Food and Agriculture Department for Organization of the International United Nations DFID Development

Programme pour des Moyens d’Existence Durables dans la Pêche (PMEDP)

(GCP/INT/735/UK)

Sustainable Fisheries Livelihoods Programme (SFLP)

PILOT PROJECT «COASTAL FISHERIES CO-MANAGEMENT IN CONGO, GABON, GUINEA AND MAURITANIA»

TERMINAL REPORT

By

Jean-Calvin Njock Regional Coordinator Regional Support Unit (RSU), Cotonou - Benin

May 2007

Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ...... 4 1. INTRODUCTION...... 5 1.1 General information and background...... 5 1.2 Project organization ...... 5 1.3 Aim, objective and outputs of the project...... 6 1.4 Strategy used ...... 6 1.4.1 Raising the awareness of and informing the stakeholders ...... 6 1.4.2 Gender issues...... 6 1.4.3 Monitoring and Evaluation...... 7 1.5 Fishing communities’ poverty profile ...... 7 Mauritania...... 7 Guinea...... 7 Gabon...... 8 Congo...... 8 1.5.1 Analysis of the project stakeholders...... 9 1.5.2 Establishing partnerships...... 9 1.5.3 Case studies for use in policy development ...... 9 2. ANALYSIS OF RESULTS...... 10 2.1 Output 1: Development of all stakeholders’ skills to allow them to participate in fisheries management and local development (including livelihood diversification) ...10 2.1.1 Organization of training and awareness-raising sessions...... 10 2.1.2 Changes brought about through skills development...... 11 2.2 Output 2: Establishment and operation of consultation mechanisms for small-scale coastal fishery management ...... 14 2.3 Output 3: Improvement and implementation of government policies and institutional and regulatory frameworks for small-scale coastal fisheries co-management ...... 16 2.4. Output 4: Preparation of a strategy supporting the fishing communities’ efforts to protect and manage the coastal marine environment...... 17 2.5 Result 5: Application and dissemination of the lessons learned from the project in order to develop policies for the benefit of the fishing communities...... 18 2.6 Regional activities...... 19 2.6.1 Social and economic contribution of fisheries to GDP and rural development...... 19 2.6.2 Fishermen’s migrations...... 20 2.6.3 Participatory surveillance ...... 21 3. RECOMMENDATIONS TO PARTICIPATING COUNTRIES...... 23 Congo...... 23 Gabon ...... 23 Guinea...... 23 Mauritania ...... 24 4. LESSONS LEARNED...... 25 4.1 Policies and institutions...... 26 4.2 Processes...... 27 4.3. Information/Communication ...... 28 Annex 1: LIST OF PILOT PROJECT PERSONNEL ...... 29 Annex 2: LIST OF DOCUMENTS PREPARED DURING PILOT PROJECT...... 30

4 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AICP Association pour l’auto promotion des initiatives communautaires de pêche (Association for Self-Promotion of Fishing Community Initiatives) CAPPED Caisse de participation à la promotion des entreprises et à leur développement (Fund for enterprise promotion and development) CCFAD Commission de coordination des actions de formation et de développement en pêche artisanale (Small-scale Fisheries Training and Development Coordination Committee) CCNADP Conseil consultatif national pour l’aménagement et le développement des pêcheries (National Consultative Council for fisheries management and development) CCRF Code of conduct for responsible fisheries CDD Comité de développement des débarcadères (Landing Stage Development Committee) CDP Commission départementale des pêches (Departmental Fisheries Committee) CEDEAO Communauté économique des Etats de l’Afrique de l’Ouest (West African States’ Economic Community) CEBEVIRHA Commission économique du bétail, de la viande et des ressources halieutiques (Livestock, Meat and Fishery Resources Economic Committee) CEMAC Communauté économique et monétaire de l’Afrique centrale (Central Africa Economic and Monetary Community) CIDA Canadian International Development Agency CLAP Comités locaux d’aménagement et de développement des pêcheries (Local Fisheries Management and Development Committees) CLC Comité local de consultation (Local Consultative Committee) CNLS Conseil national de lutte contre le VIH/SIDA (National HIV/AIDS Prevention Council) CNSHB Centre national des sciences halieutiques de Boussoura (Boussoura National Fishery Sciences Centre) CNSP Centre national de surveillance des pêches (National Fisheries Surveillance Centre) COREP Comite régional des pêches du Golfe de Guinée (Gulf of Guinea Regional Fisheries Committee) CRD Communauté rurale de développement (Rural Development Community) CSRP Commission sous régionale des pêches (Sub-regional Fisheries Committee) CRG Crédit rural de Guinée (Rural Credit of Guinea) DFID Department for International Development DPAC Direction de la pêche artisanale et côtière (Small-scale Coastal Fisheries Department) GPRSP Growth and Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper FAH Fonds d’aménagement halieutique (Fisheries Management Fund) FAO Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations GDP Gross Domestic Product GTZ German Cooperation Agency IEC Information, education, communication LDED Livelihoods Diversification Enterprise Development MAEP Ministère de l’agriculture, de l’élevage et de la pêche (Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries) MECREPAG Mutuelle d’épargne et de crédit de la pêche artisanale de Guinée (Small-scale Fisheries Savings and Credit Association) MFI Micro-Finance Institutions MPA Ministère des pêches et de l’aquaculture (Ministry of Fisheries & Aquaculture)

4 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report

MPEM Ministère des pêches et de l’économie maritime (Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Economy) NCU National Coordinating Unit NGO Non-Governmental Organisation OD Organisational development OSP Organisations socioprofessionnelles (Social and Occupational Organisations) PCU Programme Coordination Unit PIP Policies, institutions and processes PMT Project Management Team PNLS Programme national de lutte contre le SIDA (National AIDS Prevention Programme) PP2 Pilot Project 2 PSRP Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper RSU SFLP’s Regional Support Unit SCS Suivi, contrôle et surveillance (Monitoring, control and surveillance) SFLP Sustainable Fisheries Livelihoods Programme in Africa SLA Sustainable Livelihoods Approach STD Sexually-Transmitted Diseases UEMOA Union économique et monétaire Ouest africaine (West African Economic and Monetary Union) UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNPAG Union nationale des pêcheurs artisans de Guinée (National Small-scale Fishermen’s Union of Guinea) WB World Bank

4 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report

1. INTRODUCTION

The introduction to this final report covers general information, project organization, project objectives and expected results, and the strategic approach adopted for project implementation. Later, we shall analyze the results obtained and put forward recommendations for each of the countries involved. Finally, we shall examine the conclusions and the lessons learned. The data used in the preparation of this report were taken from documents prepared during the project, listed in Annex 2.

1.1 General information and background Pilot project "Coastal fisheries Co-management” or PP2 is the second sub-regional initiative undertaken by the Sustainable Fisheries Livelihoods Programme (SFLP). It was implemented in four countries: Congo, Gabon, Guinea and Mauritania. These countries were selected on the basis of a participatory process involving the Programme’s 25 partner countries at a meeting held in Cotonou in September 2002. The decision to choose participatory management (or co-management) for this coastal fisheries’ pilot project was made using a process promoted by the Programme Coordination Unit (UCP) and the Regional Support Unit (RSU). A planning workshop to prepare the pilot project’s framework, in which the CNUs of the Programme’s 25 partner countries participated, was held in Cotonou in October 2002. At this workshop the project’s aim, objective, expected results and general activities were determined, as were the basic logistics for project implementation (i.e. budget, regional management and coordination, and the use of the Sustainable Livelihoods Approach (SLA) and the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (CCRF)). Detailed project formulation was carried out in April and May 2003 by a formulation mission which held planning exercises in each of the four countries in conjunction with the national formulation teams chosen by the CNUs with RSU support. The formulation took account of the CCRF, the SLA, the poverty profiles obtained in the participating countries and the Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSP). The project document was approved by the Programme Steering Committee in July 2003. The project agreement between FAO and the fisheries authorities of the four countries was signed in April and May 2004. The Pilot Project’s Regional Coordinator was recruited in May 2004 and the national project management teams (PMT) were established between June and September 2004. The pilot project was officially launched at a meeting held in Libreville (Gabon) from 18 to 23 October 2004. At the end of this meeting, during which a monitoring workshop was also held, the management teams were asked to review their work plans and identify the areas where changes were needed, the activities and actions required to achieve those changes, and the monitoring indicators. The improved work plans were then submitted for community approval between October and December 2004 and field activities began in January 2005.

1.2 Project organization The pilot project was scheduled to have a duration of three years, with a total budget of about US$ 3 million: about US$ 500,000 for each of the beneficiary countries and an equivalent amount for both regional coordination and regional activities. However, due to its

5 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report late start and the fact that the programme’s field activities were officially due to end on 31 December 2006, the scheduled 3-year period of implementation was cut short. With the technical support of FAO representatives, each country’s CNU recruited a management team to implement project activities in the country under its responsibility. The teams were also responsible for disseminating project results in their countries. Under the overall supervision and on the advice of the Programme Coordinator, project implementation in the four participating countries was coordinated by a Regional Coordinator, based at the RSU headquarters in Cotonou. The RSU team provided technical support for project implementation.

1.3 Aim, objective and outputs of the project The pilot project’s aim was to promote a political and institutional environment capable of improving the livelihoods of the coastal fishing communities. Its objective was to improve natural resource management through the collaboration of the coastal fishing communities, the Governments and civil society. The project was expected to: • Strengthen all stakeholders’ capacity to participate in fisheries management and local development (including livelihood diversification) • Set up and put into operation small-scale coastal fisheries management consultation mechanisms • Improve and implement Government policies and institutional and regulatory frameworks for the co-management of small-scale coastal fisheries • Prepare a strategy to support fishing communities’ efforts to protect and manage the coastal marine environment • Apply and disseminate the lessons learned from the project in order to develop policies for the benefit of the fishing communities.

1.4 Strategy used

1.4.1 Raising the awareness of and informing the stakeholders Awareness and information campaigns on various aspects of fisheries management and poverty eradication were launched at the start of the project to trigger the support of the various players. These activities were carried out as part of efforts to develop the skills and competence of the communities and institutions, without which participation in management and local development would hardly be possible. Moreover, the participatory analyses of the communities’ livelihoods were used to determine the communities’ strengths and weaknesses and to identify their training requirements, i.e. basic literacy, organizational skills and some technical skills, such as product processing and responsible fishing.

1.4.2 Gender issues Gender issues were a key aspect of the pilot project strategy. Not only were these issues incorporated into the management teams’ work plans, but each team prepared a gender action plan, including gender-sensitive indicators on the monitoring grid. It must be said, however, that gender issues were inserted into the project during implementation, which meant that these gender action plans were not used to their full potential.

6 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report

1.4.3Monitoring and Evaluation A monitoring and evaluation system was set up. The process involved collecting data based on a monitoring grid designed by the RSU and taking a situation in each of the four participating countries as reference. In each country a monitoring intermediary was recruited and community monitoring committees set up to track the changes brought about by the activities, at the same time producing useful data for use in evaluating the project’s impact in terms of livelihood improvement and government policy changes. Given that the project aimed to reduce poverty in the fishing communities, these communities were asked to provide information on available human, social, financial and physical resources. The local monitoring committees also helped prepare and corroborate the baseline situations against which the changes occurring in the pilot project area would be measured. It must be pointed out that the existence of a monitoring system for Pilot Project 2 turned out to be a constraint for project implementation. In the wake of the changes made following the mid-term evaluation mission (April-May 2003), the RSU’s monitoring unit was dismantled. Efforts by the Programme Coordinator to remedy the situation did not result in a monitoring expert being recruited before May 2005, i.e. five months after the start of field activities. The delay in getting the project under way was largely due to the difficulties encountered in setting up a monitoring system at the RSU. The expert recruited developed an information gathering and analysis system operated at national level as described above.

1.5 Fishing communities’ poverty profile The poverty profile of each country’s fishing communities enabled a participatory poverty evaluation to be made and this was used as a guide in project formulation and implementation. The main points of these profiles are listed below:

Mauritania Due to Mautitania’s arid conditions and isolation, the livelihoods of the Mauritanian fishing communities are highly dependent on fishing and on physical resources, such as pirogues, engines, nets and other fishing equipment. The poor groups live mainly in large towns like Nouakchott, Mamghar and N’Diago. The villages and/or camps in the northern part of the project area show even greater signs of poverty. Their livelihoods depend almost entirely on fishing. There is no crop or livestock farming and monetary transfers are practically unknown. In these regions, migration is more a means of survival than a way of life. There is no other opportunity apart from fishing. Dreadful climatic and ecological conditions – sandstorms, arid land, numerous insects, precarious habitat and the lack of roads and water – have ruled out any large-scale settlement, fishery-related investments and services, and the creation of other income-generating activities. In the south, migration is a way of life. Every family has a member who has migrated to one of the large fish landing sites. Where possible, they have developed other livelihoods : inland fisheries, crop and livestock farming, market gardening and trading are possible along the Senegal river. The peri-urban fishing communities in Nouakchott are more likely to diversify their activities given the various job opportunities available in the capital.

Guinea The area covered by the project is on the north coast, in Boké and Boffa prefectures. In this area, as in the remainder of Guinea, having the basic physical fishing resources, such as pirogues, fishing gear and engines, is an important factor in poverty classification. Those without any inputs are classified as very poor. The poorest fishermen are those who use pirogues with paddles and fish with cast nets. The less poor can diversify their fishing

7 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report techniques by using different fishing gear depending on the season (encircling nets or bottom gillnets) and engine-driven pirogues. The most well-off groups are the fish buyers, who fund the fishing trips, and the fish wholesalers – mainly women – who export salted and dried fish to neighboring countries, such as Senegal. During the nineteen eighties, the Guinea government and several development partners began programmes designed to provide support for the coastal communities. The main aim of these programmes was to provide fishermen with equipment. However, these programmes’ method of implementation created inequalities in the fishing communities. Those left out of the programmes were marginalized and forced into subsistence fishing, using very basic equipment. Poverty in the fishing communities is also characterized by a lack of infrastructure, basic social services (health care, education and drinking water) and qualified staff to provide these services. The most vulnerable people along the Guinean coast live on the off-shore islands and in very isolated villages. Access to these places is particularly difficult during the wet season. Frequent incursions by commercial fishing vessels into the area reserved for small-scale fishing have destroyed fishing gear and led to the overfishing of resources traditionally used by the small- scale fishermen, making them even more vulnerable to poverty.

Gabon The area covered by the pilot project extends along the northern coast, in the Noya and Komo-Mondah departments. The fishing communities comprise native fishermen and migrants from countries of the sub-region (Niger, Equatorial Guinea and Benin). The poverty profiles show that the major factors affecting the fishing communities are (i) the encroachment of commercial fishing vessels on the small-scale fishing grounds, (ii) the high cost of living, (e.g. food and fishing gear), (iii) the lack of social organization, and (iv) the high incidence of disease. Very few livelihood diversification strategies are available to migrant fishermen and their families – fishing is virtually the only activity open to them. They are denied access to land and have no farming rights. Their children often suffer from malnutrition. The Gabonese, on the other hand, can combine fishing with crop and livestock farming and, in this way, ease their food security problems. Women play an important role as fish processors and wholesalers. Since there are no savings and credit institutions, the women wholesalers often lend the fishermen money to buy fishing gear. The fishing communities have reported a high incidence of diseases such as malaria, sleeping sickness and rheumatism. There are often no health centers near the villages and the people are left to resort to self-treatment and traditional medicine. The women often give birth in the villages and/or camps and only go to hospital or to a health centre when there are complications. Unprotected sex is common and often takes place in exchange for money or services. Inevitably, this exposes the women and their partners to the risk of infection (HIV and other STDs).

Congo The pilot project covers Kouilou Department which is itself a region. This department comprises the Pointe Noire district and four rural administrative districts. The oil pollution and erosion problems along the coast, especially in Pointe Noire and Loango bays, badly affect the fishing communities. Congo recently suffered a period of armed conflicts which significantly slowed its economic and social development. These conflicts had a significant impact on the fishing communities, even though the project area is not within the conflict zones. The suspension of public investment in school, road and health centre building, and the government’s inability to provide services led to the deterioration of the livelihoods of the fishing communities and other deprived rural communities.

8 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report

1.5.1 Analysis of the project stakeholders An analysis of the project stakeholders was conducted during workshops held in the project areas. This helped identify the major players and evaluate their importance and interest in terms of the project objectives and the role that each could play in project implementation. The analysis also identified those who could play a part in monitoring and evaluation.

1.5.2 Establishing partnerships Support for the communities was obtained through partnerships with NGOs and some institutions. For example, in Guinea, contracts were negotiated with a dozen or so service providers based on their expertise (Table 1). A similar process was used in the three other countries, covering roughly the same areas. These partnerships benefited not only the fishing communities (fishermen, processers and traders) without distinction of sex or nationality, but also the commercial fishing companies which enter the areas reserved for small-scale fishing, and by so doing are often in conflict with small-scale fishermen. The awareness of authorities other than those connected with fisheries (e.g. forestry, environment, decentralization, land use and local authorities) was also raised, as was that of the commercial companies operating in the coastal area, whose activities pose a serious threat to small-scale fishing (oil companies in Congo, Gabon and Mauritania and bauxite- exploiting companies in Guinea).

1.5.3 Case studies for use in policy development The project also conducted regional case studies on certain issues (fishing’s contribution to the economy, participatory surveillance, and fishermen’s migrations) in an effort to have pertinent data on which to base policies. These studies were conducted by the sub-region’s resource personnel and workshops were held to discuss and draw the lessons from them. Table 1: Service providers involved in skill-building activities in Guinea Topics Service providers 1) Basic literacy EUPD (NGO) 2) Organizational development (OD) including decentralization, co-management, conflict CENAFOD (NGO) management, savings and credit 3) Raising awareness of HIV/AIDS and other Sectoral Committee for AIDS prevention diseases 4) Product processing HTS (NGO) 5) Safety at sea Maritime Navigation Agency (ANACAM) Boussoura National Fishery Sciences Centre 6) Environment management (CNSHB) 7) Lobbying Project Management Team (PMT) Communication consultant in conjunction with 8) Directory of project partners PRS/PRSD 9) Analysis of traditional cooperation methods Guinea’s National Fisheries Observatory 10) Community support for management Committee for the coordination of small-scale project formulation fisheries training and development (CCFAD) Source: Final Report PMT Guinea

9 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report

2. ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

2.1 Output 1: Development of all stakeholders’ skills to allow them to participate in fisheries management and local development (including livelihood diversification)

2.1.1 Organization of training and awareness-raising sessions In each of the four countries, the skills development activities had a considerable impact, as shown below: In Congo, 522 micro-level players, 264 men and 258 women, and 91 meso and macro-level players received the training provided under the pilot project. Table 2: Beneficiaries of training sessions in Congo Beneficiaries Topics Micro Meso Macro Men Women Total How to manage an OSP 18 28 46 Importance of MFIs 12 45 57 Activity planning 42 32 74 An organization’s management documents (accounting 29 46 75 and administrative documents) How to hold a meeting 36 27 63 How to draft minutes of meetings and reports 20 11 31 Activity monitoring 4 4 Fisheries management and micro-financing institutions 90 40 130 Fisheries co-management and formalization of fishing 19 27 communities’ participation; gender Local governance and decentralization, local development, laws and regulations governing the fishery 45 sector, micro-financing institutions, environmental degradation, integrated management of coastal areas Other 13 29 42 TOTAL 264 258 522 91 Source: Final report of PMT Congo In Gabon, 655 persons, including 183 women, received training in 5 villages, three in Noya Department and 2 in Komo Mondah Department. In Guinea, 1,790 persons received training in various topics (Table 3).

10 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report

Table 3: Number of persons benefiting from training in Guinea Number of Training topics persons trained

Product processing 450 Safety at sea 250 Fishing technology 70 Organizational development, including decentralization, infrastructure 400 management, savings, credit, financial management and participatory approach Environment 100 Literacy 400 Joint surveillance 70 Communication 80 Joint monitoring and evaluation 70 Source: Final report Guinea PMT

2.1.2 Changes brought about through skills development 2.1.2.1 Emergence of social and occupational organizations Training and awareness-raising activities helped the stakeholders to share the same vision of co-management and to understand the link between this and the country’s current decentralization and local development policies. These activities led to the creation of OSPs and infused new life into umbrella organizations and cooperation bodies at micro, meso and macro levels. The situation in each country at the conclusion of the pilot project is shown in Table 4. Table 4: Social and Occupational Organizations (OSP) and consultative bodies set up or revitalized with pilot project support Number of Cooperation bodies organizations created 1 national fisheries consultative committee 46 OSPs Congo 1 departmental fisheries committee 8 umbrella organizations 5 local fisheries committees 4 local consultative committees (CLC) Gabon 12 OSPs 2 departmental fisheries committees (CDP) 1 national consultative council 86 cooperatives Guinea 28 landing stage development committees (CDD)

2 prefectoral consultative councils 6 local fisheries management and development Mauritania - committees

Source: Extracts from final reports by the PMTs of Congo, Gabon, Guinea and Mauritania

11 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report

Since Congo does not legally recognize the organizations set up within the fishing communities, these structures are operating unofficially. Women make up 46 percent of the membership of the 46 OSPs. In Gabon, in addition to having an executive board and legal texts (statutes and rules of procedure), OSPs are also registered with the fishery authorities. They are currently being granted legal status by the Interior Ministry – a procedure required under the Act governing associations. Women make up 45% of OSP members, 22% of whom are migrants. Women account for one third of the OSP boards, but very few board members are migrants. In Guinea, 86 cooperatives have been granted legal status. 2.1.2.2. Other changes Skills development activities led to other important changes in fishing communities’ livelihoods, and in policies and institutions: • new opportunities developed by the communities in an effort to diversify their livelihoods: in Congo, cassava is now cultivated since the use of improved cuttings was promoted in the project area. Community cassava fields were opened up by 60 beneficiaries. Market gardening has also been developed. In Gabon, the Ongam fishing community have established a banana plantation ; domestic animal raising was developed in the Lémé and Massamboué fishing communities and market gardening was promoted in the Cap Estérias fishing community. In Mauritania, mechanical repair and maintenance workshops have been set up and fishing net-making activities (traditional shoulder-held nets to replace the banned monofilament gillnets) have been developed ; women have begun household rubbish collection and also provide food and accomodation for guests; • development of dialogue between the micro-financing institutions (MFIs) and the fishing communities: this has resulted in some communities having access to MFIs, although this practice is not yet very widespread. For instance, about half a dozen OSPs in Congo have opened accounts with MFIs in Pointe Noire to support their activities. In Guinea, 36 individuals, men and women, and 43 groups in Koba, Kindiady, Doyéma and Kamsar have obtained credit from the MFI “Rural Credit of Guinea” (CRG); • establishment of savings and credit facilities: at the communities’ initiative, financing facilities are emerging in the form of tontines. In Congo, a community bank was formed in 2006 at the Base AGIP beach with the support of the pilot project and the National AIDS Eradication Council (CNLS). It has about 50 members. In Guinea, a similar facility is currently being set up in the form of a mutual credit association reserved for fishermen. It goes by the name of the Guinea Small-Scale Fishing Savings and Credit Mutual Association (MECREPAG) which, in December 2006, had funds amounting to 700 million Guinean Francs, made up of fishermen’s own voluntary funds1. It should be pointed out that MECREPAG is currently the main development tool of the National Union of Guinean Small-Scale Fishermen (UNPAG); • raising the community’s awareness of HIV/AIDS and other sexually-transmitted diseases (STD): activities designed to prevent and control HIV/AIDS were carried out among the fishing communities in Congo. This was the first time these players had been involved in all the activities undertaken in response to the national HIV/AIDS eradication strategy. Based on the satisfactory results obtained by the Association for Self-Promotion of Fishing Community Initiatives (AICP), Base Agip’s umbrella organization, under an HIV/AIDS prevention project funded by the National AIDS Prevention Committee (CNLS), fishing community members all along the coast have become youth workers and social communication providers. This has increased awareness of HIV/AIDS-related issues : about 2,374 persons have been alerted to the problem. Twenty-five vulnerable

1 1€ = 6050 FG

12 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report

households at Base Agip received support to diversify their livelihoods through activities jointly promoted by CNLS and FAO (LDED) – a good example of a partnership developed through the pilot project; In Gabon, cooperation between the pilot project and the National AIDS Prevention Programme (PNLS) resulted in an HIV/AIDS and STD awareness campaign in the project area, which reached 1,302 persons. This campaign has had a positive impact: AIDS is now talked about freely in these communities and many fishermen accept that it is necessary to take the AIDS test. As a result, AIDS screening has been carried out in Noya Department and those found to be HIV-positive are currently being helped by the PNLS; • more attention paid to community concerns when development programmes are formulated and implemented by the public authorities and development partners: this has been made possible through training in participatory approaches, such as the Sustainable Livelihoods Approach (SLA), provided for civil society technical partners (NGOs) and the public sector. For some pilot project activities, senior public sector officers worked as consultants to help influence public policies for the communities’ benefit (Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) in Guinea and Congo, Growth and Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (GPRSP) in Gabon, and fisheries policies in the four countries involved in the pilot project). It is reasonable to say that this strategy has led to the SLA being adopted by several authorities and to the provision of training in participatory planning for a number of managerial staff. The development of multiform strategic partnerships for the benefit of the communities has also resulted in the fishing communities’ concerns being reflected in local planning. For instance in Guinea, awareness campaigns mobilized several development partners in the coastal area, thereby giving the fishing communities the chance to benefit from the available opportunities. For example, the Kamsar fishermen benefited from negotiations between their Landing Stage Development Committee (CDD) and the Guinean Bauxite Company (CBG) by having their port facilities improved and water and electricity provided free of charge by the company. They have also recently become eligible for community initiative financing, also provided by the CBG. All the communities in the project area are benefiting from investments (landing stage construction) under the AFD/BAD project. Some Gabonese OSP have also been able to obtain funds from partners. For instance, the Lémé Fishing Association has obtained funds for the purchase of fishing equipment from a supplier and the Milembié Fishing Association has received a grant of 6.5 million FCFA2 from the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) to fund the training of 6 fishermen and the purchase of a motorized vessel; • greater safety at sea: between 2003 and 2005 there were 104 accidents in the pilot project area in Guinea, in which 136 persons died and 439 were injured, whereas in 2006, there were only 10 accidents, in which 4 persons died and 22 were injured. This decline has been attributed in part to the training given to the fishermen; • promotion of responsible fisheries: by promoting good practices in fish product processing, the communities are encouraging responsible fishing. In Guinea, the recommended use of smoking grids of normal mesh size is keeping small fish out of the commercial circuit, thereby helping to protect and preserve immature specimens. Guinean fishermen have also been able to develop their surveillance skills in the coastal areas reserved for their small-scale fishing, which are also spawning and nursery grounds regularly visited by trawlers; • improvement in relations between fishing communities: according to Gabonese fishermen, the frequency of conflicts over fishing grounds at sea is on the decline. This has helped to bring about peaceful relations between the communities. This is a

2 1€= 506 FCFA

13 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report

significant step forward given that conflicts at sea between native and migrant fishermen, sometimes resulting in death (as in Massotié in 2001), or between migrant fishermen (as in the case of Beninese fishermen in Massamboué and Niger fishermen in Lémé) were frequent prior to the establishment of the pilot project in Gabon; • introduction of new hygiene and cleanliness practices: this change was especially obvious in Mauritania where outbreaks of cholera have occurred often in the past. The new practices include chlorination to make water drinkable, stopping the practice of everyone washing their hands in the same bowl before meals and the introduction of Maghsel (a type of basin used for hand-washing), using soap after leaving the toilet and before and after meals, and ceasing to share personal items such as nail scissors, razors, tooth brushes, needles and razor blades.

2.2 Output 2: Establishment and operation of consultation mechanisms for small-scale coastal fishery management The significant change in Congo is the adoption of the Institutional Framework for Coastal Fisheries Co-Management. Based on Act N°2 of 1 February 2000 which provides for mechanisms for collaboration between the fisheries authority and other stakeholders, and driven by the pilot project, the fisheries authorities and other institutional players (decentralization and land use planning authorities, Koulilou departmental council and local authorities) adopted the institutional framework for fisheries co-management shown in Diagram 1.

Diagram 1: Institutional framework for coastal fisheries co-management in Congo

Scale Consultation bodies

Fisheries Consultative Committee Representatives (Fisheries Management, the Merchant Navy, National scientific research, commercial fishermen, Chairs of local fisheries committees, Environment, Water and Forests, Finance and Petroleum operations)

Fisheries Departmental Committee Representatives (Fisheries Departmental Management, the Departmental Merchant Navy, Environment, Water and Forests, Petroleum operations, commercial and small-scale fishermen)

Local Fisheries Committee Representatives (Social & Occupational Organisations and/or District fisheries umbrella organisations, sub-prefectures and decentralised authorities)

Umbrella organisations Village Representatives of the social and occupational organisations of all sectors present

14 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report

This framework provides for the establishment of a fisheries consultative committee at national level, a fisheries departmental committee at departmental level and local fisheries committees in the four coastal districts and in the district of Pointe Noire. The provisions governing the implementation of this plan have been prepared and the process for their legal adoption by means of an administrative instrument at fisheries authorities level is under way. Once adopted, the fishing communities will be legally entitled to participate in fisheries management and local development. Until the process is complete, consultations between fishing communities and fisheries authorities for all matters concerning fisheries management will take place through the umbrella organizations and the social and occupational organizations that the pilot project helped to establish. In Gabon, the establishment of consultative bodies falls within the legislative and regulatory context which defines the way such bodies operate, based on principles laid down in the Fisheries and Aquaculture Code approved in 2005 (Act No. 15/2005). Article 10 of the Code recommends the establishment of institutional mechanisms to encourage fishermen to participate in sustainable fisheries resource management. Article 12 requires the fisheries authorities to consult the major social and occupational groups prior to drawing up fisheries management plans. Finally, Article 13 provides for the establishment, where necessary, of a consultative committee in the areas concerned. It was against this background that the pilot project established consultative bodies and prepared draft decrees to formalise the fishing communities’ involvement in fisheries management and local development. Two types of bodies were thus created and established: (i) local consultative committees (CLC) at cantonal level, i.e. four in all, with two in each of the departments covered by the pilot project (Noya and Komo Mondah), and (ii) Departmental Fisheries Committees (CDP) at departmental level, i.e. two in all, with one per department. It is through these bodies, on which the fishermen’s associations are represented, that the fishing communities will be able to participate in decision-making. In Guinea, the formalization of the fishing communities’ participation in fishery resource management led to the establishment and revitalization of legally-recognised associations and cooperation bodies. These cooperation bodies, especially the CDD, carry out duties such as joint surveillance, ensuring that the rules governing safety at sea are obeyed and conducting participatory monitoring and evaluation through ad hoc bodies recognized in the statutes approved by the Guinean authorities, i.e. 5 local monitoring committees and 5 committees established to monitor safety at sea. The small-scale fisheries consultative councils give advice on matters relating to fishery resource management and local development activities. The small-scale fishermen are now no longer merely passive on- lookers, but players in a participatory process : their representative bodies (social and occupational organizations and CDD), in conjunction with the Prefectoral and Regional Councils and the National Consultative Council, are entitled to participate in framing fishery management measures for coastal areas, to monitor the implementation of such measures and to carry out joint surveillance under the aegis of and in partnership with the Fisheries National Surveillance Centre (CNSP). The preparation and publication in December 2006 of the 2007 fishing plan which will govern the activities from 1 January to 31 December 2007 is an example of such participation. A large number of the fishing communities’ representatives participated in this process, taking full advantage of the legal provisions and rights relating to their responsibilities in the management, monitoring, evaluation and surveillance process. It is heartening to note that the communities are beginning to be involved in decision-making in fishery management and other matters of interest to them. In Mauritania, six local fisheries management and development consultative committees (whose establishment is provided for in Article 12 of the Fisheries Code) have been set up. These are informal local organizations representing the grassroots on the National Fisheries Management and Development Consultative Council, which operates at macro level. Before the pilot project got under way, there was no operational local organization and the grass- roots populations did not even participate in local, let alone national consultation meetings.

15 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report

2.3 Output 3: Improvement and implementation of government policies and institutional and regulatory frameworks for small-scale coastal fisheries co-management The main action taken to achieve this result was a review of the institutional framework. This was done through a participatory process involving the fishing communities and various public institutions directly or indirectly connected to fisheries. They discussed the joint fishery surveillance case studies carried out in the four countries participating in the pilot project, with the aim of supporting those countries seeking legal recognition for their coastal fishing communities’ participation in fisheries management, including monitoring, evaluation and surveillance. A further aim was to provide the pilot project with an approach and the tools needed to involve these communities in the on-going decentralization process. They also took stock of the state of fisheries’ institutional and legal environment highlighted some shortcomings and proposed amendments to remedy the situation. The workshops held in the various countries to approve the above amendments recommended that the fishery authorities take the necessary steps to legally recognize the fishing communities’ involvement in fisheries management, including surveillance. It must be noted that in Congo changes were made to the institutional as well as to the legal and regulatory framework covering community-based co-management. Indeed, under the overall reform of the Fisheries Act, which was the subject of a wide-ranging consultation, it was proposed to legally recognize the fishing communities as partners in fisheries management through local fisheries committees. Two bills were prepared for this purpose : a draft decree, prescribing the remit, membership and method of operation of the Fisheries Consultative Committee ; and a draft order relating to the remit, membership and method of operation of the local fishery committees. These local committees are called upon to play a leading role in the fishing communities’ participation in the preparation and implementation of fishery management plans and in joint fishery surveillance, the operational mechanisms of which are yet to be defined. This reform of the legislation, through the new fisheries management framework adopted by all the stakeholders, provides for sustainable State funding of the co-management operations through the Fisheries Management Fund (FAH), established by decree in 1996. This framework sets out the functional links with national and local institutions provided for under the decentralization process, i.e. the local authorities whose role in natural resource management is currently under review. In Gabon, the fisheries authorities have received support from the pilot project and the cooperation of FAO’s Legal Office in the preparation of the the Fisheries and Aquaculture Code’s implementing provisions. This work related to two bills: a draft order concerning the establishment of an institutional mechanism covering co-management of small-scale fisheries through the CLCs and CDPs, and a draft order governing the formalization of joint surveillance of small-scale fisheries. As the pilot project had ended before these orders were signed, the bills were transferred to the on-going BAD project, one of whose mandates is to help the Gabon fisheries authorities to improve their fisheries regulatory and institutional framework. When this process is completed, grassroots players will be able to participate fully in decision-making and will be able to ensure that fishery management and local development policies take their concerns into account. In Guinea, major changes were made possible by the signing by the Fisheries and Aquaculture Minister of Decree N°00676/2006, regulating small-scale fishing, and Decree N° 00677/2006, adopting the joint surveillance manual of procedures. These laws sought to improve the legal framework in three major ways: • they legally recognized fishermen as players who should participate in sustainable fishery resource management planning. It is worth mentioning that while the principle of consulting fishing communities when drawing up management plans is provided for in the

16 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report

Marine Fisheries Code of 1995, this was never done prior to February 2006. The support of the pilot project helped fill this gap by making the legal recognition of the CDD possible, thereby formally recognizing the fishing communities’ role in fisheries management and local development; • they updated the legal environment by including the concept of joint surveillance in the decree regulating small-scale fishing, reviewing the status of the CDDs and including joint surveillance in their remit; • they introduced the concept of a financing mechanism for fisheries management and local development. In practice, the government authorities have transferred community infrastructure management to a number of CDDs (Kamsar, Koba and Koukoudé), and Kanfarandé CDD is the next in line. These CDDs have been able to open bank accounts and are now entitled to collect the operating revenues and the various landing stage taxes, provided the relevant fees are paid to the State. Generally speaking, in their capacity as decentralized sub-sectoral authorities recognized in law, the CDDs receive public funding, managed by the Rural Development Communities (CRD) – organizations authorized to receive and channel public financing resulting from budget decentralization and development partners’ interventions. On this basis, some CDDs, such as the Central Boffa CDD has been allocated funds to provide some cooperatives with about a dozen new fishing boats in an effort to boost their fish landings. The laws also entitle the CDDs to receive an allowance for participating in fishery surveillance if the information provided by fishermen who are members of a CDD results in the boarding and inspection of an illegal vessel and in that vessel paying a fine. The legal recognition of fishing communities and their organizations irrespective of nationality has also resulted in migrant fishermen becoming involved in fisheries management. It is worth pointing out that migrant fishermen play a significant role in small-scale fishing in Guinea. The provisions covering their involvement in management are contained in the laws governing the status of, rules and regulations for and approval of OSPs’, cooperatives’ and CDDs’. About 40 mixed OSPs were established in 2006. Migrant fishermen are also involved in several umbrella organizations, following the example of the treasurer of Kamsar CDD and the vice-president of Guinea’s National Union of Small-scale Fishermen, who are both from Sierra Leone. In Mauritania, as well as a study on joint surveillance, a legal study was carried out to ensure the sustainability of new local cooperation organizations’ activities and formalize the grassroots populations’ participation in sustainable coastal resource development (legal recognition of community-based organizations). The bills concerning local fisheries management and development committees (CLADP), prepared as part of this study, were made available to the relevant authorities for incorporation into the legal framework currently under review. The MPEM/GTZ support project, in charge of monitoring the operation of the National Consultative Council for Fisheries Management and Development (CCNADP), has expressed an interest in providing the link between this local cooperation framework and CCNADP, as well as continuing to provide support and supervision to ensure that these local committees become more efficient.

2.4. Output 4: Preparation of a strategy supporting the fishing communities’ efforts to protect and manage the coastal marine environment Because the pilot project activities lasted only 24 months instead of the planned 36 months, the work undertaken in an effort to achieve this result came to an end once the field activities were halted in December 2006. Congo and Guinea had already recruited consultants to begin preparing the strategy. This work will be taken over by the fisheries authorities.

17 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report

In Gabon, a study was launched to start the process. After first analyzing the state of the coastal marine ecosystem, the study outlined a community support strategy based on three pillars : (i) the establishment of consultative bodies ( i.e. the local consultative committees and the fisheries departmental committees) to provide an interface between the communities and the authorities ; (ii) information, education and communication (IEC) campaigns to raise the awareness of, educate and inform players in the marine coastal area of the need to prevent the degradation of the marine coastal areas ; (iii) the promotion of alternative activities (such as crop farming and small animal raising, aquaculture, agro-forestry, cottage industries and ecotourism) as a means of diversifying the coastal communities’ livelihoods. This study needs to be revived and an in-depth review made of the outline proposal so that it can be formalized, if necessary. The final step would then be to find a partner to finance the strategy. The work done in Mauritania may be described as the preparation of an analytical study of national documents on the environment. However, due to institutional changes the strategy was never completed.

2.5 Result 5: Application and dissemination of the lessons learned from the project in order to develop policies for the benefit of the fishing communities An information and communication strategy (I/C) was established in all the countries except Gabon, which has no official communication strategy. It allowed the project to raise the profile of the fisheries sector, attracting more attention from decision-makers and development partners, resulting in fisheries being taken into account in the PRSPs and other development initiatives. I/C activities also helped improve grassroots players’ perception of the pilot project. In Congo, the community theatre turned out to be an excellent social communication tool for HIV/AIDS-related issues, helped promote OSPs and improved relations with the partners. It was a means of mobilizing the community and gave the most vulnerable an opportunity to express themselves in public. It was also a means of raising the awareness of and lobbying the decision-makers. It is currently used by the communities to spread information about themselves. It also helped in the design of appropriate joint monitoring and evaluation mechanisms and encouraged the communities to get more involved in the monitoring activities. In Gabon, the pilot project disseminated the lessons learned and other information through the usual channels: the SFLP liaison newsletter, field and workshop activity reports and a National Liaison Newsletter produced by the pilot project and designed to: • disseminate nationally the lessons learned from the activities carried out under the project; • build on the project results; • ensure that as many of the players as possible make the most of the knowledge gained; • enable the communities to acquire the necessary skills to diversify their income- generating activities; • re-launch discussions on the development of the small-scale fishery sector. In Guinea, the strategy was based on an arrangement comprising a communication focal point, 20 trained and equipped rural promoters, 21 cercles d’écoute (listening groups), and a network of 3 rural and community radio stations providing three news magazines per station per week about pilot project activities, with the participation of the fishing communities. The laws on fisheries management are explained on the radio in the local language (Soussou)

18 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report and in French. To ensure that all the stakeholders are aware of the fisheries management laws, the following activities were carried out under the project: • the ministerial decrees governing fishing regulations and the joint surveillance procedure manual were translated into Soussou; • the official document(s) already enacted or in the process of being enacted were made available to the literacy and post-literacy groups; • an information campaign was conducted and public discussions held in the pilot project’s areas of operation ; • the OSPs, CDDs and cooperatives were kept informed of the legal and institutional provisions; and • appropriate support material was disseminated. As the preceding sections show, the I/C campaign had a significant impact on beneficiaries and policies: the co-management processes were accepted by the people, various partnerships were formed, access to financing opportunities were made possible through decentralization, and good governance was established, giving the fishing communities an opportunity for greater freedom through their participation in fishery management and local development. In an effort to support the implementation of activities, the pilot project in Mauritania drew up an information, education and communication strategy (IEC) identifying the stakeholders, the issues, and the tools and channels to be used for each expected project result. Apart from the traditional communication methods (working meetings, workshops and group discussions), the strategy recommended the use of appropriate communication supports and mechanisms, such as video cassettes, photographs, brochures, leaflets, rural radio and billboards. Overall, the IEC efforts were not only supported and accepted by the stakeholders, but led to an official decision to continue the project activities on a permanent basis. Indeed, in October 2006, following the Fisheries Department’s reorganization under the implementation of the fisheries sector sustainable development strategy (2006-2008), the pilot project’s national component was retained to serve as a support unit for developing the skills of grassroots players under the coordination of the Coastal and Small-Scale Fisheries Department (DPAC). This unit was allocated an operating budget from the State for 2007.

2.6 Regional activities Three studies were conducted as part of regional activities.

2.6.1 Social and economic contribution of fisheries to GDP and rural development Based on a methodological guide designed by the SFLP, this study was carried out with RSU support in the four countries involved in pilot project 2 as well as in the other countries in the Programme. It involved several institutions, such as the Fisheries Service and the National Accounts Department. On completion of the study, national workshops were held to advise the national decision-makers that this information on fisheries’ economic and social role was available. In this way, this study helped to raise the fisheries sector’s profile and filled the information gap in the various countries regarding fisheries’ contribution to the national economy. Based on the results of this study, the pilot project in Congo launched another study which helped toward the preparation of a sectoral strategy for poverty eradication. This document was taken into account for the second Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP2), which is currently being prepared; in which fisheries will be one of the key sectors on which the public

19 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report authorities will rely in the fight against poverty in rural areas. The study also recommended the establishment of a planning unit within the fisheries department. In Gabon, the study recommended that the fisheries sector be taken into account when the strategic paper on the growth and poverty reduction (GPRSP) was drawn up in 2005. In Guinea, the methodology proposed by SFLP to integrate fish processing and marketing so that all the fishery sector components would be covered when calculating the fish sector’s added value has now been adopted by the National Accounts Department. One of the spin- offs of this study was the start of collaboration between institutions, such as that between the National Fisheries Observatory and the Fisheries and Aquaculture Ministry’s Strategy and Development Office (BSD) and between the Planning Ministry’s National Statistics and Account Department and the Finance Ministry’s National Economy Department. In Mauritania, this study formed the basis of a technical paper on the national strategy for sustainable fisheries development (2006-2008) which, for the first time, included the principle of promoting fishing community participation in fishery resource sustainable management. This study’s main conclusions show that in the context of full exploitation of resources of high commercial value, the rise in the sector’s share of GDP must be obtained by managing and regulating access to the resources and, then, by adding value to those resources. Mauritania must also put in place procedures and institutions to support new products. Efforts must be made to improve the system used to produce fishery statistics by reactivating the economic support unit of the Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Economy.

2.6.2 Fishermen’s migrations Migration is one of the strategies the fishing communities often use in order to secure their livelihoods. All the coastal countries allow entry to migrant fishing communities, which can have serious economic implications. Also, these communities’ pattern of activity can have a real or potential impact on management policy in general. Consequently, the pilot project sought to understand the reasons for the movements of fishing communities in the region’s coastal countries. A migration evaluation was carried out to look into this state of affairs and to see what lessons could be learned in order to help formulate national and sub-regional fisheries management policies. The evaluation was based on case studies conducted by the project in the four participating countries and in three other countries in the sub-region (Benin, Cameroon and Senegal). The social, economic and cultural impacts of the migrations were analyzed and strategies for including migrant fishermen in national policies were put forward. Each case study was approved at national level and a sub-regional meeting held in Mauritania in August 2006 to evaluate the work done and decide on the steps to be taken to ensure that the sub-region’s coastal fisheries management policies take migrant fishermen into account. Generally speaking, these studies stressed the length of time that these migratory movements between various countries have been taking place and their significance for each country. It was shown that Senegal and Benin were centers of emigration, Gabon, Guinea, Congo and Cameroun were centers of immigration and Benin was a centre of both emigration and immigration. In terms of duration, there is: (i) short-term or seasonal migration, (ii) long-term migration and (iii) permanent migration or settlement. The persons involved in these movements are fishing vessel skippers with or without their families, fishermen crew-members and workers in the post-catch sub-sector. As to the reasons for the migrations, these are biological (fishermen following the fish), economic and financial (fishermen seeking markets and opportunities to save and accumulate assets), and social (fishermen fleeing social stagnation in their own countries). The impact of migration for the host country can be both positive and negative. On the positive side is the dissemination of knowledge and know-how, and the contribution to the local and national economies (food security, jobs, income etc.). On the negative side are the irresponsible fishing practices for

20 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report which the migrants are often blamed, conflicts, increased vulnerability of native populations, the fact that migrant fishermen’s children do not receive schooling and the low level of added value at local level. The issues raised by migrant participation in fisheries management and local development include: • social and economic integration facilities, and the possibility of difficulties with native fishermen; • access to land so that the migrants can diversify their livelihoods; • precarious living conditions in the fishing villages and camps; • the scant account taken of migrants in the fishery resource management and local development process. In fact, current legislation in the countries studied makes no explicit mention of them as players in fishery management, but neither does it exclude them. Therefore, there is an urgent need to involve the migrant fishing communities in fishery resource management and local development (the strategies to be defined and implemented will vary from country to country); • the importance of the migratory movements, but few data (e.g. the numbers involved and their real economic impact) are available in host countries and countries of origin; • the need for a holistic view when dealing with migration in the fisheries sector (national, regional and international policies regarding movements of goods and persons, national policies and strategies for poverty reduction and food security and the decentralization process, under way in the countries, must all be taken into account). A link was also found between small-scale coastal fishing and the illegal migration of a certain category of the coastal populations to Europe. Many illegal migrants are recruited from among those working in small-scale fishing. The policies that are being put in place to stamp out this practice in the countries from which these migrants come (Senegal and Guinea) must focus first and foremost on lending support to the small-scale fishing sub- sector and defining the management strategies more clearly.

2.6.3 Participatory surveillance The improvements made to the legal and institutional environment, described under Result 3, were based on this study. They included: initiation of the reform of the Marine Fisheries Act in Congo, the signing of an order covering rules and regulations for small-scale fisheries, and a decree providing for the adoption of a manual of joint surveillance procedures in Guinea, and the start of a process for the legal recognition of fishing community participation in management in Gabon and Mauritania. Following the approval of the study reports at national level, a sub-regional meeting involving the representatives of the four countries was held in Guinea in February 2006 to: (i) share experiences in joint surveillance, fisheries management and local development; (ii) establish links between joint surveillance on the one hand and fisheries management and local development on the other; (iii) improve national reports by incorporating, if necessary, complementary data relating to the constraints and opportunities arising from community participation in policy formulation. Following the meeting, a document summarizing the lessons drawn from the case studies was prepared. This document states that adding co-management, including joint surveillance, to fishery policies is a multi-stage process for which a number of preliminary factors must be present: • a benign political environment offering real opportunities for community participation in policy formulation and the implementation of the resulting programmes; • a legal framework defining the stakeholders’ mandates and responsibilities;

21 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report

• institutional mechanisms with operational links at all levels; • legal recognition of the communities having full partner status in social interactions (discussions with other stakeholders parties in the fisheries sector); • mechanisms to ease the way for the smooth running of the process (providing information, developing technical and financial expertise, forming partnerships, etc.). Of course, given that the level of political development varies from country to country, everything must be tailored to suit each country’s particular conditions, The Conakry meeting recommended that the joint surveillance operations which were so successful in Guinea should be extended to the other pilot project countries and beyond. It was also acknowledged that the fisheries co-management concept should comprise a holistic approach, i.e. fully integrating fisheries co-management measures in all the coastal areas, since competing activities do not always result in the sustainable and harmonious use of coastal natural resources (fishery resources and other natural habitats, such as mangroves, estuaries and marine reserves), on which the fishing communities depend for their livelihoods.

22 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report

3. RECOMMENDATIONS TO PARTICIPATING COUNTRIES

At the outset, the pilot project duration was to be three years (April 2004 to March 2007). However, for various reasons, field activities ran for only 24 months (January 2005 to December 2006), as a result of which some scheduled activities were not carried out. Furthermore, since the process that was begun remains fragile, continued support by the public authorities and the partners (national and international NGOs and donors) is needed to ensure that it does not grind to a halt. Therefore, bearing in mind the level of project implementation in each of the four countries, a number of recommendations can be formulated:

Congo • formalize co-management by adopting and implementing all proposed political, institutional and legal reforms, and implementing those reforms that have already been adopted; • continue to support the communities in the organizational development process; • develop partnerships between communities, micro-financing facilities, NGOs, private enterprises and donors to support activities aimed at livelihood diversification; • define and adopt clear and flexible financing mechanisms for co-management institutions; • prepare a draft project (for submission to the 2007 annual programme budget) concerning support for the social and occupational organizations and co-management bodies in matters such as the diversification of the fishing communities’ livelihoods, and seek funding for its implementation; • put in place procedures for the preparation of small-scale fisheries management plans; • finalize the procedures for the preparation of a fishing community support strategy designed to protect and manage the coastal marine environment.

Gabon • ensure that the decrees covering the formalization of cooperation bodies and joint surveillance are signed; • develop activities for livelihood diversification in the project area; • continue forming partnerships to support small-scale projects (alternative activities) in the fishing communities; • replicate successful pilot project experiments (fishing associations and consultative bodies) in the other fishing communities in the coastal area south of Libreville; • promote fishing community participation in the preparation of fishery management plans provided for in the Fisheries and Aquaculture Code; • establish the fisheries national consultative committee in accordance with the provisions of the Fisheries and Aquaculture Code and support its operation.

Guinea • incorporating the fisheries sector into the PRSP2 process: SFLP interventions brought about significant changes which provide opportunities for the upgrading of the political and institutional frameworks currently being prepared by the Fisheries and

23 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report

Aquaculture Ministry. The future fisheries policy paper entitled Fisheries and Aquaculture Development Policy Letter (LPDPA) is part of this. This document was prepared by the Government and forwarded to FAO who then contacted SFLP with a view to forming a technical and financial partnership. Such a partnership could help ensure that Guinea’s fisheries sector is more easily incorporated into the on-going PRSP2 process; • continued support for achievements in PP2 area of operations: the pilot project responded as well as it possibly could to the communities’ various requests for human and social resource development. In order to preserve these achievements, appropriate technical support must continue after the project stops. • support for extending project activities to areas not covered by PP2: the country now finds itself in a situation of imbalance insofar as coastal fisheries regional development is concerned: the northern section of the coast has benefited from the pilot project activities, but the central south has not had access to these activities. Therefore, thought needs to be given to extending to the southern region the experience gained in organizational and community development in the north. In this way, the entire coast would be covered and it would be possible to take a more realistic approach to coastal fisheries management in Guinea.

Mauritania • Legal recognition of effective grassroots participation in sustainable fishery resource management: in order to make the grassroots populations more accountable and to raise their awareness of the roles that they can and must play in support of Government’s efforts to ensure consensual and concerted resource management, their participation must be officially recognized. This means taking the opportunity offered by the current review of the legal and regulatory fisheries framework to legally recognize the roles that local grassroots institutions can play. • diversification of sustainable livelihoods: in order to preserve what has already been achieved in terms of developing the communities’ skills to enable them to play a greater role in management and local development, the public authorities need to take an in- depth look at the fishing communities’ day-to-day activities and help them to deal with some of their most urgent problems. It would be useful to support their efforts to create alternative activities likely to generate additional income and relieve the pressure on fishery resources. • continuation of pilot project activities: when the pilot project ended the project activities had not yet had time to produce the expected effects and impacts. So that field activities can be consolidated and continue to bring about significant and visible changes, the public authorities and development partners must continue to support them.

24 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report

4. LESSONS LEARNED Diagram 2, below, shows the pilot project implementation process.

Government policies

I/C

PRSP Poverty reduction

Macro sectoral strategies
Fisheries

Decentralizatio

n

Develop government policies through studies on
Participatory surveillance

Fisheries’ social -and economic

Contribution to
MigrationsGDP of small-scale

fishermen.

I/C

Skills development
Decentralisation, Consultative livelihoods diversification bodies :
Stakeholder analysis Data gathering for NGO tasks
Conflict resolution, monitoring,,
Savings and credit management and
Environmental protection local development.
Organisational development

Gender, etc.

Micro, Mesoee

Diagram 2: Co-management model for Pilot Project “Fisheries co-management in coastal areas of Congo, Gabon, Guinea, Mauritania”

There are three implementation levels: (i) micro level, involving communities grouped under OSPs or not grouped under OSPs; (ii) meso level, comprising decentralized administrative organizations and the local authorities created through the decentralisation process ; and iii) macro level, where public policies concerning the pilot project, i.e. those relating to poverty reduction (PRSP), fisheries and decentralization, are defined. The three levels are linked by an information/communication system established under the pilot project and tailored to suit the specific conditions in each participating country. Information about the changes brought about under the project were gathered by the local monitoring committees which are offshoots of the consultative bodies set up under the project. To enable the fishing

25 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report communities to participate effectively in resource management and local development, individuals’ and the community institutions’ skills were developed with NGO assistance. In other words, this analysis shows that three entities participated in the implementation of this project: the communities, civil society and government representatives. A number of lessons and conclusions may be drawn from this experience and can be grouped under three headings: policies, processes and the information/communication system.

4.1 Policies and institutions i - Prior to the pilot project’s implementation, fisheries management in the four participating countries was characterized by a central administration that monopolized fishery resource management activities and an almost total lack of community organizations legally recognized by the public authorities and able to take part in decision-making. This was due to the fact that none of these countries possessed legal mechanisms or appropriate institutional frameworks to allow fishing communities to participate in fishery management. The work carried out under the project helped improve the situation by promoting a political and institutional environment conducive to the establishment of a co- management process involving cooperation between the authorities, the coastal fishing communities and civil society with the aim of improving fishery resource management and promoting local development. ii - Co-management requires a good political environment where the community’s right to participate in decision-making is recognized. This pre-requisite was the guiding principle for pilot project implementation. The situation was helped by a study on joint surveillance carried out in the four participating countries. By up-dating the fisheries institutional and legal framework through the introduction of the principle of community participation in fisheries resource management and surveillance, the study helped raise the fisheries authorities’ awareness and prompted them to begin the process of formalizing the fishing communities’ participation in fishery resource management and local development. iii - At the present time, fishermen’s associations and other types of local associations do exist, even though most of these do not have legal status. Only Guinea was able to carry the process through to give these bodies legal status. As a result Guinean fishermen participate in the formulation of annual fishing plans on equal footing with the other players (e.g. the authorities) and can take advantage of available local financing (co- management financing) through the implementation of the Decentralization Act, approved in 1985. The process is still under way in the three other countries. This difference between the countries can be explained by differences in administrative procedures and in the way powers are delegated to local communities by central government. iv - It is worth mentioning that in an environment where the institutional and political foundations for co-management were weak or non-existent, it was deliberately recommended to give priority to the establishment of appropriate policies and processes before drawing up management plans. The latter could only be done after co- management structures were in place. v - it must also be noted that the main aim of pilot project interventions was to have an influence both on players’ livelihoods (human and social resources) and policies. Qualitative interventions such as these bring about no immediate changes to the fishing communities’ living conditions, their effects are only felt in the medium and long terms. In their day-to-day lives, these communities have to cope with such urgent survival problems that they often ignore longer-term problems like resource management and environmental protection (natural resources). To overcome this, action strategies must be tailored to the communities’ requirements and complementary activities introduced to generate practical and immediate benefits. For instance, income-generating activities

26 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report

(within and outwith the fisheries sector) could be promoted by opening up access to micro-financing institutions (financial resources). This would underline the fact that co- management should not be restricted to the development and/or improvement of the institutional and political environment as was the case in this Pilot Project 2. If the sustainable livelihoods approach is correctly applied, the constant concern should be to make the fullest use of all the resources required to provide a satisfactory livelihood. Whilst perhaps not achieving a balance between the various components, it would at least be aimed at achieving institutional, social, financial and environmental sustainability. vi - A good understanding of the economic and social role of the fisheries sector will help ensure that public policies take account of the fishing communities. This has not been the case for a long time. It was the evaluation of fisheries’ contribution to the national economy, initiated by SFLP, which gave the political decision-makers a clearer understanding of the sector and prompted its inclusion in the Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSP). In all four countries involved in the pilot project, fishery sector players, including small-scale fishermen, can now take advantage of the opportunities offered by the PRSPs at local level, with decentralization policies (access to basic social services such as health and education) also playing a part. vii - Now that the PRSPs take account of the fisheries sector, decentralization policies take account of the fishing communities and co-management mechanisms have been put in place, conditions are right for the fishing communities to play a part in local development. This, in the long term, will help improve grassroots players’ livelihoods. The next step will be to find ways to have the fishing communities participate in management with a view to improving fishery resource management for, without fishery resources it will be difficult for the fishing communities to justify their existence. Their participation in fisheries resource management will involve them in fisheries policy formulation and in the preparation and implementation of management plans. In each of these phases, data essential for decision-making, i.e. on fishery resources, the dynamics of the fisheries and the social and economic situation, will have to be gathered and analyzed by research institutions. viii - It is well-known that fishery surveillance, including its participatory aspect, is part and parcel of management. The experience gained by SFLP and the pilot project in this regard shows that there can be no joint surveillance of any significance without a legal framework and a responsible national surveillance institution like the one in Guinea; ix - the strengthening of the links between the micro, meso and macro levels and the use of a holistic approach involving several institutional partners are needed in order to reduce poverty within the fishing communities and ensure the sustainability of the institutional reforms; x - literacy skills development facilitates grassroots players’ participation in decision-making.

4.2 Processes The fishing communities’ participation in the monitoring and evaluation system makes for a more flexible data gathering process, allows changes to be more easily perceived, and ensures the success of development projects and the sustainability of project achievements. The use of the participatory approach in the implementation of project activities encourages the beneficiary communities to take more responsibility for the activities, at the same time boosting the effectiveness of the public authorities. It also encourages fishermen to support the principles and recognize the importance of responsible fisheries. The use of a gender approach also increases social cohesion, essential for the sustainable formalization of the associations put in place under the project. To be effective, gender issues should be considered from the start of the project.

27 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report

At the time of its formulation, the project was regional in scope. However, it has to be said that the regional dimension was not visible in the way the project was implemented. This was due in part to the process used to select the project’s participating countries. This process favoured the participatory aspect over project feasibility. Indeed, no objective criteria (e.g. membership of the same political and economic community such as CEDEAO, CEMAC and UEMOA, being part of the same area of operations of sub-regional fisheries agencies like COREP, CSRP and CEBEVIRHA, and being part of membership of the same ecological zone (estuaries, upwelling zones)) were used as a basis for selecting the countries. This made it difficult for the pilot project to have a regional scope.

4.3. Information/Communication Providing information to and raising the awareness of the decision-makers help ensure that national fisheries policies and programmes, such as the National Programme for the Prevention of Serious Diseases (e.g. malaria and HIV/AIDS), poverty reduction policies (PRSP), and decentralization policies, take the fishing communities’ concerns into account. The fact that a communication strategy exists and is applied encourages the stakeholders to accept the processes, reduces operational costs and promotes the establishment of multiform partnerships working for the benefit of the communities. In order to be as effective as possible, the communication strategy must take account of each country’s cultural sensitivities, institutional capacities and technical expertise. A communication system designed to encourage community participation in discussions about policies and processes is the ideal tool to bring about change, a common approach, acceptance of development measures, social dialogue and the mobilization of resources for the benefit of the communities.

28 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report

Annex 1: LIST OF PILOT PROJECT PERSONNEL

Congo M. Eugène Bagamboula, Team Leader M.Alphonse Bakala Kiba, Assistant Team Leader Miss Claudia Virgina Mandounou-Massika, Administrative and Finance Officer M. Réné Tchiloemba, Driver

Gabon M. Alain Bidoungou Boutchanga, Team Leader Mme Huguette Biloho Essono, Assistant Team Leader M. Hugues Bokale, Administrative and Finance Officer M. Dieudonné Boussougou, Driver

Guinée M. Mamba Kourouma, Team Leader M. Talhatou Barry, Assistant Team Leader Mme Jeannine Passy, Administrative and Finance Officer M. Sory Camara, Driver

Mauritanie M. Sidi’El Moctar Ould Mohamed Abdellahi, Team Leader M. Dia Mamadou Bocar, Assistant Team Leader Mme Marième Ba, Administrative and Finance Officer Salem Ould Massoud, Driver

29 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report

Annex 2: LIST OF DOCUMENTS PREPARED DURING PILOT PROJECT

Abdelkader B.O., 2006. L’analyse du cadre juridique de l’environnement marin et côtier pour l’élaboration d’une stratégie d’appui des communautés des pêches pour la protection et la gestion de l’environnement marin côtier. Rapport de consultation. PMEDP/PP2 : 50p. Adoté K., 2006. Mission de suivi. Rapport préliminaire. USR.16p. Adoté K., 2006. Système de suivi des changements des projets pilotes (SYSCHAPP). Niveau de réalisation des résultats et changements attendus des projets pilotes 2 & 3. (Analyse des données du premier trimestre 2006) : 9p. Akoma Poathy N.T., 2005. Etude sur la participation des communautés de pêche artisanale au système de suivi, contrôle et surveillance (SCS) des pêches au Gabon. Rapport de consultation. PMEDP/PP2 : 22p. Angoué C. A., 2004. Etat des lieux de l’aménagement au Gabon. Rapport de consultation. PMEDP/PP2 : 10 p. Atti-Mama C., 2006. Les migrations des pêcheurs au Bénin. Rapport de consultation. PMEDP/PP2 : 56 p. Boungou G., 2006. Les migrations des pêcheurs au Congo. Analyse des motivations et des impacts sociaux, économiques et culturels. Rapport de consultation. PMEDP, PP2 : 33p. Brahim Ould Abdel Khader, 2005. Rapport sur l’analyse des parties prenantes (Mauritanie). Cacaud P., 2004. Propositions visant à consolider les acquis du projet sur la surveillance participative en Guinée. Rapport de consultation. PMEDP/PP2 : 26 p. Djangone A.M. R., Ovono Edzang N., Mouelle Mouelle C. Angoué Augée C. & G.A. Rerambyath, 2003. Profil de pauvreté dans les communautés de pêche artisanale des départements de la Noya et du Komo Mondah, Gabon : 61 p. EGP Congo, 2004. Etat des lieux des pêches maritimes au Congo : éléments de réflexions sur l’atelier de lancement du Projet pilote ‘Aménagement participatif des pêches en zone côtière : 19 p. EGP Congo, 2005 – 2007. Rapports trimestriels d’activités EGP Congo, 2005. Rapport de l’atelier sur l’analyse des parties prenantes, Tchiamba- Nzassi, le 21/03/05, 7p EGP Congo, 2006. Tchemouna. Le théâtre forum dans les communautés de pêche au Congo. CD-Rom. PMEDP/PP2. EGP Congo, 2007. Projet pilote Aménagement participatif des pêches en zone côtière. CD- Rom. PMEDP/PP2. EGP Gabon, 2005 – 2006. Rapports trimestriels d’activités EGP Gabon, 2005. Rapport préparé pour l’atelier sur l’évaluation de l’impact des activités du PMEDP, Dakar, 21-25 Novembre 2005. EGP Guinée, 2004. Aménagement participatif des pêches. Etat des lieux. Rapport de la Guinée. PMEDP/PP2 : 37p. EGP Guinée, 2005. Evaluation de l’impact des interventions du PMEDP en Guinée. Rapport préparé pour l’Atelier sur l’évaluation de l’impact des activités du PMEDP, Dakar, 21-25 Novembre 2005

30 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report

EGP Guinée, 2005. Rapport sur l’analyse des parties prenantes. PMEDP/PP2 : 41p. EGP Guinée, 2005 – 2006. Rapports trimestriels d’activités EGP Mauritanie, 2005 – 2006. Rapports trimestriels d’activités Evono Edzang N., 2006. Les migrations des pêcheurs au Gabon. Approches pour une intégration aux plans d’aménagements. Rapport de consultation. PMEDP/PP2 : 35p. Failler. P, 2006. Dynamiques économiques et sociales des aires protégées estuariennes, côtières et marines en Afrique de l’Ouest : éléments de compréhension pour l’élaboration d’une gouvernance d’éco développement participative. Rapport de consultation. PMEDP/PP2 : 35p. Faro N., Diallo O., & Diallo M.M., 2005. Évaluation de la contribution socio-économique de la pêche au produit intérieur brut et au développement rural en Guinée : 54 p. Issanga Ngamissimi M. & Kaya J.A.P., 2007. Stratégie d’appui aux communautés de pêche artisanale pour la gestion durable de l’environnement marin et côtier de la République du Congo : 54p. Kamga M. K., 2006. Synthèse régionale des rapports nationaux sur la surveillance participative. Rapport de consultation. PMEDP/PP2: 29 p Kinfoussia C., 2005. Etude sur la participation des communautés de pêche au système de suivi, contrôle et surveillance des pêches au Congo. Rapport de consultation. PMEDP/PP2 : 29p. Kinfoussia C., 2006. Réforme de la législation sur la pêche maritime au Congo; étude centrée sur la pêche artisanale : Rapport de consultation. PMEDP, PP2 : 30p. Konan A., Holvoet K., Boungou G., Makanga S., Massemba H., & E. Bagamboula, 2003. Profil de pauvreté des communautés de pêche artisanale maritime en République du Congo : 67 p. Konan A., Njock J.C. and E. Allison. 2006. Making fisheries co-management work for both poverty reduction and responsible fisheries: lessons from coastal and inland waters of west and central Africa. Paper presented at the IIFET Conference, Portsmouth, July 2006. Konaté F., 2005. Institutionnalisation de la surveillance participative en Guinée. Rapport de consultation. PMEDP/PP2 : 58 p. Koumba P. & Mpandou P., 2006. Contribution du secteur de la pêche et de l’aquaculture à la réduction de la pauvreté (Congo). Rapport de consultation. PMEDP/PP2 : 24p. Mabounda D., Ondo Megne J.J., & Rerambyath G. A., 2005. Evaluation de la contribution du secteur des pêches à l’économie gabonaise : 62p. Massamba H., 2005. Profil genre dans les communautés de pêche des villages Kondi, Noumbi et Bellolo dans le département du Kouilou au Congo (Brazzaville). Rapport de consultation. PMEDP/PP2 : 73 p. Matamona M., Mampouya B., & Maloueki L., 2002. Evaluation de la contribution socio- économique du secteur des pêches au PIB et au développement rural au Congo: 93p. Mohamed O., Sidi Mohamed O. & Taleb A., 2006. Reconnaissance juridique de la participation des populations de base à l’aménagement et au développement durable des ressources côtières. Rapport de consultation. PMEDP/PP2 : 31p. N’dia Y., Diallo M.M., Traoré S., Sylla S.D. & Soumaoro B., 2003. Pauvreté des communautés de pêche artisanale du littoral guinéen (Préfectures de Boffa et Boké). Rapport de consultation. PMEDP : 47p.

31 Pilot Project 2 – Terminal Report

Ngo Likeng J.L., 2006. Migrations de pêche côtière au Cameroun. Essai d’approche pour l’intégration des communautés à l’aménagement des ressources. Rapport de consultation. PMEDP/PP2 : 27 p. Njock J.C., 2005-2006. Synthèse des rapports trimestriels d’activités des EGP. PMEDP/PP2, Coordination régionale. Njock J.C., 2006. Les conditions de l’intégration de l’aménagement participatif dans les politiques nationales de pêche. Bulletin de liaison du PMEDP n° 21 & 22. Dossier Politiques publiques. PMEDP/FAO/DFID, Cotonou, Bénin, décembre 2005 : p.17-19. Njock J.C., 2007. Intégration des communautés de pêche dans le développement local. Bulletin de liaison du PMEDP n° 23. Résultats et leçons apprises. PMEDP/ FAO/DFID, Cotonou, Benin, mars 2007: p. 31-33. Ovono Edjang N., 2005. Analyses des parties prenantes au Gabon. Rapport de consultation. PMEDP/PP2 : 22 p. PMEDP, 2004. Document du projet pilote aménagement participatif des pêches en zone côtière au Congo, Gabon, Guinée et Mauritanie, Programme pour des Moyens d’Existence Durables dans la Pêche, FAO/DFID, Cotonou, Bénin 35 p. PMEDP/PP2, 2004. Rapport de l’atelier de lancement officiel du Projet pilote "Aménagement participatif des pêches en zone côtière", de l’Atelier de planification et de suivi Libreville, Gabon, 18-23 octobre 2004 : 43p. PMEDP, 2005. Grille d’analyse pour le suivi évaluation. Grands domaines de changement. PMEDP/USR : 5p. Sall A., 2006. Etude des migrations des communautés de pêche sur la côte mauritanienne. Rapport de consultation. PMEDP/PP2 : 38 p. Sall K., 2006. Eléments de stratégies pour la prise en compte de l’aspect genre dans la mise en œuvre du projet pilote Aménagement participatif des pêches en zone côtière. Etudes de cas réalisées à N’diago et à Nouamghar. Rapport de consultation. PMEDP/PP2 : 101p. Samba A. & Faye M. M., 2006. Etude de la contribution des migrations de pêcheurs artisans sénégalais dans la gestion des pêches en Mauritanie et en Guinée. Rapport de consultation. PMEDP/PP2: 62 p. Sid’Ahmed O. C., Guisset D. & Mohamed Mbareck S., 2005. Evaluation de la contribution socio-économique de la pêche au PIB et au développement rural en Mauritanie. 50p. Sidi Zeine D. O., 2004. Etats des lieux des systèmes d’aménagement participatif des ressources halieutiques en Mauritanie. Rapport de consultation. PMEDP/PP2: 23p. Solie K., 2006. Les migrations de pêcheurs artisans marins étrangers en Guinée. Rapport de consultation. PMEDP/PP2: 50 p. Sy M. H., 2005. Etude sur la participation des communautés de pêche au système de suivi, contrôle et surveillance des pêches en Mauritanie. Rapport de consultation. PMEDP/PP2:26p. Youssouf N’dia Y., Diallo M.M., Traoré S. Sylla S. D. & B. Soumaoro, 2003. Profil de pauvr&é des communautés de pêche de Guinée: 55p.

32