OUTCOMES OF THE REGIONAL WORKSHOP ON
INFORMATION MANAGEMENT AND COORDINATION MECHANISMS OF
TSUNAMI EMERGENCY AND REHABILITATION OPERATIONS IN
AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FORESTRY
Annex 6: Excerpts from key regional meetings convened by FAO in 2005 and 2006
28 February to 1 March 2005
Bangkok,
Thailand
Regional
workshop on rehabilitation of fisheries and aquaculture in coastal communities
of tsunami affected countries in Asia.
7
to 8 March 2005
Bangkok, Thailand
Regional coordination workshop on rehabilitation
of tsunami affected
forest ecosystems: Strategies and new directions.
31
March to 1 April 2005
Bangkok, Thailand
Regional workshop on salt-affected soils from sea water
intrusion: Strategies for rehabilitation
and management.
30
to 31 March 2006
Bangkok, Thailand
Regional workshop. One year later – the rehabilitation
of fisheries and aquaculture in coastal
communities of tsunami affected countries in Asia.
29 to 30 June
2006
Bangkok, Thailand
Regional workshop on rehabilitation of agriculture
in tsunami affected areas: One and a half
years later.
27
to 29 September 2006
Bangkok, Thailand
Regional workshop on coastal area planning and
management in Asian tsunami affected
countries.
Recognizing that the
situation varies from country to country, participants raised the following
issues:
The protective role of mangroves and other coastal forests (natural and
planted) against tsunamis, typhoons, and other natural disasters depends on
various factors, including: the type and characteristics of the event itself; vegetation
characteristics such as species, stand density, height and width of the
vegetation zone; and the characteristics of the adjacent sea bottom. There is a need to
further assess the effectiveness of mangroves and other coastal vegetation in protecting coastal areas from major
natural disasters.
There is a lack of clear, accurate and comprehensive information about
the impact of the tsunami on coastal
areas, including forests and trees. Where coastal vegetation was severely affected, more precise impact
assessments are needed, which also consider the characteristics of the
sea bottom close to the coastline.
Although the tsunami caused significant damage to coastal vegetation in
some countries, many
organizations are planning to restore and rehabilitate coastal forests as a
protective measure against future tsunamis, tidal surges, typhoons and
cyclones. A rigorous analysis of the factors influencing the protective function of coastal forests
is needed and guidelines developed to assist countries that plan to establish
greenbelts and other forests for (mainly) protective
purposes.
Rehabilitation/reforestation efforts must be carefully planned and
implemented and the forests
subsequently managed properly. Full stakeholder (from different levels and
sectors) involvement is necessary in this process to ensure success. In
particular, local communities need to be
fully involved in the decision-making.
Problems preventing cost-effective methods of rehabilitation of coastal
forests include insufficient
technical knowledge, limited human resources and capacities for implementing
rehabilitation activities and ambiguous land tenure and clear demarcation of
land.
Initiatives aimed at the rehabilitation and management of coastal
forests for protection purposes must be linked to the socio-cultural and economic needs and
aspirations of local people. Protection
forests also require management and many production forests, if properly
managed, can also fulfil protection functions.
There is a
critical need for sound technical information on workable practices for
rehabilitating coastal forests, suitable sites for planting, and proven
approaches for involving local people in
decision-making, planning and implementation. Similarly, policy makers and the
donor community require solid advice to avoid quick fixes, with potentially negative consequences, to ensure that their
decisions and assistance enhance sustainable development.
Integrated coastal zone management is particularly challenging because
of the tremendous diversity of
livelihoods that depend on fisheries, aquaculture, tourism, forestry and agriculture. Long-term rehabilitation should focus
on creating sustainable livelihoods and restoring the productive use of coastal
resources. Integrated approaches to coastal zone management need to balance
ecological, social, cultural, economic considerations and the importance of community participation and adequate
governance. Inter-sectoral cooperation and
coordination are needed, as well as appropriate policy formulation and strategic planning mechanisms to balance
trade-offs among different, and often conflicting, interests.
Detailed calculations of the wood needs for
reconstructing infrastructure have yet to be carried
out in most places. In some countries, wood demand may be met from domestic sources. However, there is a risk of
over-exploitation of local forests (some of them protected areas) to
meet the wood demand for reconstruction. In some cases, large quantities of
wood will have to be imported.
Some donor countries are offering to export wood to affected countries.
Care must be taken
to ensure that wood used for reconstruction has the necessary characteristics
to meet specific needs and is adequately treated to ensure durability. Some
species may also not be acceptable for socio-cultural reasons. The potential of using salvage
wood and alternative construction
materials, such as bamboos, needs to be further explored.
Conflicting demands for the use of the affected lands (green belts,
aquaculture, agriculture, tourism, residential and industrial sites) are
causing controversies and tensions in a number of locations, especially where land titles and
tenure arrangements are ambiguous. In some cases, “land grabbing” has particularly affected poorer
sections of society.
Although several countries have passed zoning laws, prohibiting
development of coastal areas within a
certain distance of high-water marks and beachfronts, in general, law
enforcement requires strengthening.
The international community has helped countries with emergency relief
and early response assistance, impact
assessments, development of rehabilitation plans and wood needs assessments. NGOs have raised substantial funds to
assist in tsunami rehabilitation efforts and are moving quickly with
delivering assistance. There is a tremendous need and opportunity to improve the effectiveness of efforts through improved
coordination and the provision of relevant information in a timely
manner.
The following issues and topics
could be addressed through regional collaboration:
Natural disaster management strategies, including
exchange of information on vulnerability and risk analysis and rapid damage assessments.
Exchange of technical information on the rehabilitation,
establishment and management of coastal forests
(natural and planted).
Sharing of experiences and lessons learned related to restoration
and rehabilitation of coastal areas and
integrated coastal zone management.
Practical
application of the livelihoods approach and a means to strengthen
inter-sectoral collaboration.
Governance issues, including coordination between
national and local level planning, approaches for strengthened stakeholder participation, and the
development of institutional frameworks and legislation
to support integrated coastal zone management and coastal forest
rehabilitation.
Scientific
analyses of factors influencing the degree of protection provided by coastal
forests and guidelines for the establishment and management of protection
forests and shelterbelts in order to make
them more effective.
Assistance in organizing joint research
activities and exchange of research results.
Recommendations
The participants recommended that a regional
partnership to foster collaboration and coordination of forest-related initiatives in rehabilitation efforts
in the tsunami affected countries should be established.
The participants recognized that such regional partnerships for information
sharing, technical support and
capacity building are consistent with existing FAO-supported networks and other
partnership mechanisms in which its member countries are actively
participating. The proposed partnership
would address the current needs and challenges presented by the tsunami disaster.
The partnership would include affected countries,
international and regional organizations, NGOs, research organizations and other stakeholders, as
well as donors supporting the partnership. The objective would be to support a forestry response
to the tsunami that is cost effective, comprehensive, technically sound and developed
within the context of integrated coastal area management and sustainable livelihoods.
The immediate benefits of the activities of the
partnership would be targeted at the tsunami affected areas in Asia, but would also be relevant to other
affected areas and to mitigation and rehabilitation efforts in future coastal disasters.
The functions of the partnership
would be the following:
provide access to information;
furnish technical knowledge, expertise, guidelines and tools;
support capacity building; and
strengthen partnerships, coordination arrangement and access to financial resources.
The structure would consist of the following: affected countries, a
wide network of partners, a support group
(steering committee/coordination committee) made up of the countries and a
small, representative group of partners, and a secretariat at FAO. An emphasis
would be put on making it flexible, streamlined and able to evolve to
accommodate emerging needs.
It further recommended that FAO, in collaboration
with other potential partners, continue to work to develop and establish the
partnership and, as an interim measure, formulate a programme of action related to the critical issues identified in this
document.
FAO and other UN organizations together with
affected countries and other partners should quickly work together to make specific
requests for support through the mid-term review of the Flash Appeal, and other sources, for
regional cooperation and other priority issues related to forests and tsunami.
The participants proposed that the summary report
be made available at the Ministerial Meeting on Forests and the Committee on Forestry to be held at FAO, Rome on 14 and 15-19 March, respectively.
Guiding
principles for rehabilitation and development
Putting people first in rehabilitation
A livelihood approach is recommended which
ensures that natural systems have an enhanced ability to provide a broad and
sustainable range of livelihood strategies, accessible to all members of these communities (including women,
children and marginalized groups). This approach should also take into account the diversity of
additional and existing livelihood strategies available to people in coastal communities, such as
farming, fish processing, gardening, marketing etc. Key features are:
reduction of vulnerability and potential risk for coastal communities from future natural disasters (through for example, efficient and consistent
design and placing of infrastructure and
protection of the coastal zone environment);
partnership and national ownership through extensive stakeholder consultation and public participation regarding fishers and fish farmers’
objectives, which ensures respect for traditional uses, access and rights;
action based on a practice of co-management that involves all stakeholders in policy formulation and decision-making,
based on adequate representation of the stakeholders and the best scientific information available;
an emphasis on flexible and adaptive methods that respond to the complexity and differences
in rehabilitation work in different areas; and
respect to the human rights of all participants, especially with respect to labour standards, equity of distribution
of benefits, access to land. Provision of assistance and rehabilitation based on humanitarian needs rather than legal status.
Rehabilitation that is
consistent with international and regional agreements and guidelines
Any rehabilitation activity
should positively contribute to the following agreements and guidelines:
the goals on poverty alleviation and food security contained in the Millennium Declaration;
the ASEAN Resolution and Plan of Action adopted by the Millennium Conference and BIMSTEC
declaration;
the principles of sustainable development of fisheries and aquaculture that are set out in the FAO Code of Conduct for
Responsible Fisheries (CCRF), NACA Principles for Sustainable Aquaculture,
SEAFDEC Regional Guidelines for Responsible Fisheries in South-east Asia; and
the recently agreed UNEP principles for tsunami reconstruction.
In particular, action will follow a multi-sectoral
approach which ensures that the natural resource base of the coastal zone is sustained. This includes:
integrated coastal zone management and an ecosystems approach that recognizes the
multiple use nature of the limited natural
resources base and involved planning for the fair
allocates of resource across users; and
provision of support for institutional
and policy reforms that address fishing over capacity,
unsustainable fishing practices and
unsustainable aquaculture.
Key principles for the
subsectors
The
goal of rehabilitation is to achieve the following key features for the
fisheries and aquaculture sectors.
For fishery a sector that:
is based on a fishing capacity that is commensurate with the productivity of the fishery resource, controlled through the allocation of
user/access rights to fish;
is based on balance of small-scale artisanal fisher folk fishing inshore water with larger-scale “industrial” vessels restricted to
offshore areas supported by a “pro-poor” policy that gives preference to beach-based labour intensive fishing;
is based on non-destructive fishing gear and practices;
provides adequate safety at sea provisions and practices;
is based on healthy ecosystems that have been rehabilitated
through participatory practices that involves the
people that depend on them;
is based on good governance with strong institutional support from both government and NGOs; and
is supported by high quality onshore infrastructure that ensures food safety and value-adding potential in post-harvest processing and sale of fish
products.
For aquaculture a sector that:
is based on environmentally sound management practices that does not pollute, damage habitats or cause long-term
irreversible harm, including use of feed that is taken from sustainable sources and seeds
that are raised in environmentally sound hatcheries or taken from sustainable fisheries;
adopts technologies and farm management practices that are appropriate to rural people with limited resources that minimize the impacts of
aquaculture on other users of the coastal
environment; and
adopts an array of appropriate technologies and farm management practices, including those suitable to people with
limited resources, which minimize impacts and which support: democratic self-determined
farmer organizations; marketing, processing manufacturing of inputs and outputs; fair trade
and markets; international and regional partnerships; and wide-scale communication,
facilitation of dialogue and sharing of experiences.
In addition, both fisheries and
aquaculture sectors should be supported by markets that:
minimize losses and wastage, including during transportation;
are based on fish handling at sea to ensure high quality of landed fish, and supported by high quality onshore
infrastructure to ensure maximization of fish quality and value-added potential
in the post-harvest processing and sale of fish products; and
are based on the provision of high quality and safe food for human consumption.
The rehabilitation processes
The implementation
activities will follow a process approach and shall include the following
elements:
detailed impact/damage assessments and needs analyses to be the basis of all rehabilitation activities;
assessments of the institutional capacity of different organizations at all levels (and economic sectors) to deliver effectively, and the
organizational ability of recipients to receive and use any inputs;
action will be taken with a clear indication of measurable outcomes;
emphasis on accountability
and transparency;
effective communication with actions supporting coordinated partnership between government, NGOs, international agencies and
bilateral donors; and
findings and outcomes communicated clearly to development partners throughout the process.
Recognizing that
conditions vary from country to country, the participants raised the following
issues:
Time scale
Integrated coastal area management (ICAM) is the accepted framework for
long-term planning
and thus naturally relates to reconstruction and development planning.
However, emergency support and rehabilitation are ongoing: The issue is
therefore how to apply essential ICAM
principles wherever required.
The situation is very dynamic and communities and other stakeholders
will make their own decisions:
There is a need, therefore, to monitor trends and conditions and feed the
results back into the overall management
of reconstruction programmes.
Policy issues (short- and
long-term planning)
As a result of the tsunami, local governments are now encouraged to
take decisions on land use planning, mostly related to safety considerations and zoning of
coastal areas (buffer zones, housing).
These decisions could have important implications for affected populations and
agricultural and other lands.
ICAM should be
used as the proper framework for planning options, not only as a framework for agro-ecosystem management, but
also as a participatory consultation and coordination process with all
stakeholders.
In this context, issues related to land tenure are likely to be very
important.
ICAM is not only a question of proper strategy, but also a question of
tactics: Emergency and
reconstruction support should be carried out on the basis of management units
that include all
populations linked by natural and social processes. Such support should also be
offered to
populations that have welcomed displaced persons and populations that may react negatively if they are
excluded from the reconstruction process and see no benefits accruing to them. ICAM can be a useful framework for
sound social and political reconstruction tactics.
The introduction of ICAM can be a platform for different stakeholders
with their different perspectives to meet
and find out what needs to be done before establishing guiding principles.
These comprise:
Communities that want to use the land and other resources;
government agencies that want to plan reconstruction and regulate resource use; and
technical experts, environmentalists, etc.
ICAM can offer a proper unit to evaluate and
discuss compensation to affected parties
related to changes in resource base
and land use (agriculture, industry settlement, business
companies, etc.).
Legal aspects of regulating land use should be based on a proper
investigation of affected parties, actual
potential benefits, etc.
ICAM is a long-term process that requires capacity building at different
levels – central government, district,
NGOs, stakeholders, etc.
Capacity building that can be implemented now to influence emergency and
immediate rehabilitation planning should
be determined.
Tensions between emergency interventions and
long-term planning need to be identified and
resolved.
Technical issues
Two major types of systems may be considered: Deltaic complexes and
sandy shore complexes.
Both are subject to strong tidal influence and water and salt flows should be properly assessed.
Reclamation and drainage activities may impact downstream users;
groundwater tables may
also be affected by leaching or subject to increased pressure; and salinity of
lagoons and their links to the sea may be
affected.
Assessment of damage to natural resources:
For rehabilitation of damaged area and resources – Mangrove forests/beach forests/ agricultural
land/aquaculture/other uses.
ICAM units in the context of tsunami affected areas should be understood
to include the hinterland
watersheds as appropriate: Temporary re-allocation of water for leaching, movement of agriculture upstream, etc.
Land zoning and other regulatory instruments.
Previous land use
was not necessarily appropriate or sustainable (certain types of aquaculture,
conversion of mangrove forests to other uses, etc.).
Guiding
principles
Three
overriding principles in tsunami interventions were identified.
People centred approach – dealing with people, their sensitivities,
resources and livelihoods.
Integrated approach – involving agro-economic and socio-economic
considerations.
Acknowledging opportunities and threats – disasters provide both
opportunities and threats that need to be
taken into account.
These three overriding
principles can be subdivided into six guiding principles:
Conflict sensitivity
Building people’s capacities
Using an integrated approach
Aiming beyond the status-quo
Subsidiarity
Risk-taking
Diversification and commercialization activities
The working group identified the following
development foci required for the introduction and sustainable development of diversified and
commercialized (D&C) agriculture systems in the tsunami affected areas:
Recovery before growth: Re-establishing livelihoods is the over-riding
objective in the rehabilitation and reconstruction phases. Immediate efforts
need to focus on approaches that recapitalize households that have lost their
key productive assets before attempting improved
diversification and commercialization.
Household income and asset accumulation: Re-establishing and improving
household production, and reconstructing
and strengthening the private sector through the development of processing, markets, business development and financial
services and small enterprises, will
lead to improved incomes and asset accumulation. This better enables households
and communities to buffer their livelihoods against the numerous risks
currently existing in the tsunami affected areas.
Support services: Improvements in public services and infrastructure
will have the twin benefits of reducing
vulnerability (for example through improved transport and communications, and
social protection schemes) and improving skills (which in turn improve their ability to manage productive
activities or find employment).
Recommendations
Soil reclamation
Agricultural activities that dominated the
tsunami affected area included lowland paddy rice that was either rainfed or irrigated and home gardens. In the
former case (rice based systems) surface flushing
of salts may be effective in dissolving deposited salts. In all field based
rehabilitation activities an adequate
drainage system is a critical component in the overall reclamation process as these structures will transport soluble salts
from the field. Consequently, existing drainage systems if damaged should be repaired and made
functional. Furthermore, if drainage infrastructure has to be built, a comprehensive assessment of the
costs/benefits associated with the rehabilitation process should be undertaken
before making a decision to rehabilitate these areas. It must be noted that reconstructing drainage infrastructure is
expensive and any decision to undertake major works should be the
responsibility of the local or national government. Guidelines for
rehabilitating drainage have been articulated by FAO and should be used.
Along with effective drainage, land levelling is
critical in the reclamation of salt-affected soils and efficient irrigation
management. Lands affected by salt inundation should be levelled prior to the commencement of surface flushing
of salts. This can be achieved using sophisticated laser levelling devices or simple grader systems that can be tractor
mounted.
Reclamation of water resources
Contaminated open and shallow tube wells can be
reclaimed through natural flushing that will occur over the next wet season or by
pumping and monitoring the electrical conductivity (EC). An acceptable EC for agricultural
and drinking purposes would be <2 dS m-1.
The
working groups identified a range of issues which fell under nine principal
themes:
A need for coordination of assistance and for fishery management;
Assessment of impacts/scientific studies for decision-making;
Clarifying fishery policy managing capacity and institutions for
coastal management;
Aligning assistance with needs;
Strengthening human capacity;
Preparedness, safety and simple early warning systems;
Strengthening communities;
Appropriate financial mechanisms and access to them, funds and finance;
Post-harvest/value adding – opportunities for alternative employment.
The priority issues
raised by the countries under each theme, and recommended solutions, are
presented in full in Appendix E.
Indonesia – five priority need areas
included:
Improving coordination between government, donors, NGOs and communities which has not been
effective. What was needed was well planned meetings among stakeholders, assigning of tasks and
responsibilities, use of feedback and control mechanism;
Matching needs to requirements was important. Donors tended to make assumptions about the
needs. It was important to make interventions sustainable. This could be
achieved through improving the profile of
the sector, strengthening the community, using participatory approaches and controlling delivery and implementation;
Mechanism for distributions were too focussed around the main centres and needed to be broadened. A coordination team
was needed, additional information should be provided to the public along with good monitoring and
accountability;
Capacity building was needed for beneficiaries and organizations. This should involve assessment of training needs, formulation of training
content etc.;
An early warning system was needed along with safety awareness. Infrastructure plans for the future were required, an
understanding of disasters and a natural disaster fund established.
India – five priority need areas
included:
Scientific studies to better
understand the impact of the tsunami, especially in the longer term;
Development of institutional arrangements for capacity building (identification and
strengthening of institutions);
Prioritising
the balance between economic and social issues (identify stakeholders, multilevel
meetings, development of consensus, development of policy and strategy (using a bottom up approach);
Planning and implementation
of infrastructure projects with consideration of issues related to ownership and
management (e.g. to identify actors, collect plans, linking of policies, development of plans with dialogue between
agencies and building consensus);
Building of social capital to handle credit, marketing and resource management (developing
a framework which is conducive to collaboration, common programmes) and training.
Malaysia – five priority need areas
included:
Human resource development (ensuring knowledge of and ability to support policy
implementation). Understanding of fisheries management and economics,
additional training of government officers, additional training for fishers;
Sustainability of long term plans. Human capacity and social assets were required to enable community empowerment, perhaps through
extension services;
A need to align needs with rehabilitation activities and planning. This requires development of a fishery profile,
strengthening of the communities, use of participatory approaches, communication and control over delivery and
implementation;
National disaster preparedness and a plan is important. The government needs to pre-position a store of emergency materials,
develop community warning systems, software and hardware;
Appropriate financial mechanisms need to be developed and linked to a national disaster fund.
Maldives – five priority need areas
included:
Provision of shelter and displacement of people away from original home Islands and lack of livelihoods opportunities at new locations;
Provision of alternative livelihoods while in shelter housing;
Need to create social institutions to increase community resilience and assist with post tsunami
recovery;
Lack of processing infrastructure, technology and marketing;
Lack of access to investment capital.
Maldives recognized that there is an
ongoing need to secure financial support for addressing shelter housing issues. An associated factor is implementing
appropriate programmes to mitigate transitional
and long term impacts from displacement from traditional fishing grounds by
providing short term employment
opportunities and skill retraining. Maldives
was beginning to engage in the process
of establishing and building community and cooperative organizational capacity
and this was an ongoing need.
Developing processing technology towards adding value and improving fish quality and safety was identified as a key future
direction. Developing financial institutions and mechanisms to underpin capital investment was also recognized as
important for the future of the Maldives.
In a discussion session following the group
presentations, a question was raised for India
regarding whether
or not they saw the issue of building social capital as a long or short term
exercise. India responded that it was considered
a long term process. Points were also raised regarding clarification on how outstanding current issues
were to be dealt with (such as any groups or individuals that may have missed
out on rehabilitation support). There was concern that there still may be a
relief gap in some
countries. There was also a request to consider the danger of exporting
problems to other sectors/areas
unless comprehensive planning was carried out (for example moving large number
of fishers into another sector).
There was also a request that the groups recognize the
consideration of regional issues (such as transboundary fisheries/ecosystems
and migrant workers). These issues may be a good area for CONSRN to work in. Lastly, there
was a concern expressed regarding the common coordination issues. Coordination does not deliver unless there are
clear objectives and leadership. The workshop
agreed that there are many lessons to be learned from the different countries.
Myanmar – five priority need areas
included:
Displaced people in shelters and lack of permanent housing;
Lack of access to investment capital;
Communication to fishers/communities about tsunami warnings and rehabilitation
process;
Immediate lack of vessels and managing vessel capacity into the future;
Resource status is unknown and there is no effective management.
Problems
identified with shelter housing and lack of access to investment capital
requires the mobilization of financial
resources both within Myanmar
and amongst the donor community. It was also recognized that a review of the institutional framework and
mechanisms underpinning capital finance is required. Myanmar
sees a critical need to develop telecommunications infrastructure to open
communication with isolated fisher communities. This would need to be backed up
with a dedicated education and awareness
programme. There is still an immediate need to replace fishing boats
damaged or destroyed during the tsunami but
Myanmar also recognized that the
management of vessel capacity into the future would be a key issue. There is little
information on resource status and there is an immediate need to carry out baseline resource assessments and develop fishery
management plans.
Sri Lanka – five priority need areas
included:
Development of policy for the sector, a policy paper was underway but this may also need mobilization of funds establishment of coordination
units, data systems, MIS, fisheries ID cards
and vessel registration;
Strengthening of coordination and information flow in the sector, funding for institutional infrastructure
and rehabilitation development (for example addressing gaps such as the multi-day boat issue);
Institutionalization of coastal management approaches and capacity building for coastal communities, government
officers, fishers and stakeholders;
Capacity building for livelihoods development through credit/microfinance and value addition
for products;
Evaluation of the tsunami impact on ecosystems through conducting surveys and assessments, regular monitoring and linking with
the capture fishery sector.
Thailand – five priority need areas
included:
Coordination,
which was currently insufficient. There is a lack of human resources. What is needed is a lead agency with staff assigned for the
long term to gather and communicate information;
An early warning system is required (simple system). Infrastructure
is needed and perhaps a project piloted;
Capacity building for management for fisheries and development (training for fishers and officials)
and a resource impact assessment;
Revolving fund/micro-credit is needed. These could be soft loans. There is a need to provide the community with funds
and capacity building to manage them (including soft loans);
Community group strengthening and empowerment is needed. It is important to make sure the community was united with an emphasis on
cooperative approaches.
Future actions and
recommendations for countries and CONSRN partners
Review of progress against the RSF showed that
the original elements are still valid. However, there has been a shift in focus from
asset provision towards capacity building, institutional building and improving
management. This shift highlights the need for continued action and support for
the rehabilitation and reconstruction
process over the next five years.
The workshop agreed that in order to move from
emergency relief to longer-term rehabilitation and reconstruction the following
cross-cutting challenges needed to be addressed:
Improved data and information and the need for
better coordination asset
distribution
as well as all activities involved in
the fishery/aquaculture rehabilitation. These include:
Strengthening
communication and sharing of information;
Maintaining and improving the function of coordination units;
Key information elements for fishery/aquaculture management systems (e.g.
beneficiary identification, registration, licensing etc.);
Management Information Systems;
Monitoring and feedback on the impacts of tsunami rehabilitation programmes.
Assuring appropriate financial mechanisms are in
place at both the macro level for
fishery/aquaculture infrastructure
reconstruction and at the micro level for development of
fishing communities. These include:
Securing donor/government funds;
Establishing support from rural financial institutions and systems (e.g. soft loans, revolving
funds, credit etc.);
Promotion of community level capacity to access/manage financial resources.
Strengthening human capacity (through training and skill upgrading) for
communities,
government officials and NGOs, in the areas of:
Capacity building at community level in leadership/organizational skills;
Socio-economics
and financial management.
Empowering and ensuring full participation of
communities in the rehabilitation process.
Reducing dependency and encouraging self sufficiency/self-help;
Reducing vulnerability and increasing resilience;
Strengthening
social institutions/networks (e.g. communities;
cooperatives, fishers groups)
and involving them in decision-making;
Promotion of consensus and ownership of rehabilitation processes.
More specifically, country priorities depended on the
stage at which countries had reached, between emergency relief to full rehabilitation and
reconstruction. These included:
Ensuring all affected parties have been identified and addressing any outstanding gaps in asset replacement or
rehabilitation needs;
Aligning assistance with the real needs of the affected parties (appropriate scales of input, communication of needs,
financial sustainability);
Resource assessment, based on scientific studies and traditional knowledge; to inform decision-making on implementation
of responsible fisheries and aquaculture (e.g. fishing capacity, appropriate
infrastructure development, aquaculture zoning etc.);
Clarifying policy objectives in terms of economic, social and resource objectives, for coastal
resource allocation, managing fishing capacity, strengthening institutions for
fishery (coastal and offshore) management
and responsible aquaculture;
Improving fishery and aquaculture co-management through the effective participation of stakeholders,
dialogue and consensus in decision-making;
Strengthening
disaster preparedness at both national and local levels, through contingency planning and simple and
effective early warning systems (e.g. pilot systems for fishing communities);
Promoting resilience of fishers and fishing communities (e.g. improving sea-safety for fishers, fishing operations,
vessel quality; insurance etc.);
Ensuring that development of fishery/aquaculture infrastructure is appropriate and commensurate with the capacity of the
fishery/aquaculture resources; and ensuring that the developments can be
financially sustained;
Promoting opportunities for income diversification and alternative employment particularly amongst
groups which remain vulnerable;
Improved post-harvest/value adding of fishery products (e.g. product development, access to market information,
value chain analysis, and training).
The workshop recognized that there are issues relating
to migrant workers and the shelter and relocation of internally displaced persons and (e.g.
foreign fishing crews, persons housed in camps, persons who are unable to
return to their homes). However, it was concluded that these are outside the
immediate competence of CONSRN. The workshop further recognized that where
these people are
engaged in fishing/aquaculture, CONSRN has a role relating to supporting skills
enhancement and addressing their
rehabilitation needs.
It was also noted that management of transboundary
fishery issues were important, but were beyond the scope of this workshop (management of shared resources, addressing
the causes and management of IUU fishing
etc.). At a regional level, a number of broad activities were identified including:
Resource assessments (especially the impact of tsunami on resources);
Early warning system communication;
Lessons learned, experience and information sharing.
Priority action for CONSRN could
include:
Assessment of resources;
Conduct training needs assessments and implement capacity strengthening;
Support to clarification
of fishery/aquaculture policy objectives;
The workshop identified a number of positive outcomes in
the rehabilitation process as indicated in the country presentations that have strongly influenced
the process of returning the agricultural sector back to some normalcy. However, there are
weaknesses that have been identified and were discussed. A synopsis of these factors is presented below:
It was generally agreed that within the overall rehabilitation process, less attention had been paid towards the rehabilitation
of the agricultural sector. This may in part have been due to priorities and the relatively
limited physical impact that the tsunami had on this sector when compared to the overall damage
sustained. The importance of this sector on the livelihoods of significant numbers of people
and the external impact of a functional agricultural sector on the economy were thought to be
legitimate arguments for raising the profile of this sector.
From a socio-economic perspective there is very little data available that would allow a comprehensive assessment of the impact of the rehabilitation
efforts on communities and their
livelihoods. In a number of cases victims of the tsunami are still housed in
Internally Displaced Person (IDP)
camps and are dependent on distributed aid. This dependence on aid is a concern to authorities in that it
effectively hinders the process of transition between aid dependence and
independent livelihood strategies for returning communities and individuals.
There is still considerable infrastructure rehabilitation that is required before fully functional
agricultural pursuits can be implemented. This factor was considered as a hindrance to the initiation of agricultural
endeavours in some areas.
The effect of the tsunami on extension services and related knowledge-based agencies was
enormous. Shortly after the tsunami, individuals in the country with the
required skills to
offer assistance were reluctant to work in affected areas due to fear of
further tremors and possible injury.
There is a dire need for capacity building in this area and the development and implementation of effective
technology transfer strategies to facilitate the re-establishment of new
and improved farming systems.
Weak coordination amongst a range of stakeholders active in the rehabilitation process was identified as a factor impacting
on progress towards normalizing agriculture except in a few places such as Nagapattinam (India).
Soil salinity is recognized as a significant problem in the affected areas, although there has been noteworthy progress with respect to its mitigation.
This has largely been due to the positive impact of natural rainfall on leaching/flushing
salts from the effective root zone. However, there is a need to continue monitoring this
process as there is evidence to suggest that
sodicity and crop nutritional imbalances are posing a problem in some areas of Indonesia.
Not enough attention has been paid to the empowerment of farmer organizations and self-help
groups in building coherent communities and enabling community members to revive their communities and build capabilities to undertake the
recovery process with community participation.
The provision of inputs to farmers as they return to agriculture has not been well organized/
coordinated and in
some cases sufficient materials were not made available and/or there has
not been any follow
up in the supply of further assistance after the initial input.
Some of the lessons learned in
this process were identified as follows:
Overlapping of programmes, inputs and beneficiaries
was clearly evident in some areas.
There is a need to use/work through local institutions in effecting input distribution and rehabilitation efforts.
Difficulties in the assessment of the extent of damage and poor coordination between actors resulted in challenges associated
with targeting immediate response initiatives. There is still a problem of
reliability of data and poor coordination between different parties and data sharing.
Lack of local expertise and support, and consequently a dependency on outside assistance.
Difficulties in finding a reliable supplier/implementing partners in the affected areas and within
the countries.
The slow pace of the recovery process is attributed to the complexity of the problem that not only addresses the physical agricultural issue associated with
the impact of the wave but also the socio-economic parameters. These two components are
inseparably linked.
A lack of information, feedback and appropriate timeframes were experienced. For example, poor data management resulted in
inconsistencies between data sets collected on the same parameters.
In general, there was a lack of a strategic vision for agriculture, this being exacerbated by the paucity of technological interventions or
mixed and confusing approaches to address the
prevailing complex situation.
Recommendations
as to how to move forward in the rehabilitation of the agricultural sector were
made. These included:
A concerted effort in building capacity at all levels from farmers through to institutions. This should be undertaken within a planned timeframe.
The establishment of some pilot projects that address the issues confronting the return of affected
lands to full production that would incorporate elements of monitoring and
evaluation.
Strengthening
of empowerment processes among farmer organizations.
Development of data processing capacity and interpretation within government institutions that would enable sound future planning.
Strategies effecting
the overall development of a sustainable agricultural sector were deemed to
include:
A systematic recovery process should be implemented. This would require a greater
degree of
cooperation between all parties.
Monitoring of feedback and follow-up activities.
Improvement of service capacity and identification
of service providers and beneficiaries for
the long term.
Sustainable solutions should include vulnerability reduction of people dependent on agriculture,
risk transfer and disaster preparedness.
Income generation through integrated agriculture systems, agribusiness
and agro-industry.
Marketing network arrangement and provision of market information.
General comments
Agriculture did not receive the priority it should have
been afforded. There were several reasons for this, including:
In the aftermath of the tsunami the focus by most aid agencies and donors was on the physical damage caused to infrastructure that was most
visible. This was at the expense of a
somewhat less visible, but equally important, agriculture sector.
The logistics of moving large quantities of inputs (i.e. seed, fertilizer) required to re-establish
agriculture was
seem as a further hurdle to overcome in the process of rehabilitating the sector.
The availability of technical experts and individuals who were prepared to go to affected areas limited progress.
The initial focus on rehabilitation was on salinity and the reclamation of salt-affected lands at
the expense of livelihoods.
It is impossible to implement an agricultural project within the time frame that donors and aid
agencies work within. In general it takes between three and five years to
implement a successful agricultural
programme. Hence there is a need to educate donors and aid agencies on
the benefits of investing for the long term.
There is a need to focus on an integrated approach to natural resources management of which agriculture is just one
of the components.
Our ability to quantify the extent of damage and the long term impacts on livelihoods was not well articulated to donors, except in a few places
such as Nagapattinam (India).
There is a need to address this.
There is a need to strengthen the coordination function
at the operational level. Several NGOs established partnerships without local government
consultation, making the coordination process extremely difficult. Along with this there is a
need to strengthen the acquisition, assessment and evaluation of data within the
national governments in order to target more specific interventions. This could be facilitated by
appointing a single body within the government as a central hub/depository of information. In addition,
there is a need to strengthen the capacity with such organizations in data evaluation and interpretation.
In some cases there was inequity in compensation payouts
to farmers that caused considerable dissatisfaction. In this respect, farmers that leased
land in India were not
eligible for compensation packages or assistance, but some farmers received coverage through the
efforts of NGOs.
There is a need for designing rehabilitation activities
to suit the specific location and circumstances that prevail in the different countries affected by the tsunami.
Farm
labourers who were dependent on the agricultural sector for their livelihoods
seem to have been
neglected in the overall approach to re-establishing the agricultural sector.
There is a need to consider the plight of
this sector of the community.
Challenges that are posed over
the long term were discussed and identified as follows:
The problems associated with heavily damaged/impacted agricultural
areas has, to date, been avoided. There is a need to
now consider approaches and interventions that would address these more difficult or recalcitrant affected
areas.
Technology transfer and capacity building is required at all levels.
High unemployment rates in tsunami affected areas needs addressing. The agricultural sector may assist in providing
job opportunities, particularly where there may be significant changes in this sector, i.e. establishment of
plantation crops.
Keeping the momentum with donors and other stakeholders.
There are policy restrictions
in some cases that are hindering the rehabilitation process. These need to be
addressed.
Acknowledgement
of the role of traditional agricultural systems in the rehabilitation process and its incorporation into such
programmes needs to be recognized.
Priorities for long-term
rehabilitation and development
The overarching priorities for long-term rehabilitation
and development need to incorporate these four
elements:
Integratedcoastalareamanagementplans: All countries affected by the tsunami are encouraged to develop policies and strategies to
incorporate coastal buffer zones. This would
include the establishment of Green Belts. Further, the concept of a coastal management plan would incorporate coastal water
management; waste management; sustainable livelihoods development;
research and information sharing; and the mainstreaming of traditional
knowledge into development plans.
Mainstreamingdisastermanagementintonationalplanningandstrategies: The events of 26 December clearly
demonstrate an inadequacy within this area that needs urgent addressing when developing medium- and long-terms
plans in the rehabilitation process.
Developmentofaneffectivemonitoringandevaluationsystem: To facilitate the process of ongoing learning, there is a need for monitoring and evaluation in
order to adjust plans and strategies as progress in the implementation of
rehabilitation programmes takes effect.
Long-termprioritiesinmeetingrehabilitationoftheagriculturalsector: The overall long-term
goal in the rehabilitation of the agricultural sector is to build a better and
more robust agriculture that is environmentally sustainable. In order to
achieve this, four key criteria need to
be addressed. These include the following:
➤ Addresslanduseandlandtenureissues: Land use changes are inevitable with the re-development
of these coastal areas. This includes the re-zoning of land for specific purposes
that may not coincide with that prior to the tsunami, i.e. establishment of Green
Belts. Hence there is a need for effective planning and consultation at all
levels to effect these changes in land use. In addition, issues
over land tenure and rights need to be resolved.
Capacitybuilding: There is a need for ongoing and long-term commitment to capacity building at all levels, i.e. from farmers to
institutions. The tsunami had a devastating impact
on human resources that will take considerable resources and time to reinstate.
Holisticapproachtoagriculturaldevelopment: In order to effect the development of the agricultural
sector that will meet the aforementioned criteria, there is a need to develop agribusinesses that incorporate micro-credit schemes,
focus on markets and market development,
and promote the development of agricultural enterprises, such as livestock, in areas that may not have undertaken such activities
in the past. There is a need to revitalize the sector and the concept of
agribusiness where seen as a possible mechanism that could incorporate
the active participation of governments and the private sector in the rehabilitation process. It is important that
social equity and gender sensitivity be given high priority in this
process.
Supporttostate-of-the-artandtraditionalagriculturaltechnologies: The development of a
revitalized agricultural sector should be framed within the context of
introducing new and innovative
technologies along with the incorporation of traditional practices. In the
latter case there
are numerous examples of traditional agriculture practices that would assist in
the rehabilitation
process as well as enhance the productivity of these changed agricultural environments. For example,
traditional or commonly grown crop and vegetable varieties that are suited to saline soil
conditions should be promoted and encouraged.
Medium-term priorities and
strategies
In
order to achieve the long-term objectives for the agricultural sector, there is
a need to address some immediate
constraints. These constraints are outlined below:
Land rights – securing land rights and titles for individuals would facilitate the initiation of farming activities in some
areas.
Infrastructure
development and rehabilitation – there is still considerable restoration work to be completed that includes
the construction and rehabilitation of rural roads, building of dykes and the construction of markets, to name a few.
Irrigation and drainage – the rehabilitation of irrigation and drainage canals would facilitate the reclamation of
tsunami affected lands and water bodies.
Alternative crops and the breeding of salt tolerant varieties.
Ecosystem management – covering soil erosion control and management and incorporating a
holistic approach to managing watersheds.
Capacity building.
Research, development and information sharing – documentation and data collection of the impact
on and recovery of tsunami affected agriculture and ecosystems, with a strong
focus on sustainable livelihoods
development.
Facilitating
upstream-downstream linkages that incorporate local knowledge into planning and encouraging greater participation of
all actors including local community groups.
Development of sustainable livelihoods – the focus would be on the development of income generating activities, micro-credit
schemes, establishing market chain linkages, and community empowerment.
Development of an effective monitoring and evaluation systems.
Ensuring a smooth transition of affected individuals from the emergency phase to the mid-term
rehabilitation phase with a focus on agricultural livelihood activities.
Agricultural
development - this includes the production and distribution of seed and
planting materials; crop diversification that includes or incorporates cash
cropping options;
plant protection; livestock; and improved agricultural practices that
incorporate local
knowledge.
In order to achieve
these outcomes, there is a need to put into place policies and a legal
framework governing the management of coastal buffer zones.
Mechanisms for coordination and exchange of
information
Several issues were
identified and recommendations in overcoming these impediments were suggested.
The issues highlighted were as follows:
Full-fledged
coordination mechanisms for disaster events such as the tsunami were not in
place prior to the event. The lack of
an overarching coordination body in each of the affected countries negatively
impacted upon the initial relief efforts. Coordination has predominantly been
on a sectoral basis with some sectors performing this role effectively.
Coordination is not mandatory and hence even though an organization may require
registration with the government there is no mechanism or requirement for the
organization to coordinate its activities with other stakeholders. In addition,
cross-sectoral activities often escape coordination. In order to overcome this
limitation there is a need to establish a permanent disaster management and
coordination authority (which is in process in a few countries) in each of the
countries whose role would be to take charge of the coordination of relief/aid
during disasters. In this respect it would be mandatory for all international
and national NGOs to sign a memorandum of understanding with the coordination
body. This would assist in the coordination efforts and assist in the
regulation of these actors. Experience had shown that some NGOs were
unscrupulous in their activities and hence by making registration compulsory the
coordination body would be in a position to regulate and assess their
activities thereby “black marking” organizations that did not meet specific
criteria in their relief efforts.
Coordination
needs to be decentralized. For
effective coordination to occur there is a need to decentralize the
coordination effort down to the district/local level. This will require the
establishment of such bodies that will facilitate an effective communications
linkage between the community at the lowest level and top level decision-makers
at the highest level.
Lack of
capacity and leadership to coordinate. There
is a need to strengthen the capacity of coordination bodies to effectively
manage such disasters as the tsunami. In addition, it was clearly evident
during the initial stages of the relief effort that there was a lack of
leadership and authority to make decisions at various levels. There is a need
to strengthen leadership skills and devolve the decision-making process to
lower levels in the chain of command.
Coordination
is not mandatory. To date there is no
requirement for relief organizations to coordinate their activities with other
stakeholders. It was recommended that it should become mandatory for all
organizations to coordinate their activities through a single national disaster
management and coordination authority.
While noting the
devastation caused by the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami - particularly with respect
to the livelihoods of people living in coastal communities, their resources and
environment - there is now an opportunity to “build-back-better” and to improve
coastal area planning and management.
The workshop
recognizes the importance of the transition between the relief and long-term
development phases now taking place in tsunami-hit areas.
Note is taken of
the predominantly sectoral nature of rehabilitation and development efforts,
both with respect to national and regional level activities, and the need for
increased application of cross sectoral approaches to coastal area planning and
management.
Recommendations for actions
To
integrate disaster management with coastal area planning and management
particularly
by:
➤ Developing and linking disasters early warning
systems,
➤ Enhancing existing systems for early warning;
➤ Promoting initiatives to support disaster
management e.g. establishment/rehabilitation of buffer zones or Green Belts,
considering their multi-functionality.
To
establish/strengthen coordination mechanisms, dialogues and partnerships in
support of
coastal area planning and management across sectors and at all levels by:
➤ Encouraging initiatives to ensure national
integrated coastal area planning and management, considering local social,
economic and ecological dimensions;
➤ Identifying and supporting a national focal point
to lead the integrated planning process and associated monitoring and revision;
➤ Strengthening and mobilizing existing
inter-governmental mechanisms and frameworks, for example ASEAN and SAARC as
well as other regional collaborative mechanisms and arrangements to support
coastal area planning and management;
➤ Improving coordination through development of an
agreed framework to identify roles of regional/international organizations;
➤ Organizing regional cross-sectoral dialogues and
coordination mechanisms to generate lessons learned and synthesize information
on a regular basis;
➤ Supporting existing frameworks to support national
level policy, planning and coordination e.g. CONSRN;
➤ Facilitating negotiation, trade-offs and balancing
of policy/objectives at various geographical levels, recognizing that less
powerful stakeholders may need support;
➤ Creating an enabling environment and incentive
system to support coordination, dialogue and partnership.
To develop better knowledge based systems to support coastal area planning and
management, particularly:
➤ Develop standards and information management systems to support data, information
and knowledge
sharing;
➤ Support information gathering beyond impact assessment for strategic planning and decision-making during the
rehabilitation phase and thereafter;
➤ Collate and efficiently manage relevant data, information and knowledge, and support
better application and dissemination of analysed/synthesized output;
➤ Establish national frameworks for social vulnerability and risk assessment;
➤ Continue interdisciplinary research on environmentally friendly reconstruction of coastal zones;
➤ Assess empirical experience and fully use existing available and emerging knowledge
to inform
policy processes; and
➤ Revise, update and disseminate FAO guidelines on Integrated Coastal Area Management.
To support good governance to facilitate coastal area planning and management,
considering:
➤ Political commitment towards improved coastal area planning and management;
➤ The need for legislative reform and provision including adoption of land/resource use rights;
➤ Community participation and learning, and co-management;
➤ The role and capacity of key stakeholders, including NGOs and the private sector, to support improved coastal
area planning and management.
To build capacity for coastal area planning and management at all levels, particularly
by:
➤ Educating key actors, for example, policy-makers, the media, the general public,
donor agencies and religious leaders, of progress and impacts of
rehabilitation, and the situation and needs at the local level;
➤ Strengthening communities and local-level institutions through better organization
and empowerment, particularly with respect to coastal development planning and land/resource use
management;
➤ Ensure resources and capacity adequately support improved coastal area planning and management.
The Next Wave
Outcomes of the Regional Workshop on Information Management and Coordination
Mechanisms of Tsunami Emergency and Rehabilitation Operations in Agriculture,
Fisheries and Forestry held at the Amari Watergate Hotel in Bangkok, Thailand
from 30 October to 1 November 2006.
