Managing multi-lateral, intergovernmental projects and programmes: the case of the UNEP/GEF South China Sea project

The management of comprehensive and extensive, multi-lateral and multi-national programmes and projects in the field of coastal and ocean management poses numerous organisational problems encompassing co-ordination between: the actions of individual participating countries at the regional level; the national level actions of institutions from different sectors; and actions that are designed to address issues as diverse as: biological diversity conservation and sustainable use; fisheries management; maritime transport; and the control of land based pollution. Most large multi-lateral projects focus on sound scientific knowledge and information, and pay less attention to the design of a management structure that will ensure coherence and co-ordination of the interventions once the programme or project is under implementation. The project entitled “Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand” was complex since it addressed three priority areas of concern namely the loss and degradation of coastal habitats, over-exploitation of fisheries in the Gulf of Thailand, and land-based pollution. It is suggested that the success of the management framework reflects the following key design elements: • The framework permitted and encouraged both “horizontal” (inter-country) and “vertical” (intra-country) interactions and networking between individuals at all levels of project implementation and execution; • Inclusion of a body (the Regional Scientific and Technical Committee) that served as a forum for reconciling both sectorial and national interests and priorities; • The clear separation between discussions of scientific and technical matters from discussions dealing with policy and principles at both the national and regional levels; • The framework facilitated the incorporation of sound scientific and technical advice and information into politically based decision-making; • The use of regional experts and consultants from the participating countries fostered “ownership” of the activities and outputs; • Restriction of the membership of the Project Steering Committee to government representatives only, and exclusion of observers from regional and international agencies and institutions other than UNEP; and, • The framework allowed for adaptive management and was not a rigid unchanging structure.