Template for the Monitoring and Evaluation of the Implementation of RES&POA-2030 Background
SEAFDEC proposed the Concept Note for organizing the Regional Workshop on the Roadmap for Monitoring and Evaluation of the Implementation of the Resolution and Plan of Action on Sustainable Fisheries for Food Security in the ASEAN Region Towards 2030 (RES&POA-2030) during the 53rd Meeting of the SEAFDEC Council (53CM) in early 2021. The 53CM supported such idea and suggested SEAFDEC develop and disseminate the key indicators for monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of RES&POA-2030 in order that the AMSs could provide valuable inputs during the Workshop.
The SEAFDEC Secretariat in collaboration with the SEAFDEC Departments developed the indicators that will be used as tools to facilitate the monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of the RES&POA-2030. The indicators were categorized according to the six components of the Plan of Action on Sustainable Fisheries for Food Security for the ASEAN Region Towards 2030 (POA- 2030), namely: 1) Planning and Information, 2) Fisheries Management, 3) Aquaculture, 4) Optimal Utilization of Fish and Fishery Products, 5) Fish Trade, and 6) Regional and International Policy Formulation. The detailed POA-2030 could be accessed at http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12066/6583.
This Template will be used to facilitate the monitoring and evaluation of the progress made by the AMSs in the implementation of the POA-2030 by providing inputs and feedback including the rating of indicators and additional information as agreed during the Regional Workshop on Development of the Key Indicators and Detailed Roadmap on 23–24 March 2022.
Instruction
10. The SEAFDEC National Coordinators shall serve as focal persons for the monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of the POA-2030. They shall coordinate with the relevant agencies/institutions within their respective countries to gather relevant information and submit the accomplished Template to the SEAFDEC Secretariat.
11. The monitoring and evaluation are a self-assessment by the AMSs of their implementation of the POA-2030. The AMSs are requested to rate the indicators to determine the level of achievement of POA-2030. In rating the indicators, the AMSs should consider common criteria (e.g. national policies, legal frameworks, programs, working mechanisms, human resources, financial resources, among others). However, the criteria for each indicator should be considered as applicable to the respective countries; while additional criteria could be explored, as appropriate.
Each indicator should be rated as:
Option 1: rating scale of 1-5 1 = not at all
2 = at a limited level 3 = at a fair level 4 = at a good level 5 = at an excellent level Option 2: Yes/No
If the indicator is not applicable or the country is unable to provide a response, please indicate N/A.
12. The AMSs should provide additional information (e.g. means of verification) for each indicator to ensure that the same set of fundamentals and criteria is maintained during the different timeframes (i.e. in 2021 for the baseline, in 2025 for the mid-term review, and in 2029 for the final evaluation) of the monitoring and evaluation of the POA-2030 .
Country: Republic of the Philippines
Timeframe: ☒ Baseline 2021 ☐ Mid-term Review 2025 ☐ Final Evaluation 2029
A. Planning and Information
POA-2030 No.
Indicators Rating Additional information (e.g. means of verification)
1 Level of integration of planning of marine capture fisheries, inland capture fisheries, and aquaculture sub-sectors for
sustainable fisheries (e.g. availability of fisheries management/master plan that integrated all fisheries sub-sectors, multi- stakeholder participation in the planning process
5 Presence of fishery management plans.
Map of the Philippines showing the 12 Fishery Management Areas where fishery managements are
implemented. Presence of
Management Boards, and Scientific Advisory Groups
2 Level of the country’s capacity to develop
a plan towards sustainable fisheries 5 Fishery Management Plans, CRM Plans, developed.
3 Level of sufficiency of the country’s systems and mechanisms for collection of statistics and data disaggregated at the species level to support fisheries valuation including monitoring of their performance (e.g. existing programs on data collection)
5 The Philippines is implementing the National Stock Assessment Program (NSAP), a regular program under the Department of Agriculture wherein enumerators in 758 landing sites collect fishery statistics data (e.g.
Species caught, Fishing Boat type, CPUE, Total Catch, Length and weight frequency data, Gear type, Fishing ground)
4 Level of the country’s capacity to establish reference points for the
management of fish stocks (e.g. biomass, MSY, ABC, TAE, spawning potential ratio (SPR), minimum length (especially for blue swimming crab)
4 The Philippines has established RPs for commercially important species in the 12 FMAs and in various fishing grounds.
Map/ List of RPs for major
commercially important species in the Philippines per fishing ground.
5
g.
Level of the country’s capacity to collect data and information on aquatic species under international concern (e.g. sharks, rays, sea turtles, catadromous eels, aquatic mammals)5 Please specify all species:
1. Sharks
2. Rays (Manta and Devil Rays) 3. Sea turtles
4. Dolphins 5. Whales
6. Whale sharks 7. Bigeye Tuna 8. Yellowfin Tuna 9. Skipjack Tuna
h.
Level of the country’s application ofSOPs to harmonize/standardize data collection methods for species under international concern
5 Fisheries Administrative Order, Manual of Operations for Fisheries Observers, Manual for Species ID 6 Level of applicability of regional fishery
information systems and mechanisms to facilitate sharing, exchange, and
compilation of statistics and information that are harmonized with international statistical standards to the country’s fishery information systems and mechanisms (e.g. data and information digitization programs)
4 Integrated Maritime Environment Monitoring System (IMEMS) Tuna Catch Logsheet
Philippine Fisheries Observer Program (PFOP) Species of Special Interest Minimum Data Standards
7 Level of sharing of relevant statistics and fisheries-related data and information between the country’s fisheries agency and other authorities (e.g. in-country coordination)
4
8 Level of the country’s application of simple and practical indicators for planning, monitoring, and evaluation of fisheries
5
9 Level of the country’s sharing/
exchanging of information on research findings, good practices, and experiences among countries and regional institutions
5 The Philippine Journal of Fisheries (TPJF)
Scientific Conferences Participation to international conferences/fora/workshops B. Fisheries Management
POA-2030 No.
Indicators Rating Additional information (e.g. means of verification)
10 Level of timeliness of the country’s reviewing and updating of national fisheries policies, legal and institutional frameworks in consultation with stakeholders
4
11 Level of the country’s acceleration of the development of fisheries management plans for conservation and management
4
12 Level of the country’s implementation of measures to prevent unauthorized fishing and eliminate illegal fishing practices
5 NPOA IUUF, Fisheries Administrative Orders, Search for Most Outstanding Coastal Municipality/ City, Deputation of Bantay Dagat, Acquisition of Patrol Boats, Deployment of IMEMS, Fishery Management Plans, CNFIDP
13 Level of the country’s implementation of comprehensive policies for fisheries management
5
14 Level of the country’s application of fisheries management approaches (e.g. co- management, EAFM, among others)
5
15 Level of capacity of the country’s fisheries communities and capability of fisheries-related organizations to implement necessary actions to address issues on the well-being of fishers
4
16 Level of participation of the country’s local communities and fisheries-related organizations in fisheries management
5
17 Level of the country’s awareness/
perception of the need to develop
financial incentives (e.g. micro-credit) for small-scale stakeholders and cooperatives for the responsible development of fisheries enterprises and developmental activities that optimize economic returns
5
18 Level of the country’s application of energy-efficient technologies for fishing gears fishing vessels, and fishing operations
3 Awarding of sails to local fishers
19 g. Level of sufficiency of the country’s capable fishing crew and workers in the fishing industry (e.g. enough number of competent fishing crew and workers, programs for new crew members and workers)
5
h. Level of the country’s application of appropriate technologies to optimize the number of crew onboard fishing vessels
4
20 Level of the country’s implementation of good and appropriate employment practices in accordance with domestic laws and regulations or relevant international instruments
- relevant provisions of ILO Conventions (e.g. C-188)
5
21 Level of capacity of the country’s relevant authorities and communities to
collaboratively resolve conflicts on resources utilization (e.g. establishment of an authorized multi-stakeholder
committee at local level)
5 Establishment of Fishery Management Boards in the 12 FMAs
22 Level of the country’s exploration and sustainable exploitation of potential underutilized fishery resources through comprehensive fishery resources surveys in a precautionary manner (e.g.
exploitation of deep-sea resources)
4
23 g. Level of the country’s implementation
of the SSF Guidelines 4
h. Level of the country’s effort to collect sex-disaggregated statistics on fishers and fish workers in the fisheries value chain
5 FishR
24 Availability of guidelines/regulations/
procedures to facilitate fair distribution of benefits from the intra-regional and international trade of fish and fishery products among small-scale actors along the value chain
Y
25 g. Level of the country’s monitoring and assessment of the impacts of climate change on fisheries and aquaculture
2
h. Level of country’s adjustment of existing programs taking into consideration the effects of climate change and natural disasters
3
26 Level of the country’s assessment and management of the impacts of aquatic pollution (e.g. marine debris, ALDFG, microplastics) on fisheries and
aquaculture
2
27 Level of the country’s cooperation with other countries to assess and manage straddling, transboundary, and highly migratory fishery resources, as
appropriate (e.g. country’s participation in BOBLME, GOT-Fish, RFMOs, bilateral arrangements)
5
Marine Fisheries
28 Level of the country’s implementation of measures and activities to combat IUU fishing activities (e.g. NPOA-IUU, IUU- related information sharing, fishing vessel record database, VMS, port-in & port-out controls, conservation and management measures of relevant RFMOs of which SEAFDEC Member Countries are a member, MCS infrastructure and equipment)
5
29 Level of the country’s involvement and participation at regional, sub-regional, and bilateral levels on fisheries management, combating IUU fishing, and MCS network through inter-agency
coordination and information sharing (e.g.
country’s cooperation/coordination with AN-IUU, RPOA-IUU, among others)
5
30 Level of the country’s utilization of existing regional frameworks and tools for combating IUU fishing activities (e.g.
RFVR, ACDS, and innovative
5
technologies)
31 Level of involvement of the country’s legal officers in consultative dialogues at regional/sub-regional level to share and exchange information on updated legal and regulatory frameworks to address issues in fisheries management, as applicable
4
32 g. Level of capacity of the country’s relevant authorities to implement the requirements of port State measures
4
h. Level of capacity of the country’s relevant authorities to implement the requirements of flag State
responsibilities
5
33 g. Level of the country’s effort to conduct research on the impacts of various fishing gear types and methods on aquatic ecosystems and animal populations
4
h. Level of country’s development and promotion of environment-friendly fishing practices (e.g. low impact and fuel-efficient (LIFE) fishing
gears/methods)
4
34 Level of the country’s implementation of regional and international guidelines to mitigate bycatch and discard
4
35 Level of the country’s promotion of adoption of resource enhancement approaches with appropriate monitoring and evaluation programs (e.g. artificial reefs, restocking programs, mobile hatcheries, habitat restoration)
5
36 Level of the country’s application of the
fisheries refugia concept 3
37 Level of the country’s implementation of approaches to sustainable management of major critical coastal habitats (e.g.
mangroves, coral reefs, seagrasses)
4
38 Level of the country’s compliance with international standards on safety at sea, decent working conditions, and onboard fishing vessels sanitation
4
39 Level of the country’s effort to assess the possible impacts of subsidies on fisheries, particularly on the special requirements and the needs of small-scale fisheries in the region
3
Inland Fisheries
40 Level of the country’s implementation of comprehensive policies and provision of support to legal and institutional
frameworks for inland fisheries (e.g. co- management, rights-based fisheries, ecosystem approach to inland fisheries management)
3
41 Level of awareness of the country’s relevant stakeholders of the importance of inland fisheries and of the need to
rehabilitate/restore habitats and aquatic species for local food security
4
42 Level of the country’s effort to monitor and mitigate the negative impacts of invasive/alien species on the inland ecosystem and biodiversity
3
43 g. Level of coordination among the country’s national agencies on multiple utilization of inland water resources to mitigate conflicts among users
3
h. Level of the country’s involvement in sub-regional mechanisms to address transboundary inland fisheries management issues, where applicable
3
44 g. Level of the country’s effort to promote R&D to understand the migration patterns, spawning grounds and seasons, and nursery grounds of important inland aquatic animals
4 Very limited R&D on migration patterns
h. Level of the country’s effort to sustain inland fisheries ecosystem health, habitat inter-connectivity, and dry season management
4
45 g. Level of the country’s effort to monitor and assess the impacts of construction/ operations of man-made structures on inland waterways
2
h. Availability of mitigation measures and appropriate conservation and management measures for such impacts
Y
46 Level of the country’s effort to undertake coordinated planning and management on the use of inland water bodies (e.g. closed and open season regulations, leasable or auction fisheries, special area for conservation and fish refugia (SPEECTRA))
3
Level of capacity of the country’s human resources and institutions to implement the plan and manage the use of inland water bodies
4
47 Availability of guidelines to promote the
use of practical and simple indicators for Y
inland/floodplain fisheries within the national inland fisheries management framework (provincial/community notifications for inland fisheries measures based on indicators e.g. succession of species, amount of rainfall and water inflow, level and duration of flood, abundance of macro-invertebrates) C. Aquaculture
POA-2030 No.
Indicators Rating Additional information (e.g. means of verification)
48 Level of the country’s implementation of programs and policies on aquaculture to address social, economic, and
environmental aspects of sustainable aquaculture to improve
food security, livelihoods, and
employment, and alleviate poverty (e.g.
rural aquaculture program)
4
49 Level of the country’s implementation of the ASEAN guidelines for environment- friendly and responsible aquaculture and good aquaculture practices
3
50 Level of coordination among the country’s national agencies to integrate aquaculture into rural development activities within the context of multiple- use of land and water resources
3
51 Level of the country’s utilization of advanced technologies for marine and inland aquaculture such as full-cycle breeding and culture of high-value species
5
52 Level of the country’s implementation of measures or strategies for responsible, environment-friendly, and sustainable aquaculture
4
53 Level of the country’s support for R&D on aquaculture (e.g. genetic resources, impacts of climate change, feed, aquatic animal health management)
4
54 Availability and accessibility of the country’s specific pathogen-free broodstock and seeds
Y
55 Level of the country’s implementation of
aquatic biosecurity measures 2
56 Level of the country’s implementation of policies that complement and support fish farmers, hatchery operators, and other stakeholders
4
57 Level of the country’s implementation of
good and appropriate employment 3
practices in accordance with domestic laws and regulations or relevant international instruments 58 Level of the country’s
awareness/perception of the need to develop financial incentives and micro- credit systems for the responsible development of aquaculture enterprises and developmental activities that optimize economic returns
5
59 Level of the country’s implementation of programs/efforts to regulate the
introduction and movement of aquatic organisms in accordance with regional and international guidelines (e.g. national measures or SOPs including quarantine measures on the importation of aquatic species)
4
60 Level of the country’s implementation of programs/efforts to prevent and control serious disease outbreaks (e.g. R&D, OIE standards, other initiatives following standard procedures)
4
61 Level of the country’s capability to diagnose and control aquatic animal diseases (e.g. human resources, assessment and development plan,
harmonized diagnostic methods/protocols, laboratories)
4
62 Level of the country’s involvement in the implementation of regional warning systems on aquatic animal health and diseases (e.g. compliance with the Regional Technical Guidelines on Early Warning System for Aquatic Animal Health Emergencies)
4
63 Level of the country’s prudent usage of legal antibiotics in aquaculture and monitoring of the impacts of antimicrobial resistance on aquatic animals
3
64 Level of the country’s efficient usage of aquafeeds including use of alternative protein sources to reduce fish meal and other fish-based products e.g. utilization of the Regional Database of Alternative Feed Ingredients in Aquaculture)
4
65 Level of the country’s effort to conduct risk assessments of the culture of exotic aquatic species and prevent the escape of high-risk species
4
66 Level of the country’s implementation of programs to improve human resource capabilities for responsible aquaculture
4
67 Level of the country's implementation of
policies and strategies that enable the 4
aquaculture sector to adopt measures to mitigate the potential impacts of climate change and environmental stressors 68 Level of the country’s application of the
precautionary approach to safeguarding the environment from the over-
intensification and expansion of inland, coastal, and offshore aquaculture (e.g.
utilization of tools such as software program to measure carrying capacity)
3
69 Level of the country’s effort to conduct risk assessment and R&D related to the use of GMO products in aquaculture
4
D. Optimal Utilization of Fish and Fishery Products POA-2030
No.
Indicators Rating Additional information (e.g. means of verification)
70 Level of country’s applicability of technologies to optimize the utilization of catches/farmed products
4
71 Level of the country’s effort to promote the production of and preserve the diversity of traditional fish products
4
72 g. Level of the country’s effort to implement quality and safety
management systems that support the competitive position of ASEAN fish and fishery products in the global markets
5
h. Level of the country’s effort to promote the implementation of the quality and safety management systems among small and medium enterprises
4
73 Level of the country’s legislation, and coordinated mechanisms/activities with relevant control agencies throughout the fish value chain (e.g. product
traceability/certification, chain of custody)
5
74 Level of country’s implementation/ effort to promote and conduct training programs and develop training materials to upgrade the technical skills and competencies of relevant personnel in the public and private sectors on fisheries post-harvest technologies, and food quality and safety management systems
5
75 Level of the country’s
awareness/perception of the need to develop financial incentives and micro- credit systems for the responsible
development of fisheries and aquaculture enterprises and developmental activities that optimize economic returns,
5
specifically for the post-harvest fisheries sub-sector
76 Level of the country’s implementation of good and appropriate employment practices in accordance with domestic laws and regulations or relevant international instruments
5
77 Level of the country’s capability to adopt standards and guidelines for handling fish and fishery products, and implement hygienic fish handling onboard fishing vessels and market places
4
E. Fish Trade POA-2030
No.
Indicators Rating Additional information (e.g. means of verification)
78 Level of the country’s cooperation with other AMSs to implement international standards on the trading of fish and fishery products within the region (e.g.
development of regional guidelines relevant to international standards on trading of fish and fishery products, harmonization and standardization of fish trade system including farm/hatchery certification through bilateral agreements or mutual recognition agreement)
5
79 Level of the country’s effort to implement the regional/ASEAN standards (e.g.
ASEAN GAqP, ASEAN Shrimp GAP, others) on the international trading of fishery and aquaculture products
4
80 Level of the country’s implementation of fish trade-related standards (e.g. SPS/TBT measures)
4
81 Level of country’s development and implementation of national laws, rules, and regulations on trading of species in accordance with international laws
5
82 Level of the country’s cooperation with other AMSs towards common positions that could be reflected in international fish trade-related fora
4
83 Level of the country’s engagement of private sector to address trade-related issues and promote/sustain regional and international trade
5
84 Level of the country’s implementation of support programs to assist and build the capacity of small-scale producers to comply with standards on safety and quality of fish and fishery products
4