c: Four unexpected and highly positive results emerged during the implementation process, namely the creation of COREMAHI, which although in its infancy, aims to fill in the limited mandate of IATTC to contribute to the Mahi-mahi fishery, the gender strategy, the participatory monitoring by fishers in monitoring and providing data for improving management and the additional financing contributions by the private sector and the governments in all countries76 to help make up for budget shortfalls.


11.

Finding (Other Aspects)5d: Costa Rica was the first country to implement the GMC with its hybrid model in which it invested considerable effort and a commitment to create the first large pelagic FIP in the world and testing something, as well as the country’s offer of highly valuable in-kind contributions related to scientific data.


Recommendations
1

DESIGN

Recommendation: 1 It is highly recommended that a second phase be developed to continue efforts to mainstream other dimensions of sustainability (e.g., bycatch reduction, greater importance place on human and indigenous rights) into seafood supply chains, while rebuilding and protecting fish stocks, biodiversity and livelihoods. The subsequent phase must also be anchored to a robust, flexible Theory of Change that includes key assumptions to drive an adaptive management process, all of which are essential for learning by experimenting with context-specific complexities associated with the multisectoral, and multidisciplinary management challenges of the fishery sector. Outcomes must be SMART. It is also imperative that the project incorporate the lessons and good practices (FIPs, Governance Platform and Seafood buyer-seller Roundtable good practices) from Phase 1. All countries should be part of the process, as long as the explicit guidelines and conditions for participation are followed, and new countries should be welcome, provided that a fixed percent co-financing contribution is provided under a government-private partnership arrangement.

2

DESIGN

Recommendation 2: Prepare a Concept Note for future sustainable marine commodity supply chains projects, the design team must interdisciplinary, capable of thinking outside the box with different eyes and who understands Management and Action plans, lead the dialogue about how to create a triple bottom-line fisheries project with an integrated environmental, social, gender and human rights focus from the beginning, doing things differently, bringing in innovation through a multidisciplinary focus – a really well thought out one. Up to date information is required, along with gender fishery profiles, gender analyses, among others. Transparency, dynamic dialogue and trust are fundamental ingredients that must be the highest priority for participating countries to instill in their Governance Platforms, carefully screening to include actors from different levels of supply chains who are committed to work in synergy and for positive change.

3

IMPLEMENTATION

Recommendation 3: For similar projects, or a future phase 2 of the GMC, it is recommended that the IPCU start operations alongside the beneficiary countries (and not afterwards) within the same start-up period, allowing all the IPs to benefit from the management structures and lessons learned, thus that will undoubtedly also contribute to efficiency and therefore to the expected results. This should not exclude testing new approaches, if they are built on adaptive management principles, solid assumptions and good communication structures with the other participating partners. There should be at least a non-binding expression of financial commitment from the private sector for support.

4

IMPLEMENTATION

Recommendation 4: Future FIPs must ensure that participating countries are complying with their commitments to international agreements (e.g., CBD Biological Diversity, UNCLOS , UCHR , Universal Declaration of Human Rights). Those countries should also look to raise the institutional bar to de-politicize outside influence from powerful private sector interests and donor/executing/implementation agencies, while harmonize intersectoral coordination from the highest levels of government similar to the excellent model provided by BAPPENAS and the incipient model re-emerging in Ecuador.

5

CROSS-CUTTING EFFECTIVENESS
Recommendation 5: A second phase should also have sufficient funding to cover costs to identify root cause analyses of key elements contributing to the degradation of marine biodiversity and other ecosystem services, ensuring that participating fishing nations health, safety and environmental safeguards, especially for reducing Bycatch (e.g., habitat protection, complying with the CBD specifications and pertinent protocols, IUU bycatch, as well as innovative approaches by Squire et al 20201a, b), and develop context-specific Management Plans, together with their associated Action Plans that are measured by SMART outcome targets. A Phase 2 design must include the FAO’s Fishery Code of Conduct and the Ecosystems Approach to Fisheries, which has shortcomings, but is an adequate starting point for addressing the complexities, uncertainty and unpredictability of the human interactions with ecosystem dynamics. The linear, Agroecosystem approach should remain with the sector where it belongs.

6

CROSS-CUTTING EFFECTIVENESS
Recommendation 6: A climate adaptation component should be integrated into the second phase, given the impacts that climate changes will have on fisheries of the future, as it will help avoid missing an opportunity for timely and urgent action, before it becomes problematic. A 3-stepwise approach testing widely used ecosystem-risk assessment methods (see references in) could benefit Phase 2 from its early design to prepare for the impacts of climate change on future fisheries management for climate change.

7

CROSS-CUTTING EFFECTIVENESS

Recommendation 7: A second phase should also build upon the Phase 1 success with creating public-private partnership at the national and global levels while participating international NGOs should always contribute, rather than request funds or provide significant in-kind contributions.

8

CROSS-CUTTING EFFECTIVENESS
Recommendation 8: A second phase should expand its focus on the social dimensions of sustainable marine commodity supply chains to include results-based indicators that build on the Phase 1 Gender Strategy and mainstream a responsive approach addressing gender equality/equity into an adaptive, learning framework developed in Governance Platforms. It is imperative that the strategy and implementation framework includes realistic budgets that ensure that the actions derived from the Project not only have the responsive gender approach, but it must also start from a deep root cause analysis of the situation of women (gender analysis with primary information) in supported fisheries to ensure that gender-strategic action plans are adapted to context-specific realities, and other key elements

9

CROSS-CUTTING EFFECTIVENESS
Recommendation 9: Human and labor rights abuses must be addressed along commodity supply chains – from harvest to the table- during a second phase. SFP seems well-positioned to explore collaboration opportunities with leaders such as the Danish Institute for Human Rights’ (DIHR) work with Pursuing a Human Rights-based Approach to Fisheries and Aquaculture, as should be progressive donors like Swedish International Development Agency who funded their work.

10

SUSTAINABILITY
Recommendation 10: Phase 2 should allocate funds and develop an action plan to develop specific solutions to facilitate small-scale fishers to report and verify sustainable practices, including IT development to ensure technological equity and justice. Currently, small-scale fisheries (SSF) cannot afford e-logbooks and the private industrial companies in Ecuador have provided funds for SSF to buy them. However, this is an exception, and the financial gap must be filled to allow SSF to report.

11

SUSTAINABILITY
Recommendation 11: A high priority should be placed on advancing the institutionalization of COREMAHI for Eastern Pacific Mahimahi fishing nations, as it offers a viable mechanism for improving the coordinated management of the Mahimahi and associated bycatch. The extent to which the Code of Conduct should be agreed upon by signatory nations should be examined carefully to ensure that it is sufficiently robust for sustainably managing the fishery, including reducing bycatch, yet palatable for countries who might be reluctant to sign.

Management Response Documents
1. Recommendation:

DESIGN

Recommendation: 1 It is highly recommended that a second phase be developed to continue efforts to mainstream other dimensions of sustainability (e.g., bycatch reduction, greater importance place on human and indigenous rights) into seafood supply chains, while rebuilding and protecting fish stocks, biodiversity and livelihoods. The subsequent phase must also be anchored to a robust, flexible Theory of Change that includes key assumptions to drive an adaptive management process, all of which are essential for learning by experimenting with context-specific complexities associated with the multisectoral, and multidisciplinary management challenges of the fishery sector. Outcomes must be SMART. It is also imperative that the project incorporate the lessons and good practices (FIPs, Governance Platform and Seafood buyer-seller Roundtable good practices) from Phase 1. All countries should be part of the process, as long as the explicit guidelines and conditions for participation are followed, and new countries should be welcome, provided that a fixed percent co-financing contribution is provided under a government-private partnership arrangement.

Management Response: [Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2021/11/17]

Design a concept note or PIF/project proposal and PPG phase that incorporates the key measures below

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
1.1 UNDP hires a consultant with multisciplinary background to design the concept note for a second phase. The design will take into account the recomendations and key actions in this management response matrix. The concept note will be presented to the GEF Secretariat.
[Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2022/01/31]
The GMC Project through the UNDP and SFP 2021/12 Completed Action completed. A concept note for the GMC 2 was designed and presented to the GEF secretariat History
1.2 UNDP and SFP develop criteria and guidelines outlining conditions for partner inclusion in GMC 2 (their experience and knowledge offers communities of practice examples to new country members) in direct coordination and consultation with the GEF Secretariat.
[Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2022/06/28]
The GMC Project through the UNDP and SFP 2022/06 Completed Action completed. The PIF for the GMC 2 has been cleared and approved by the GEF Secretariat. History
1.3 UNDP hires a consultant/team with multidisciplinary background to design the PIF/project proposal for the GEF and other possible donors for a second phase. The design will take into account the recommendations and key actions in this management response matrix. The PIF/project proposal is to be coordinated with the participating countries to agree upon expected outcomes and actions and to distribute associated costs if possible.
[Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2022/06/28]
The UNDP and the consultant/ team, with GMC Project support until project close, are in charge of designing the second phase of the project, including a potential PIF and/or a project proposal 2022/07 Completed This action is completed. The PIF for the GMC 2 has been cleared and approved by the GEF Secretariat. History
1.4 UNDP leads virtual meeting of interested parties to discuss the way forward for GMC2 and to discuss expand potential donors to be approached. These could include the Asian Development Bank, African Development Bank, Caribbean Development Bank, Inter American Development Bank, Swedish International Development Assistance, the Nordic Development Fund and various philanthropic foundations such as MAVA, Waitt, Pew and MacArthur, among others.
[Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2022/06/28]
The UNDP and the consultant/ team, with GMC Project support until project close, are in charge of designing the second phase of the project, including a potential PIF and/or a project proposal 2022/06 Completed The regional bureau has led virtual meetings with different stakeholders of the participating countries of the GMC2: Ecuador, Guatemala, Mauritania, Morocco, Panama, Senegal. These meetings helped in arranging the central framework of the PIF, which has been already approved by the GEF Secretariat. History
1.5 Compile lessons from GMC 1 and other similar projects and initiatives to help design GMC2
[Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2022/01/31]
The UNDP and the consultant/ team, with GMC Project support until project close, are in charge of designing the second phase of the project, including a potential PIF and/or a project proposal 2022/03 Completed Action completed. The lessons learned from GMC 1 where used to develop the concept note for GMC2 and will be used for designing the PIF History
1.6 Develop a preliminary and robust Theory of Change pathway leading to the expected development impacts for GMC 2, together with assumptions, risk-reducing measures and SMART outcomes.
[Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2022/06/28]
The UNDP and the consultant/ team, with GMC Project support until project close, are in charge of designing the second phase of the project, including a potential PIF and/or a project proposal 2022/05 Completed UNDP hired a consultant team to develop the PIF for the GMC 2. The PIF has a preliminary and robust theory of change, as evidenced in the attached documents. History
1.7 Calculate a preliminary budget to be included in the PIF/project proposal for achieving the expected results.
[Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2022/06/28]
The UNDP and the consultant/ team, with GMC Project support until project close, are in charge of designing the second phase of the project, including a potential PIF and/or a project proposal 2022/05 Completed Action completed. UNDP hired a consultant team in charge of developing the PIF for the GMC2. The PIF included a preliminary budget, as shown in the attached document. History
2. Recommendation:

DESIGN

Recommendation 2: Prepare a Concept Note for future sustainable marine commodity supply chains projects, the design team must interdisciplinary, capable of thinking outside the box with different eyes and who understands Management and Action plans, lead the dialogue about how to create a triple bottom-line fisheries project with an integrated environmental, social, gender and human rights focus from the beginning, doing things differently, bringing in innovation through a multidisciplinary focus – a really well thought out one. Up to date information is required, along with gender fishery profiles, gender analyses, among others. Transparency, dynamic dialogue and trust are fundamental ingredients that must be the highest priority for participating countries to instill in their Governance Platforms, carefully screening to include actors from different levels of supply chains who are committed to work in synergy and for positive change.

Management Response: [Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2021/11/17]

Design a concept note or PIF/project proposal and PPG phase that incorporates the key measures below

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
2.1 Formulate the project design (PIF/project proposal for the GEF or other donors) for a second phase by a multidisciplinary team and framed to improve clarity and consistency for the Blue Economy (BE) metaphor and key considerations of the circular economy based on critical reviews and alternative outcome-focused approaches, specifically focusing on measurable outcomes that can help to fill in some of GMC-1's gaps. At a minimum, these tools should focus on building ecological resilience (reduced habitat destruction, capture of CITES-listed species, protection of spawning aggregation areas and MPAs), incorporating human and labor rights into sustainable marine commodity certifications and a stronger gender component. and strengthening private sector participation that promotes impact investments.
[Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2022/06/28]
The UNDP and the consultant/team, with the support of the GMC project until project close, is in charge of designing the PIF/project proposal 2022/05 Completed UNDP hired a consultant team that was in charge of developing the PIF. The PIF has already been cleared and approved by the GEF Secretariat. The PIF includes considerations of Blue Economy and circular economy. History
2.2 For the PIF/project proposal and preparation phase (PPG), consider the inclusion of activities towards the design of a country-specific, real-time, participatory (fisherfolk, women, private sector, NGOs and academia) M&E platform with baselines established and guidelines to measure the effectiveness in achieving triple bottom line development impacts (outcomes) which is linked to BE and CMSP component outcomes. The platform should be built on free-ware, rather than expensive GIS software.
[Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2022/06/28]
The UNDP, with the support of the GMC project until project close, is in charge of designing the PIF/project proposal and PPG preparation in coordination with partner countries 2022/05 Completed This action is completed. UNDP hired a consultant team in charge of developing the PIF for the GMC2, which has cleared and approved by the GEF Secretariat. The PIF of the GMC 2 includes activities that consider participatory approaches. History
2.3 For the PIF/project proposal and preparation phase (PPG), consider the mainstreaming of sustainable seafood supply chains in both Export and Domestic markets. Local markets should not only target fresh, frozen and salt-dried seafood sold in local markets, but also link to tourism venues, like hotels and restaurants, following the lessons SFP has learned in the Philippines.
[Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2022/06/28]
The UNDP, with the support of the GMC project until project close, is in charge of designing the PIF/project proposal and PPG preparation in coordination with partner countries 2022/05 Completed UNDP hired a consultant team in charge of developing the PIF for the GMC2. The PIF has cleared and approved by the GEF Secretariat, and includes the mainstreaming of sustainable seafood supply chains in export and domestic markets. History
2.4 The design of GMC2 will consider that at least two countries host the project through a high-level intersectoral coordinating authority (e.g., the BAPPENAS Indonesia example).
[Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2022/06/28]
The UNDP, with the support of the GMC project until project close, is in charge of designing the PIF/project proposal and PPG preparation in coordination with partner countries 2022/05 Completed UNDP hired a consultant team in charge of developing the PIF for the GMC2. The PIF is cleared and approved by the GEF Secretariat. The participating countries for the GMC 2 are: Ecuador, Guatemala, Mauritania, Morocco, Panama, Senegal. History
3. Recommendation:

IMPLEMENTATION

Recommendation 3: For similar projects, or a future phase 2 of the GMC, it is recommended that the IPCU start operations alongside the beneficiary countries (and not afterwards) within the same start-up period, allowing all the IPs to benefit from the management structures and lessons learned, thus that will undoubtedly also contribute to efficiency and therefore to the expected results. This should not exclude testing new approaches, if they are built on adaptive management principles, solid assumptions and good communication structures with the other participating partners. There should be at least a non-binding expression of financial commitment from the private sector for support.

Management Response: [Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2021/11/17]

Design a concept note or PIF/project proposal and PPG phase that incorporates the key measures below

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
3.1 During PIF/project proposal and preparation phase (PPG) indicate that all participating partners/countries are to initiate in unison with an Inception Phase (national inception workshop) in each country, followed by an integrated inception workshop with all approaches described. This should outline fluid communication mechanisms among partners and the Coordinating Unit, and should outline approaches for a country-specific, real time, integrated (social, environmental and economic dimensions) M&E platform focusing on outcomes and adaptive management principles.
[Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2022/06/28]
The UNDP, with the support of the GMC project until project close, is in charge of designing the PIF/project and PPG preparation in coordination with partner countries 2022/06 Completed The PIF has already been approved and cleared by the GEF Secretariat. The PIF indicates that all participant countries will initiate in unison with an inception phase in each country. This can be evidenced in the attached document. History
The UNDP, with the support of the GMC project until project close, is in charge of designing the PIF/project and PPG preparation in coordination with partner countries
[Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2022/06/28]
The UNDP, with the support of the GMC project until project close, is in charge of designing the PIF/project proposal and PPG preparation in coordination with partner countries 2022/05 Completed The PIF for the GMC 2 is ready and has already been cleared and approved by the GEF Secretariat. The PIF was developed in coordination with the participating countries: Ecuador, Guatemala, Mauritania, Morocco, Panama, Senegal History
4. Recommendation:

IMPLEMENTATION

Recommendation 4: Future FIPs must ensure that participating countries are complying with their commitments to international agreements (e.g., CBD Biological Diversity, UNCLOS , UCHR , Universal Declaration of Human Rights). Those countries should also look to raise the institutional bar to de-politicize outside influence from powerful private sector interests and donor/executing/implementation agencies, while harmonize intersectoral coordination from the highest levels of government similar to the excellent model provided by BAPPENAS and the incipient model re-emerging in Ecuador.

Management Response: [Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2021/11/17]

Design a concept note or PIF/project proposal and PPG phase that incorporates the key measures below

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
4.1 During PIF/project proposal and preparation phase (PPG), protocols and operational guidelines for the constitution of Governance Platforms are to be promoted in FIPs, including selection criteria for who is allowed to participate in the dialogue spaces. The guidelines are to also contain a fail safe clause that outlines actions to be taken when outside interests try to influence or interfere with the operational governance process. Data sharing arrangements and corresponding protocols will also be promoted.
[Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2022/06/28]
The UNDP, with the support of the GMC project until project close, is in charge of designing the PIF/project proposal and PPG preparation in coordination with partner countries 2022/05 Completed The PIF for the GMC 2 is ready and has already been cleared and approved by the GEF secretariat. The PIF indicates that the GMC 2 must include protocols and operational guidelines for the Constitution of governance platforms to promote FIPs. History
5. Recommendation:

CROSS-CUTTING EFFECTIVENESS
Recommendation 5: A second phase should also have sufficient funding to cover costs to identify root cause analyses of key elements contributing to the degradation of marine biodiversity and other ecosystem services, ensuring that participating fishing nations health, safety and environmental safeguards, especially for reducing Bycatch (e.g., habitat protection, complying with the CBD specifications and pertinent protocols, IUU bycatch, as well as innovative approaches by Squire et al 20201a, b), and develop context-specific Management Plans, together with their associated Action Plans that are measured by SMART outcome targets. A Phase 2 design must include the FAO’s Fishery Code of Conduct and the Ecosystems Approach to Fisheries, which has shortcomings, but is an adequate starting point for addressing the complexities, uncertainty and unpredictability of the human interactions with ecosystem dynamics. The linear, Agroecosystem approach should remain with the sector where it belongs.

Management Response: [Added: 2021/11/17]

Design a concept note or PIF/project proposal and PPG phase that incorporates the key measures below

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
5.1 During PIF/project proposal and preparation phase (PPG), a rigorous costing analysis of the implementation costs for each component and actions is to be undertaken by each country, as well as the costs associated to the International Coordinating Unit.
[Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2022/06/28]
The UNDP, with the support of the GMC project until project close, is in charge of designing the PIF/project proposal and PPG preparation in coordination with partner countries 2022/05 Completed the PIF for the GMC2 is ready and has already been cleared and approved by the GEF secretariat. A cost analysis has been included in the PIF document, as shown in the attached document. History
5.2 During PIF/project proposal and preparation phase (PPG), all participating countries are to make commitments to abide at a minimum by the FAO’s Fishery Code of Conduct and the Ecosystems Approach to Fisheries, among others. Incorporate in PIF/project
[Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2022/06/28]
The UNDP, with the support of the GMC project until project close, is in charge of designing the PIF/project proposal and PPG preparation in coordination with partner countries 2022/05 Completed The PIF for the GMC 2 is ready and has already been cleared and approved by the GEF secretariat. The PIF states that all participating countries will make commitments to abide at a minimum by the FAO's Fishery Code of Conduct. History
6. Recommendation:

CROSS-CUTTING EFFECTIVENESS
Recommendation 6: A climate adaptation component should be integrated into the second phase, given the impacts that climate changes will have on fisheries of the future, as it will help avoid missing an opportunity for timely and urgent action, before it becomes problematic. A 3-stepwise approach testing widely used ecosystem-risk assessment methods (see references in) could benefit Phase 2 from its early design to prepare for the impacts of climate change on future fisheries management for climate change.

Management Response: [Added: 2021/11/17]

Design a concept note or PIF/project proposal and PPG phase that incorporates the key measures below

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
6.1 During PIF/project proposal and preparation phase (PPG), a consultant/team expert/s on Climate Adaptation in Fisheries are to develop safeguards and concrete actions for ensuring that GMC2 is working to integrate climate adaptation strategies and actions. This must include a robust ecosystem risk assessment and corresponding mitigation measures.
[Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2022/06/28]
The UNDP, with the support of the GMC project until project close, is in charge of designing the PIF/project proposal and PPG preparation in coordination with partner countries 2022/05 Completed The PIF is ready and has already been cleared and approved by the GEF Secretariat. The team in charge of developing the PIF included a safeguards specialist, who included a risk analysis with its mitigation measures, as indicated in the attached document. History
7. Recommendation:

CROSS-CUTTING EFFECTIVENESS

Recommendation 7: A second phase should also build upon the Phase 1 success with creating public-private partnership at the national and global levels while participating international NGOs should always contribute, rather than request funds or provide significant in-kind contributions.

Management Response: [Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2021/11/17]

Design a concept note or PIF/project proposal and PPG phase that incorporates the key measures below

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
7.1 During PIF/project proposal and preparation phase (PPG), lessons from the GMC1 experiences are to be considered in creating public-private partnerships and reinforce/formulate guidelines for minimum private sector investments and the mechanisms for accessing them and explore the design and implementation of new financing solutions that will contribute to sustainability, innovation and scaling-up mechanisms. The cofinancing structure should also calculate a reasonable estimate of in-kind contributions from artisanal fisherfolk associations and governments at baseline levels and throughout the implementation period.
[Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2022/06/28]
The UNDP, with the support of the GMC project until project close, is in charge of designing the PIF/project proposal and PPG preparation in coordination with partner countries 2022/05 Completed The PIF for the GMC2 is ready and has already been cleared and approved by the GEF Secretariat. for the development of the PIF lessons and experiences learned from the GMC1 have been considered, specially regarding the creation of public-private partnerships. History
7.2 During PIF/project proposal and preparation phase (PPG), NGOs are to bring to the FIP significant monetary or in-kind contributions approved by the FIP to justify their participation.
[Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2022/06/28]
The UNDP, with the support of the GMC project until project close, is in charge of designing the PIF/project proposal and PPG preparation in coordination with partner countries 2022/05 Completed the PIF for the GMC2 is ready and has already been approved and cleared by the GEF Secretariat. The PIF includes the co-financing values disaggregated per activity, as can be seen in the attached document. History
8. Recommendation:

CROSS-CUTTING EFFECTIVENESS
Recommendation 8: A second phase should expand its focus on the social dimensions of sustainable marine commodity supply chains to include results-based indicators that build on the Phase 1 Gender Strategy and mainstream a responsive approach addressing gender equality/equity into an adaptive, learning framework developed in Governance Platforms. It is imperative that the strategy and implementation framework includes realistic budgets that ensure that the actions derived from the Project not only have the responsive gender approach, but it must also start from a deep root cause analysis of the situation of women (gender analysis with primary information) in supported fisheries to ensure that gender-strategic action plans are adapted to context-specific realities, and other key elements

Management Response: [Added: 2021/11/17]

Design a concept note or PIF/project proposal and PPG phase that incorporates the key measures below

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
8.3 During the GMC2 implementation phase (narrative included in PIF or PPG phase, when applicable), guidelines will be developed to outline similar approaches to mainstreaming gender into the FIPs
[Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2022/06/28]
The UNDP, with the support of the GMC project until project close, is in charge of designing the PIF/project proposal, PPG preparation and implementation phase in coordination with partner countries 2022/05 Completed The PIF for the GMC 2 is ready and has already been cleared and approved by the GEF Secretariat. Throughout the document, it is highlighted that the activities will consider gender equality and gender mainstreaming into the FIPs. History
8.1 During PIF/project proposal and preparation phase (PPG), frame a causative results chain for each GMC2 component per participating country and develop a clear, causative path toward the immediate and overall objectives. Additionally, each country should allocate a budget to hire a national gender team to develop gender analyses that can contribute to an overarching approach that can be tested as a gender inclusion model for the Blue Economy/circular economy approach.
[Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2022/03/31]
The UNDP, with the support of the GMC project until project close, is in charge of designing the PIF/project proposal and PPG preparation in coordination with partner countries 2022/12 Not Initiated The PIF is currently under development. After approval from the GEF Secretariat, the PPG phase will start. during this phase, a gender specialist at a national level (for each participating country) will include inputs and strategy in the project document. History
8.2 During the development of the PPG/project proposal, a gender analysis and strategy will be developed for the GMC2 that builds off of the GMC1 experiences. Cost distribution among countries for in country gender analysis will be considered.
[Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2022/03/31]
The UNDP in coordination with partner countries 2022/12 Not Initiated The PIF is currently under development. After approval from the GEF Secretariat, the PPG phase will start. during this phase, a gender specialist at a national level (for each participating country) will include inputs and strategy in the project document. History
9. Recommendation:

CROSS-CUTTING EFFECTIVENESS
Recommendation 9: Human and labor rights abuses must be addressed along commodity supply chains – from harvest to the table- during a second phase. SFP seems well-positioned to explore collaboration opportunities with leaders such as the Danish Institute for Human Rights’ (DIHR) work with Pursuing a Human Rights-based Approach to Fisheries and Aquaculture, as should be progressive donors like Swedish International Development Agency who funded their work.

Management Response: [Added: 2021/11/17]

Design a concept note or PIF/project proposal and PPG phase that incorporates the key measures below
 

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
9.1 During the GMC2 implementation phase (narrative included in PIF or PPG phase, when applicable), in close coordination with leading human rights organizations working in the fishery sector (e.g., Danish Institute of Human Rights, ILO) a strategy will be developed for mainstreaming HR into the marine commodity value chains with a certification standard.
[Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2022/06/28]
The UNDP, with the support of the GMC project until project close, is in charge of designing the PIF/project proposal, PPG preparation and implementation phase in coordination with partner countries 2022/05 Completed the PIF is ready and has already been cleared and approved by the GEF secretariat. Throughout the PIF, it is stated that the project will develop and work strongly on mainstreaming human rights in the marine commodity value chains. History
9.2 During PIF/Project Proposal and preparation phase (PPG), the project will evaluate the use/incorporation of the human rights guide to the SDGs and the Indigenous Navigator on Human Rights developed by the Danish Institute of Human Rights, as well as their Sector Wide Impact Approach (SWIA) in the fishery sector and link it to the M&E Platform for each FIP.
[Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2022/06/28]
The UNDP, with the support of the GMC project until project close, is in charge of designing the PIF/project proposal and PPG preparation in coordination with partner countries 2022/05 Completed the PIF is ready and has already been cleared and approved by the GEF secretariat. Throughout the PIF, it is stated that the project will develop and work strongly on mainstreaming human rights in the marine commodity value chains. History
10. Recommendation:

SUSTAINABILITY
Recommendation 10: Phase 2 should allocate funds and develop an action plan to develop specific solutions to facilitate small-scale fishers to report and verify sustainable practices, including IT development to ensure technological equity and justice. Currently, small-scale fisheries (SSF) cannot afford e-logbooks and the private industrial companies in Ecuador have provided funds for SSF to buy them. However, this is an exception, and the financial gap must be filled to allow SSF to report.

Management Response: [Added: 2021/11/17]

Design a concept note or PIF/project proposal and PPG phase that incorporates the key measures below

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
10.1 During PIF/Project Proposal and preparation phase (PPG), a representative portion of the budget (or cofinancing) will target assisting small-scale fishers to comply with electronic reporting and monitoring requirements.
[Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2022/06/28]
The UNDP, with the support of the GMC project until project close, is in charge of designing the PIF/project proposal and PPG preparation in coordination with partner countries 2022/06 Completed the PIF is ready and has already been cleared and approved by the GEF Secretariat. In the PIF document it is stated that output 2.1.3 will work directly with Artisanal and small-scale fishers and local supply chain partners effectively engage into fisheries improvement projects and co-management platforms. This corresponds to $5600000 from the budget and 18914574 from cofinancing. History
11. Recommendation:

SUSTAINABILITY
Recommendation 11: A high priority should be placed on advancing the institutionalization of COREMAHI for Eastern Pacific Mahimahi fishing nations, as it offers a viable mechanism for improving the coordinated management of the Mahimahi and associated bycatch. The extent to which the Code of Conduct should be agreed upon by signatory nations should be examined carefully to ensure that it is sufficiently robust for sustainably managing the fishery, including reducing bycatch, yet palatable for countries who might be reluctant to sign.

Management Response: [Added: 2021/11/17]

Design a concept note or PIF/project proposal and PPG phase that incorporates the key measures below

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
11.1 To the extent possible, during PIF/Project proposal and preparation phase (PPG), technical and financial support will be given to strengthen COREMAHI´s governance in the Eastern Pacific. Similar actions will be explored to create regional bodies that could help fill the kinds of gaps that COREMAHI has done for supporting IATT.
[Added: 2021/11/17] [Last Updated: 2022/06/28]
The UNDP, with the support of the GMC project until project close, is in charge of designing the PIF/project proposal and PPG preparation in coordination with partner countries 2022/06 No Longer Applicable [Justification: this action is no longer applicable since the project will not take place in the Eastern PAcific Area. The countries that will participate in the GMC2 are: Ecuador, Guatemala, Mauritania, Morocco, Panama, Senegal, and will focus on the Canary Current and the Pacific Central American Coastal Large Marine Ecosystems. Nevertheless, the PIF included a section related to straddling stocks and mobilization of the private sector, taking as an example the strategies applied for the COREMAHI platform in the GMC1. ]
History

Latest Evaluations

Contact us

1 UN Plaza
DC1-20th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Tel. +1 646 781 4200
Fax. +1 646 781 4213
erc.support@undp.org