mangrove inception workshop report - finallibrary.enaca.org/mangrove/inception/inception.pdf ·...

Mangrove Project

FP6 – 003697 Mangrove ecosystems, communities and conflict: developing knowledge-based

approaches to reconcile multiple demands August 2005 – January 2009

Inception Workshop

Bangkok, Thailand 9-11 November 2005

Mangrove ecosystems, communities and conflict: developing knowledge-based approaches to reconcile multiple demands

Inception Workshop

Bangkok, Thailand 9-11 November 2005

MANGROVE – Inception Workshop

i

Contents

Acronyms........................................................................................................... ii

Acknowledgements ............................................................................................ iii

Executive Summary ........................................................................................... iv

Introduction .......................................................................................................1

Background................................................................................................................. 1 Project Purpose ........................................................................................................... 1 Project Objectives........................................................................................................ 1 Workshop Objectives ................................................................................................... 1

Day One ............................................................................................................2

Workshop Overview..................................................................................................... 2 Review of Project Work Program and Coordination ........................................................ 2 Mangroves in Vietnam ................................................................................................. 2 Mangroves in Thailand................................................................................................. 3 Mangroves in Indonesia ............................................................................................... 3 Outstanding Issues...................................................................................................... 3

Day Two ............................................................................................................4

Review of Today’s Program, Summary of Yesterday’s Work............................................ 4 WP 1: Situation Analysis – Review of Activities and Expected Outcomes ......................... 4 Workshop Session - Identify Study Sites, Common Issues, Differences and Potential Difficulties ................................................................................................................... 5 Workshop Session - Stakeholder Identification and Discussion of Conflicts and Tensions Surrounding Mangroves ............................................................................................... 5 Introduction to FishBase and Sea Around Us initiatives .................................................. 5

Day Three..........................................................................................................5

Introduction to the STREAM Initiative and WP 2 Activities .............................................. 5 Workshop Session – Communication Planning Deliverables and Internal and External Communication Plans, Project Website and Email List .................................................... 6

Follow Up Actions ...............................................................................................7

Appendix 1 Agenda.............................................................................................8

Appendix 2 Participants .....................................................................................10


ii

Acronyms CZM Coastal Zone Management

DANIDA Danish International Development Agency

DFID Department for International Development (UK)

EU European Union

GO Government Organization

GTZ Gesellshaft Fur Techniciazuzaminarbeit (German development organization)

IDDRA Institut du Développement Durable et des Resources Aquatiques

MU Mulawarman University

M&E Monitoring and evaluation

MERD Mangrove Ecosystem Research Division

NACA Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific

NGO Non-governmental Organization

NRSP Natural Resources Systems Programme

OVI Objectively Verifiable Indicator

RMD Reconcile Multiple Demands

STREAM Support to Regional Aquatic Resources Management

UOE University of Essex

VNU Vietnam National University


iii

Acknowledgements We are deeply grateful to Stuart Bunting for coordinating the workshop and for the staff of NACA for hosting the MANGROVE Inception Workshop. In particular, we would like to thank:

• Ms Rebecca Cajilig, for handling the workshop logistics and finances so thoroughly, and

• Ms Supawan Ponglumyai, for developing the project website so quickly, for

ensuring that the IT systems all ran smoothly and for producing the workshop CDs.


iv

Executive Summary This EU Sixth Framework Program MANGROVE Project began in 2005 and will run until 2009. It is a collaboration among seven partner organizations from six countries. The project aims to improve understanding of mangrove ecosystems, communities and conflicts and to develop knowledge-based approaches to reconcile the multiple demands on mangroves and adjacent coastal zones in Southeast Asia. This report contains a record of the proceedings of the Inception Workshop held at the NACA Secretariat in Bangkok, Thailand, from 9-11 November 2005. At this workshop project partners were reacquainted with each other and the objectives of the project. The consortium members who participated were:

• Mulawarman University • Kasetsart University • Mangrove Ecosystem Research Division, Vietnam National University • Wageningen University • STREAM Initiative, Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific and • Centre for Environment and Society, University of Essex.

Substantial work was undertaken in developing an implementation strategy, reviewing the current status of mangroves, identifying stakeholders and appropriate communication strategies, and reviewing conflicts and tensions surrounding mangroves in the respective countries. A significant outcome of the workshop was the identification of potential project study sites. The sites that were proposed are:

• Nam Dinh, Vietnam; • Mahakam Delta, East Kalimantan, Indonesia; and • Nakhon Si Thammarat, Thailand.


1

Introduction Background Hosted in Bangkok by NACA-STREAM, this Inception Workshop was the first collaborative activity within the EU-funded project entitled “MANGROVE: Mangrove ecosystems, communities and conflict: developing knowledge-based approaches to reconcile multiple demands.”

Project Purpose The purpose of this project is to improve understanding of the multiple uses of mangrove ecosystems in employment generation, asset creation, food provision and sustaining the provision of societal support functions.

Project Objectives The objectives of this project are to:

• Develop action plans to reconcile multiple demands placed on mangroves and adjacent coastal zones in Southeast Asia

• Communicate findings about effective approaches for developing action plans to agencies responsible for coastal zone management

• Conduct a multidisciplinary situation analysis of mangrove ecosystem resources, functions and management in Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam

• Develop a participatory monitoring and evaluation system to assess the impacts on mangrove ecosystems

• Pilot action plans and assess their impacts on ecosystems, livelihoods and institutions using a participatory monitoring and evaluation system

• Identify high-potential strategies for promoting policy change, and • Develop appropriate communications media to promote national and regional

policy initiatives.

Workshop Objectives The objectives of the Inception Workshop were to:

• Acquaint project partners • Review the current status of mangroves in project countries • Plan the logistics for phases 1 and 2 • Agree an implementation strategy for Work Package 1 (WP 1) • Reach preliminary agreement on study sites • Identify stakeholders • Review conflicts and tensions surrounding mangroves • Review communication needs, and • Agree on the implantation methodology of Work Package 2 (WP 2).


2

Day One Workshop Overview Graham Haylor welcomed the project partners to the NACA Secretariat in Bangkok. He reminded participants of the project’s objectives and that the intention of this workshop was to come together to understand the specifics of the project. Of particular focus for this workshop would be phases one and two of the project, including detailed discussions of project locations, stakeholders, conflicts and communications. He emphasised that the session on planning and budget being held on the second day of the workshop was important, and that it was necessary to resolve all issues that required discussion and consensus. Review of Project Work Program and Coordination Stuart Bunting spoke next. He reiterated Graham’s comments that a major output of this workshop should be to have a refined timeline for work packages 1 and 2 (WP 1 and 2). More generally, he provided some suggestions for key actions that would need to occur for the program to be successful. He noted that the project team would need to identify and establish a dialogue with relevant agencies and organizations. To achieve the desired impact, the project must focus on responsiveness, not merely the production of technical reports. Returning to some housekeeping issues, Stuart raised the need to investigate other potential project partners given that IDDRA were likely to withdraw. He also made the suggestion that major project meetings should be held alongside conferences to enable participants to attend and present. To this end, he asked people to identify conferences and meetings that would be relevant. Additional questions were raised by project partners. In responding to these, some issues were clarified. It was agreed that the coordinating partner for each work package would play a managerial role in their work program but would still be involved in other work packages. Each of the relevant partners will manage their sub-contractor’s budget. When recruiting researchers the focus should be on high quality candidates, particularly encouraging some with social-science backgrounds. Salary costs must only be used to employ temporary staff, meaning that permanent staff can’t be paid from the project. Mangroves in Vietnam Asst Prof Dr Nguyen Hoang Tri provided the first of two presentations from the Mangrove Ecosystem Research Division (MERD). He focused on two major topics: biosphere reserves in Vietnam, and stakeholder analysis and socio-economic indicators for integrated management of these reserves (see Day One on the accompanying CD). The major conclusions that he reached were that:

• Integrated management in biosphere reserves is less effective when key stakeholders are excluded from decision-making and management, and

• Social monitoring is an effective tool for both decision-making processes and decision-makers to integrate measures in use and management of biosphere reserves at present and in the future.

Prof Phan Nguyen Hong then outlined the past and present status of mangroves in Vietnam, the role of mangroves in coastal areas, human impacts on mangrove ecosystems,


3

effects of mangrove restoration and the effects of propagation and education activities (see Day One on the accompanying CD). He made particular mention of the role of mangroves in reducing the impact of large waves on coastal communities, noting that this was significant in the whole of northern Vietnam. Mangroves in Thailand Dr Varaunthat Dulyapurk from the Department of Aquaculture, Kasetsart University, spoke next. The major concepts that he raised were the loss of mangroves, management practices, ecological and management issues, and criteria for site selection (see Day One on the accompanying CD). At the conclusion of this presentation, there was a discussion regarding the impact of the tsunami on mangroves and the appropriateness of using a tsunami-affected site in this project. Consideration was given to including an Andaman site. An additional comment was made regarding the potential for using this project to influence the Thai Government’s next Five-Year Plan (2007). There was consensus that this would be a highly beneficial outcome and should be pursued. Mangroves in Indonesia Dr Ahmad Syafei Sidik from the Faculty of Fisheries and Marine Science, Mulawarman University, gave the next presentation. He talked about the coastal resources profile in East Kalimantan, the present status and main issues, sustainability problems, current management practices, and some alternative research sites. He also observed that where industry has been involved in mangrove areas it has provided substantial funding for both social and environmental initiatives (see Day One on the accompanying CD). Outstanding Issues After a short break, the groups raised numerous outstanding issues that needed to be resolved before the project work could commence. Following is the consensus that was reached to resolve the issues. Many different groups may hold jurisdiction or influence over the proposed study sites. To this end all partners should, as soon as possible, begin requesting permission and recognition from the relevant agencies and institutions to conduct the necessary project work. Substantial time has passed since the project budget was set. Since this time likely project costs have risen, putting substantial pressure on the team’s ability to deliver the required outputs. It was acknowledged that the project budget is fixed and unlikely to be adjusted. Project partners should adjust their inputs to ensure that they can work within these constraints. A technique that may assist in working with these budgetary constraints is to shift costs between budget categories. The European Union is amenable to this. Given the numerous cultural, linguistic and religious differences among project partners, processes were needed to maintain simple communication. To ease this process, STREAM will facilitate communications among parties, documenting any issues that arise for future reference. English will be the project language but consideration will be given to producing project materials in local languages.


4

Measurement of change was considered to be particularly difficult given that much of the change will not occur during the life of the project. To resolve this, meaningful indicators need to be used that make sense within the timeframe of the project. Particular reference was made to using process measures rather than outcome measures. In addition, it was suggested that project partners should access existing data sets to create a reference point to measure whether meaningful change has occurred during the project. To affect change the project will need to influence policy. To achieve policy change, the project should attempt to influence key policy statements. It will be necessary to coordinate the project’s outputs with the policy development cycles of respective governments and institutions to attempt to influence their policy decisions. One of the project partners, IDDRA, will almost certainly withdraw from the project. To continue with the project, it is essential that this partner is replaced with another partner based in Europe. The other project partners nominated potential candidates. An additional issue that has been caused by the likely departure of IDDRA is that project funds are not being released. It was agreed that reaching an informal agreement would be enough to get funds released. To achieve this, each project partner would write to the University of Essex, expressing that activities are commencing and funding is needed. The project documentation as it stood did not provide partners with adequate detailed information to commence project implementation. It was agreed that partners would use the remainder of the workshop to start a detailed work plan. After the workshop, each partner would develop both a work and risk plan and provide these to Stuart Bunting who will coordinate. This project is running slightly behind schedule. It was agreed that project partners would hold off asking for an extension from the EU until we have resolved further issues. It was agreed that there is not a great urgency at the moment. It was agreed that the timing of the monitoring and evaluation cycle used by the project team should follow the annual reporting cycle that is used the EU.

Day Two Review of Today’s Program, Summary of Yesterday’s Work Stuart Bunting briefly summarized the proceedings of the first day of the workshop. He then gave an overview of the program for the second day. This included revisiting the project aims, work plan, timetable, work packages and deliverables, and a discussion of the method for project coordination and consortium structure. WP 1: Situation Analysis – Review of Activities and Expected Outcomes Stuart Bunting continued onto the next item on the agenda, a discussion of work package 1 (WP 1). As discussed and agreed with the project partners, the objectives of this work package are to:

• Identify representative communities and raise awareness of the project • Study and understand community livelihood strategies and mangrove

functionality


5

• Examine and discuss institutional, policy and legal frameworks with stakeholders

• Document market networks and their influence on the livelihoods of poor communities, and

• Establish dialogue with key stakeholders, describing and understanding roles and positions

Stuart presented detailed information looking at a variety of techniques and strategies for engaging with livelihoods, institutional, policy and legal frameworks, market networks, and communication outcomes. For greater detail on the content of this presentation, please see Day Two on the accompanying CD. Workshop Session - Identify Study Sites, Common Issues, Differences and Potential Difficulties A significant outcome of the workshop was the identification of potential project study sites. The sites that were proposed are Nam Dinh, Vietnam; Mahakam Delta, East Kalimantan, Indonesia and Nakhon Si Thammarat, Thailand. For more detail regarding the method by which these sites were selected, please see Day Two on the accompanying CD. Workshop Session - Stakeholder Identification and Discussion of Conflicts and Tensions Surrounding Mangroves Each of the project partners spent substantial time identifying stakeholders that were involved in the mangrove sites that had been selected in the previous session. The competing interests and agendas for these groups were identified and contrasted among the different partner countries. For more detail about the stakeholders and conflicts that exist, please see Day Two on the accompanying CD. Introduction to FishBase and Sea Around Us initiatives Stuart led a discussion presenting opportunities to link the findings of this project with the FishBase and Sea Around Us projects. This linkage had been highlighted in the project proposal, and aimed to ensure that data from the project are readily accessible in the public domain beyond the lifetime of the project. For greater detail, please see Day Two on the accompanying CD.

Day Three Introduction to the STREAM Initiative and WP 2 Activities Graham Haylor gave a brief presentation to the group outlining what the STREAM Initiative is, how it works, who it works with and what it works to achieve. Please see Day Three on the accompanying CD for further information.


6

Workshop Session – Communication Planning Deliverables and Internal and External Communication Plans, Project Website and Email List Chris Keating commenced this session with a discussion of the proposed monitoring and evaluation system for the project. He explained that the proposed M&E system is an integrated annual system for sharing information quarterly about activities, stakeholders, project impacts and learning. The M&E cycle culminates at the end of the year in an Annual M&E Workshop, which is proposed to take place in mid-December. The learning that emerges from this workshop will provide the basis for an Annual Learning Report. For more detail about the annual cycle of the proposed M&E system, please see the figure below, and for details about the process itself please refer to the project website at www.streaminitiative.org/Mangrove/MnE.html

Graham continued on the communication theme, raising various possibilities for communication techniques that had been found to work well in other projects. He suggested that there be a quarterly bulletin that would provide each project partner with a simple record of events and stories that had occurred during the preceding quarter. This concept was readily accepted by the project partners. After inspecting an example document (based on an existing STREAM template), some useful suggestions were made to improve the document for this project. Larger spaces and margins, coloured paper and the creation of a distinct visual identity (possibly based on the website) were all recommended. Graham also gave a demonstration of the pilot project website. This was greeted with a positive response. Project partners were happy with the proposed site and felt comfortable that it would meet their needs. The website can be found at this address: http://www.streaminitiative.org/Mangrove/index.html The potential for having local language versions of the project website was raised. While all partners agreed that this would be ideal, it was suggested that this would add substantial cost and time to the website development. Possible alternatives were to have local language summaries on the English website and/or having links to local websites. It was considered that these options would alleviate some of the language problems. There was a lengthy discussion regarding the relative strengths and weaknesses of online forums versus regular netmeetings. An online forum has the benefit of requiring less ongoing support and being constantly available but had, from various project partners’ experiences, some drawbacks. Primarily, the concern was that there was a relatively steep learning curve for people without experience in a similar medium. It was also noted


7

that without a critical mass of people contributing to a web forum, it would not contain enough up-to-date information to be a useful tool. On the other hand, there was quite strong support for the concept of netmeetings. From Graham’s experience, these were considered to be a useful medium for conducting a regular exchange of information. His only observation was that for them to work well they need to be held regularly, have a clear agenda and be facilitated. There was interest from the project partners in pursuing this approach. Yahoo accounts were the preferred method and it was agreed that the most appropriate time for all partners would be 15:00 Bangkok time. Another option for maintaining communication was to use Skype or some other similar software. More general observations that were raised and discussed by the project partners were:

• There should be an EU reference and logo shown on all project documents including the project website.

• The establishment of a drafting or version control process for the development of project documents. The preferred method at this stage is to use email.

• Developing standard templates and protocols for document generation. Graham Haylor was going to provide Stuart Bunting with some example templates.

Following this session, each project partner group went away and developed a proposed communication plan for their relevant work packages. Please see Day Two on the accompanying CD for the presentations that were made on these communication plans.

Follow Up Actions 1. Identify replacement project partner for IDDRA. 2. Finalize work plans and timelines for each project partner (to be coordinated and

compiled by Stuart Bunting). 3. Complete press release announcing commencement of the project. 4. Project partners write letters to University of Essex requesting a release of funds. 5. Develop templates for project documents. 6. Identify workshops and conferences that participants can present project findings at.

Project meetings should be scheduled to coincide with these workshops and conferences


8

Appendix 1 Agenda

Day One – Wednesday, 9 November

0830-0915 Introductions, workshop objectives and housekeeping STREAM

0915-1000 Review - project work program and coordination UOE

1000-1030 Break

1030-1130 Mangroves in Vietnam MERD, VNU

1130-1230 Mangroves in Thailand KU

1230-1330 Lunch

1330-1430 Mangroves in Indonesia MU

1430-1530 Group session on outstanding issues EOE

1530-1545 Break

1545-1615 Reporting back on outstanding issues Groups

1615-1645

Community, markets and institutions – lessons from EC INCO-DEV PAPUSSA project (KU) KU


9

Day Two – Thursday, 10 November

0850-0900 Review of today’s program, summary of yesterday’s work STREAM

0900-1000

Planning – budgets, timing, outputs and relationships for WP 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 All

1000-1015 Break

1015-1100 Feedback on planning and logistics issues All

1100-1200

WP 1: Situation analysis - a review of activities and expected outcomes UOE

1200-1300 Lunch

1300-1330

Workshop session to identify study sites, common issues, differences and potential difficulties Groups

1330-1400 Reportback on group sessions Groups

1400-1420 Who are the stakeholders? UOE

1420-1440 Workshop session - stakeholder identification Groups

1440-1510 Reportback on group sessions Groups

1510-1525 Break

1525-1600

Workshop session on conflicts and tensions surrounding mangroves Groups

1630-1730 Reportback on group deliberations Groups

1515-1545 Introduction to FishBase and Sea Around Us initiatives UOE

Day Three – Friday, 11 November

0920-0940 Introduction to the STREAM Initiative and WP 2 activities STREAM

0940-1115

Workshop session on communication planning – deliverables and internal and external communication plans, project website and email list

STREAM

1115-1145 Break

1145-12:00 Reporting back on communication plans Groups

1200-1230

Press release and summary explaining the project to stakeholders and participants

1230-1300 Thanks and close of meeting UOE/STREAM


10

Appendix 2 Participants

1. Dr Ahmad Syafei Sidik Faculty of Fisheries and Marine Science, Mulawaman University

2. Mr Erwiantono Faculty of Fisheries and Marine Science, Mulawaman University

3. Dr Varaunthat Dulyapurk Department of Aquaculture, Kasetsart University

4. Dr Ruangvit Yoonpundh Department of Aquaculture, Kasetsart University

5. Dr Wara Department of Aquaculture, Kasetsart University

6. Prof Phan Nguyen Hong Mangrove Ecosystem Research Division (MERD) Centre for Natural Resources and Environmental Studies Vietnam National University

7. Asst Prof Dr Nguyen Hoang Tri

Mangrove Ecosystem Research Division (MERD) Centre for Natural Resources and Environmental Studies Vietnam National University

8. Dr Paul van Zwieten Wageningen University

9. Ir Roel H Bosma Wageningen University

10. Dr Graham Haylor STREAM Initiative, Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific

11. Koji Yamamoto STREAM Initiative, Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific

12. Christopher Keating STREAM Initiative, Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific

13. Supawan STREAM Initiative, Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific

14. Dr Stuart Bunting Centre for Environment and Society, University of Essex

mangrove inception workshop report - finallibrary.enaca.org/mangrove/inception/inception.pdf ·...

Documents