|
|
|
| /train/mod6/update/ | home |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
||||
|
 |
.. | ||
|
||||
|
|
Project Overview | ||
|
||||
|
 |
Introduction | ||
|
||||
|
|
Newsletters | ||
|
||||
|
 |
Organisation | ||
|
||||
|
|
Project Activities | ||
|
||||
|
|
|||
|
||||
|
|
|||
|
||||
|
|
Information | ||
|
||||
|
|
Project Data | ||
|
||||
|
|
Links | ||
|
||||
|
Search this Site | |||
|
||||
|
Contact | |||
|
||||
|
Get in touch via the above link, or send us your email address. |
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
Summary of Module 6, Strategy and Masterplan
|
|
The long-term objective of developing Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM)
in Guyana provided the framework for the Guyana Sea Defences (ICB-SZMS project.
The projects’ target is to formulate a strategy and Master Plan for Guyana’s sea
defences. This plan should allow for more effective and cost efficient
management of both the mangrove vegetation and manmade structures that comprise
the Guyana sea defences. At the Opening Workshop in January 2004, Module 6 accepted the responsibility of collating the inputs of Modules 1-5 to produce a first outline of a Long Term Vision – Strategy and Master Plan for Sea Defence Management in Guyana. In the Second Workshop, Module 6 identified and presented a number of Institutional, Technical and Legal inputs required (but presently lacking) for the efficient management of Guyana’s Sea and River Defences. Also, the team’s concept of reactive, proactive and preventative approaches to Sea Defence management was outlined. Reference was made to the findings and report by Mr. Phillip Alsopp, which presented an Evaluation of the Legal and Institutional Framework for ICZM in Guyana. The Module 6 Team used these findings as the basis for preparation of the 3rd Workshop. First a process of establishing inter-agency cooperation and collaboration with a number of agencies was initiated. These entities included Government (e.g. EPA), and non-governmental (e.g. GAPE) organizations and individuals (e.g. former officers of the Guyana Sea Defences). Meetings were scheduled (and some held) to solicit views, opinions and facts to aid in the elaboration of the Strategy and Master Plan. An important aspect of these meetings was discussions on and drafting of MoU’s between GS&RD and other Governmental organizations. The second activity focused on inter-Module cooperation and collaboration mainly between Module 6 and Modules 1-5. This activity was done in two phases. In the first phase, meetings were scheduled and held by Module 6with the other Modules individually. These meetings updated Module 6 on the status of activities in the other five modules. Also, they provided some answers to queries previously made by Module 6. In the second phase of this activity, three one-day workshops were organized and held for participation by key members of all six modules. These sessions were organized to achieve synergy and coherence between the various modules. This activity was timely, as the process of outlining a five-year master plan for Sea Defence Management is being elaborated. The workshops focused on seven major topics. These included: 1. Existing problems, typical measures and costs. 2. Existing problems in five to ten years time. 3. Strategic options and selected strategy. 4. Objectives. 5. Prioritized action plan. Activities specific to the 5-year Master Plan for institutional development included: - SWOT analysis. - Objectives and priorities. The results of these workshops were presented at the third Workshop for the Steering Committee on December 8, 2004. A synopsis of the issues to be mentioned in the Strategy and Masterplan for Sea Defences follows below. a. Vision statement To provide reliable defences through constantly improving sea and river defences management thereby encouraging the generation of economic activities in the protected areas and to continually enhance the standard of living of the population b. Mission To reduce the risk of flooding and the loss of land in the protected areas due to the actions of the rivers and sea therefore minimizing the likelihood of damage to social and economic infrastructure, through the construction, maintenance and management of sea and river defences in a technically sound, cost effective and environmentally sustainable manner. c. Strategy i. Prioritized proactive strategy: avoid damage where desired, repair remaining damage when it occurs. ii. Criteria a. Emergency situation: collapse of sea defence. b. Social urgency and political pressure c. Socio-economic values. d. Anticipation of residual life of the sea defence. iii. Preferred criteria a. Prediction and prevention of damage - Morphological development (mud flats, channel system, sand banks, etc.). - Values at risk d. Problem areas and planned capital investments 2005 – 2008.
Regions 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 were covered. Some results are presented on the
following map. e. Four-year (2005 – 2008) budget estimate SRDD. This budget covered costs of
maintaining and improving buildings, payment of staff, supply contracts,
operational costs, capital expenditure, emergency works and maintenance of sea
defences in Regions 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6. The total amount is G$7,855,855,000 or US$39,279,425.
This amount excluded ongoing capital investment projects financed by foreign aid
(e.g. CDB and EU). - The budget does not include CDB/EU capital investments envisaged for 2005. - The budget does not include cost of improved and expanded organizational structure. - In recent years allocated budget was only 25% of actual requirements. - Budgetary limitations restricted SRDD activities to emergency responses. f. Institutional Development - Improved physical facilities. - Increased funding on a timely basis for sea defence management - Institutionalize interagency cooperation and collaboration - Optimize procurement procedures - Improve and expand organizational structure. Future Activities for Module 6 to an efficient Sea
Defence Management The technical requirements for an efficient SRDD is recognized and acknowledged by all concerned, however, there is some uncertainty as to the nature of the organizational and legal setting through which these functions will be executed. Some of the questions awaiting answers includes: - In the legal setting, given the number of agencies with jurisdiction for areas in the vicinity of the sea defences, there is the question of where the final authority should reside? Also, should there be a demarcation of buffer zones or a redefining of the area allocated for sea defences? - There are extensive volumes of documentation produced and being produced by the Modules. Their recommendations and operational proposals need examination, analyses and consideration during the elaboration of the draft plan. Given the ad hoc nature of Module 6, how will this activity be organized? - It is recognized that a number of institutions operational plans overlap with the work of SRDD and some collect data relevant for use by SRDD. What mechanism will be employed to draft and activate MoU and institutionalize participation by these organizations? Module 6 must address these and other issues before a draft plan can be finalized.
Recommendations for Module 6 Module 6 is tasked with the drafting of a strategic plan. However, at the end of the process this group would have gravitated to their respective disciplines. It is recommended therefore, that Module 6 be reconstituted within the SRDD (temporarily or permanently). This will give members an opportunity to work constantly on completion of the draft plan. The SRDD would benefit from the institutional memory created from this approach as they could take the opportunity to earmark staffers to comprise the future planning team for SRDD. | |
|
|