No consensus reached on proposed demonstration site for St Kitts & Nevis
01-21-2002 -- CCA/CREP
Basseterre, St Kitts, Jan 21 - There was an enthusiastic welcome for the CCA/CREP team which visited St Kitts and Nevis for consultations on proposed demonstration sites.
The team of project manager, Cathal Healy-Singh, technical officer, Yuri Chakalall and CCA executive director, Joth Singh met governmental and non-governmental stakeholders in a combined session on January 14, before doing site visits over the following two days.
The St Kitts and Nevis representatives did not reach a consensus on a proposed site. They opted instead to have CREP's contracted consultants undertake a detailed comparison of the nationally proposed sites, Wingfield Watershed and Bath Bog, with the agreement that the final selection would be guided by the recommendations of the consultants in conjunction with the CREP PMU.
NOTICE
The 4th meeting of the Joint Executive Committee (JEC), will take place in Dominica November 7 & 8, 2002. This meeting will review and approve the implementation plan for the Regional Environmental Environmental Awareness programme (REA), and Amenity Areas demonstration sites (SEE ABOVE).
The contracts for the Assessment of Amenity Area Candidate Sites and Preliminary Project Formulation for Demonstration Activities were awarded as follows:
For Barbados, St. Kitts & Nevis, Antigua and Barbuda, St. Lucia and the Bahamas
- the Social & Environmental Management Services (SEMS) consortium
Implementation of Amenity Areas demonstration sites is scheduled to start on February 1, 2003. The Second Annual Work Plan for this programme will be presented to the Joint Executive Committee of CREP for approval at a meeting scheduled for November 7 and 8, 2002 in Dominica.
Approval will be required by the JEC and endorsed by CARIFORUM and the European Union Delegation.
The register of consultants will be opened for the period October 1, 2002 to October 31, 2002. Only registered consultants are entitled to bid for contracts.
1.0 Background Information
1.1 Beneficiary Countries
CARIFORUM Countries (GROUP A: Barbados, St. Kitts & Nevis, Antigua & Barbuda, St. Lucia, Bahamas)
1.2 Contracting Authority
Deputy Regional Authorising Officer (Barbados)
For the Secretariat of the Caribbean Forum of African, Caribbean & Pacific (ACP) States.
1.3 Current State of Affairs
The Wider Caribbean region has over 600 �protected areas�, as defined by IUCN (International Union for the Conservation of Nature) including the various national parks, nature reserves, national monuments, wildlife sanctuaries, and marine protected areas (MPAs). Many of these are not achieving the objectives for which they were established, partly due to a lack of human and financial resources for their effective implementation.
The CARIFORUM Member States (CMS) are characterized by rich diverse ecosystems and amenities of abundant renewable and non-renewable natural resources. This endowment, which is the source of the Region�s economic growth is however, becoming increasingly degraded owing to the loss of bio-diversity, degradation of land, soils, coastal zones, water resources and urban areas.
The common feature of all CMS is their proximity to and dependence on the sea. Impacts that occur in the watersheds are directly translated into impacts on the coastline. Many of the CMS have established protected areas1. Protective and restorative actions in these areas will directly affect the whole ecosystem, especially in the small island states.
The CMS recognize these threats to their individual natural resources base, as well as their inter-connections and cumulative effects resulting from shared ocean currents and their collective position in the world�s tourism market. As such, remedy to the problem requires concerted Regional actions and co-operation.
The Caribbean Regional Environmental Programme has been mandated to �develop and enhance the management of Amenity Areas�.
2.0 Contract Objectives
2.1 Objective 1: Review & Development of Proposed (Draft) Amenity Area1 (AA) Demonstration Site Selection Criteria
The Consultant will be required to review the draft Amenity Area Demonstration Site Selection Criteria2 developed by the Caribbean Regional Environmental Programme (CREP), Programme Management Unit (PMU). This review is to be undertaken in order to refine and logically assign weighting factors to the proposed criteria. Justification of the assigned importance of specific criterion relative to others should be presented. It is expected that heavier weightings should be assigned to those criteria that are considered to be most critical in respect of the feasibility and practicality of implementation and the attainment of CREP�s programmatic objectives.
To standardize the Selection Criteria, the PMU will hold a joint one-day working session with the Team Leaders of each Consulting group to ensure consistency in reporting and to establish harmonization of assessment outputs.
The approved final criteria are to be applied by the Consultant, later in the ranking of the �preferred� AA sites as determined from respective National Consultation processes.
2.2 Objective 2: Assessment of Amenity Area Candidate Sites
The Consultant will be required to carry out an assessment of the status, needs and demonstration potentials of the top ranked (nationally preferred) Amenity Area (AA) candidate site in each participating, beneficiary CARIFORUM Member State (CMS) indicated in Section 1.1 of this Terms of Reference.
AA candidate sites will be determined as a result of National Consultations that the CREP PMU will undertake. The Consultants are expected to undertake their country AA site assessment visits within two to eight weeks following the National Consultations. The sequencing of the National Consultations and the work of the Consultants will be most important.
There are thirteen (13) Cariforum Member States (CMS) covered by CREP. These National Consultations will begin in December 2001 with Barbados. A one-week period is scheduled for each (A Tentative Schedule3 of National Consultations by PMU has been developed).
In each CMS up to four (4) AAs in one of four categories (coastal, marine, terrestrial and cultural heritage) will be discussed at the National Consultations undertaken by CREP. Of these, three candidate sites will be selected and ranked in terms of national priority and preference.
At the Consultations, Government and non-Government stakeholders will be asked to review, add to and comment on the Selection Criteria as well as identify and prioritise Demonstration Activities3 for the AAs. Proposed demonstration activities, have been identified by the PMU and have been reviewed and amended by key Regional Stakeholder Organizations involved in Protected Areas Management, �Preliminary Strategizing Workshop for a Regional Cooperative Framework for Management and Development of Protected Areas�, held on November 8 and 9, 2001 at Almond Bay, Hastings, Barbados.
The CREP PMU will make the results of the National Consultations available to the Consultant prior to their respective country assessment visits. Additionally, the CREP PMU will make available to the Consultant all contact information of Government and non-Government representatives who attended the National Consultations. Contact information for designated Government and non-Government focal points for CREP related activity will also be made available.
Using the approved Amenity Area Selection Criteria, the Consultant is expected undertake country visits to execute a standardized, comparative analytical assessment of each top ranked (preferred) AA candidate sites emerging from the National Consultations. As an output, the combined results of the assessments of the three consulting groups are expected to confirm, from amongst the 13 CMS, four to six candidate AA sites, that should be selected as �Regional� AA demonstration sites i.e. a determination of which sites and demonstration activities are most important and viable for CREP �demonstration� activities during the implementation phase.
This assessment is expected to be achieved through: consistent collection of new information; direct site visits; review of: existing literature, data, policies; interviews; questionnaire surveys; or any other practical and cost effective means at their disposal.
Specifically, Consultants are expected to undertake detailed site assessment and analysis for each of the final identified, nationally significant, top ranked, candidate demonstration sites and to cross compare these sites using the finalized selection criteria. This comparison will be expected to produce a priority ranking with justifications in respect of need, importance, demonstration opportunity potentials and Regional suitability (feasibility and practicality) as potential demonstration sites.
As a separate task Consultants will be asked to assess second and third ranked candidate demonstration sites to a lesser degree of detail, using the same criteria and approach as for the top ranked sites. This assessment should be based on interviews with national focal organizations and individuals identified by the CREP PMU and from a desktop review of existing and available information.
It is envisaged, that this reporting effort will be used as a guidance resource to direct and prioritise future Regional protected area management demonstration and implementation activities, either, if there is continuity of the CREP beyond its current projected programme life, or, as part of the Caribbean Conservation Association�s, future programming.
2.3 Objective 3: Assessment of Proposed Demonstration Activities
The Consultants will also be required to assess the potential, viability, feasibility and practicality of the demonstration activities proposed and emergent from the National Consultations. Demonstration activities assessed should be those that are consistent with CREP�s programmatic mandate. The Consultant will also be expected to recommend additional activities with potential for demonstration given prevailing site conditions and existing institutional arrangements.
The Regionally based determination of AAs and demonstration activities on which to focus CREP funds will be based principally on:
those areas where biodiversity is most abundant and diverse � and potentially valuable;
those countries where Government and non-Government co-management models for implementation are most likely to succeed;
those areas where indigenous species are in most danger;
those areas where multiple demonstration activities are possible and representative of activities required in the other CARIFORUM Member States.
2.4 Objective 4: Preliminary Project Formulation of Recommended Demonstration Activities
Using the outputs from tasks and activities required to achieve Objective 3 (above), the Consultants are required to formulate and cost projects and component activities required to implement recommended �demonstration activities.�
The PMU will utilize this information to finalize selection of demonstration activities to implement under CREP. Project development/formulation should cover implementation scenario time frames (from project startup, development, monitoring and completion) of both, a) two years (24 months), and (b) two and a half years, (30 months). Although, the CREP has a finite programmatic life, demonstration activity project conceptualization and formulation should envision a �progressive development� or evolutionary approach, i.e. consolidation and expansion with time and successful implementation of demonstration activities (post CREP).
3.0 Assumptions
The principal assumption is that the National Consultations with Government and Non Governmental Stakeholders in all the CMS will result in a clear consensus and identification of at least one (most preferred) AA per country that can be considered, in a Regional evaluation as a potential demonstration site.
It is also assumed that the Consultants will be able to access sufficient data on all AA sites identified by the consultations to make an even comparison between all.
Thirdly, it is assumed that sufficient uniformity in reporting by the different Consultants will allow for an easily accessible, logical and transparent identification process, on a Regional basis, of the demonstration sites best suited to receive further attention under CREP.
4.0 Scope of the Work
4.1 General
The Consultant will be expected to undertake the following Specific Activities, using an optimal combination of indirect and direct means, not limited to: telephone interviews, questionnaire surveys, literature/policy reviews, internet searches, direct consultation visits, and informal networks or alternative practical and cost effective means at his/her disposal.
4.2 Specific Tasks Required to Achieve Contract Objectives
4.2.1 Tasks Required to Achieve Objective 1
Review, and modify �draft� demonstration site selection criteria;
Submit modified site selection criteria, with justifications, for PMU review;
Participate in meeting with PMU and other consulting teams to review, finalize and approve selection criteria to be applied in standardized assessment of Regional Candidate Sites
4.2.2 Tasks Required to Achieve Objective 2
Conduct country visits to assess proposed top ranked AA candidate sites, emerging from National Consultation Processes;
Compare top ranked AA candidate sites, using the finalized selection criteria;
From the standardized comparison of sites, recommend and rank the sites;
Undertake a desktop review and interviews for second and third ranked nationally proposed AA candidate sites to document the status of these additional sites (This task should be reported separately).
4.2.3 Specific Activities Required to Complete Tasks Under Objective 2
During the country visits to assess top ranked AA candidate sites, emerging from National Consultation Processes the Consultants are expected to undertake the following specific activities:
Define and graphically map the working (and if existent, the legal) boundaries of the AA site;
Obtain and present a detailed account of site-specific biophysical conditions (including but not limited to geological and vegetation conditions);
Summarize and assess demographics from most currently available census data. Comment on population size, distribution and density for communities directly within the AA or within a sphere of influence of the AA;
Report on means of income generation, employment/livelihood activities (particularly those that are resource dependent) and standard of living (poverty/affluence);
Assess the status of the site relevant key natural resource assets present (forest, fresh-water, coastal, marine, historical, archaeological and cultural resources). This assessment should include but not be restricted to considerations of: patterns of resource use/exploitation, land use, conservation status, institutional resource management capacities, man made or natural risks or hazards;
Assess the potentials for alternative sustainable income generating activities utilizing the resources within the AA that would improve standards of living and environmental qualities;
Assess downstream impacts of potential demonstration activities.
Specific attention should be focused on evaluating the status of:
existing and proposed institutional frameworks for protected area management;
local classification/categorization systems for the protected areas;
protected area management plans;
technical and administrative human resource capacities;
ability of existing management structures and institutions to absorb capacity building support;
levels of education and training as well as local course availability;
existing and needed equipment;
integrated protected area management arrangements and fit with respect to national physical planning processes;
mechanisms for inter-agency collaboration on protected area management or resource management issues within protected areas;
mechanisms for community participation and participatory planning/decision-making;
legal frameworks for protected area management;
multilateral environmental agreements/conventions to which there are commitments;
proposed management, biodiversity action or special area plans;
resource inventories and information systems;
funding mechanisms available to support protected area implementation and management.
4.2.4 Tasks Required to Achieve Objective 3
Develop a standardized framework/matrix for the comparative assessment of proposed demonstration activities.
Such a framework should include but not be restricted to indicators such as: demonstration activity potential in a regional context, costs to implement, need, likely time frame for implementation and attainment of results, complexity of implementation (institutional, human resource, technical) and consistency with CREP objectives etc.
Rank proposed demonstration activities in respect of these indicators for each of the sites evaluated.
Emphasis should be on demonstration potential, priority and feasibility of implementation.
Using the framework/matrix the Consultants are expected to identify, recommend and justify the demonstration activities that should be pursued within each site.
4.2. 5 Tasks Required to Achieve Objective 4
Prioritize recommended demonstration activities for implementation within each site;
Formulate key actions/tasks required to implement recommended demonstration activity projects;
Specify a time frame and duration for execution of demonstration activities;
Indicate the key lead and supporting (national and Regional) institutions/organizations best capable of coordinating and executing actions;
Provide cost estimates (professional fees, material costs and other expenses) associated with the specific actions required to implement recommended demonstration activities. Total/bottom line costs for achieving each recommended demonstration activity should also be provided;
Identify and least measurable indicators for tracking success of implementation of demonstration activities and monitoring changes from pre-existing/baseline conditions;
Indicate mechanisms of demonstration activity sustainability, potentials for revenue generation and other potential sources of funds or donor interest.
4.3 Project Management, Contractor�s Tasks & Responsibilities
The Contractor (Principal Consultant) is responsible for daily management of the project and reporting to the Contracting Party or the Contracting Party�s Agent (Programme Manager CREP PMU) as specified or as required on a demand basis. The Contractor is also fully responsible for ensuring Contract performance and sub-contractor compliance as well as for the management of finances and expenditures, within agreed Contract budgets.
5.0 Project Location & Timing
(GROUP A: Barbados, St. Kitts & Nevis, Antigua & Barbuda, St. Lucia, Bahamas)
The Consultant is expected to complete the assignment within but no later than 85 working days from the date of contract award.
6.0 Requirements
The Contractor is expected to provide the personnel, equipment, supplies, logistical support and office space etc. needed for the successful execution of the contract. Information on sources of these inputs, where required for completion of the contract, should be provided.
At the end of the contract, all reports and other materials generated as outputs of the contract shall become the property of the Contracting Authority.
All incidental expenses incurred in the course of the contract, as required to fulfil these Terms of Reference is to be invoiced at actual cost.
7.0 Reporting
The Consultant will be required to generate, complete and submit the following:
Modified AA site selection criteria with weighting factors and justification/rationale
(by working day 10 of the contract period)
A draft standardized matrix/framework for the comparative assessment of proposed demonstration activities
(by working day 25 of the contract period)
A draft Site Assessment and Ranking Report of Top Ranked Amenity Area Candidate Sites
(by working day 55 of the contract period)
A draft Summary Desktop Review Report Detailing the Status of Second and Third Ranked Amenity Area Candidate Sites
(by working day 65 of the contract period)
A draft Assessment Report of Proposed Demonstration Activities within Recommended Amenity Area Candidate Sites
(by working day 65 of the contract period)
A draft Preliminary Project Formulation of Recommended Demonstration Activities Report
(by working day 80 of the contract period)
Final versions of all reports should be completed by working day 90 of the contract period.
These reports will be reviewed by the CREP, Programme Management Unit (PMU), and comments will be provided to the Consultant for report finalisation. All reports should be written in English and four (4) copies each, submitted. Reports should be directly submitted to:
The Programme Manager
Caribbean Regional Environmental Programme
Programme Management Unit
�Chelford�
The Garrison
St. Michael
Barbados
FOOTNOTES:
1. The term Amenity Area will be used interchangeably with the words �Protected Area� in the context of this document, and should be interpreted as having the same meaning. Amenity Areas are areas having significant ecological, recreational, social, aesthetic and economic value.
2. See Item 1, attached
3. See Item 1, attached
