SEMINAR REPORT

The seminar on Networking (activity 1.1.6 of immediate objective of the Work Plan) took place at the Regional Coordination Centre in Tunis in Mechtel Hotel on 24 – 25 April 1991.

Opening Session

The seminar started by welcome speeches of the Regional Coordinator, Mr. H. AKROUT, the FAO Resident Representative, Mr. K. CHOUEIRI, the UNDP Resident Representative, F. FOKELADEH, the FAO Director of fishery operation, Mr. Y. KATO and the Chief Division for the regional programme of UNDP, Mr. M. BOULAARES.

After that his Excellency the Minister of Agriculture opened the seminar with a lecture in which he highlighted the importance of aquaculture in the general development plan of Tunisia, and in the region in general, wishing full success for the meeting, comfortable stay and fruitful participation in the seminar.

• Election of officers:

• Adoption of the agenda. The agenda prepared by the Project Coordinator was uninamously adopted.

The first session started by an introductory lecture of the Project Coordinator, Mr. HASSEN AKROUT, in which he recalled the recommendations of the sub-regional meetings (7 – 19 March 1991), defined the objectives of the seminar and presented the work plan for the various networks forseen during 1991–1992.

In the first communication, Mr. BOULAARES presented UNDP interest in networking. He stressed the importance of networking philosophy as opposed to traditional approaches. Self-sufficient and self-reliant network are the main objectives. National input and commitment are vital for the successful implementation of MEDRAP II.

Mr. MARIO PEDINI presented on behalf of FAO, their experience in networking. He quoted the EIFAC and the NACA experiences. Both of them are organized now in self-sustained networks, which are fully supported by the participating governments. He highlighted the strong points of both networks, but he also mentioned their weakness and the reasons why some sub-networks have never been implemented.

After that, the participants listened to some other communications from experts and representatives of specialized agencies who have had some experience in the field of networking.

Those communications were presented by:

In the discussion that followed, the delegates tackeled the various mechanisms adopted in the presented experiences.

Strong points were stressed and some of the hinderances were identified. Participants stressed the importance of learning from experience of other international networking activities such as the training sub-network of NACA. It was also mentioned that as yet there is no blue print for a successful network.

The participants went on with the panel discussion about the various sub-networks.

The following recommendations were concluded to be presented to the Steering Committee Meeting for adoption:

1. The importance of national commitment is recognized and measures have to be taken by the national coordinators to ensure the active involvement of their respective countries in MEDRAP II and in particular to identify the potential participants (institutions and individuals) in the various activities of the different sub-networks.

2. It is recommended to constitute in each respective country a national committee representative of the various interested institutions and individuals, and under the chairman ship of the national coordinator in order to ensure the efficient and effective operation and the continuity of MEDRAP II.

3. In view of the importance of parity in the field of an effective and quick communication and because of the lack of modern communication facilities in some countries, remedial action has to be taken by respective countries to overcome such hinderances. The delegates of LEBANON and BULGARIA stressed that effective communication facilities were not available in their respective countries and that this could represent obstacles for their effective participation in the network. It is also the case for ALBANIA.

4. As regards recommendations concerning the five sub-networks, as presented in the sub-regional meetings report (7 – 19 March 1991), the seminar recommended the following:

   4. a Training Sub-network :

   The meeting approves the work plan presented in the report of the sub-regional meetings.

   4. b Research Sub-network :

   Because of the complexity and diversity and the lack of complementarity, scientists' and researchers' participation is required. Particular importance should be given to defining the mechanisms to strengthen networking. Given the cost and prerequisite capacity for collaborative research, it is recommended that the level and fields of cooperation in research should be further studied during the seminar devoted to this sub-network.

   The meeting approves the work plan presented in the report of the sub-regional meetings.

   4. c Information Sub-network :

   In the project Document, no provisions are made for this sub-network because this was foreseen in AQUAMED. However, as AQUAMED has not been initiated and because of the high interest expressed by the participants and in view of its importance in ensuring MEDRAP continuity, it is recommended that it should be initiated progressively. This sub-network should be project driven and financial implications have to be explored.

   The meeting approves the work plan presented in the report of the sub-regional meetings.

   4. d - 4 e Production and Extension Sub-networks :

   It is recommended that the review of proposals relative to these two sub-net works should be brought to the second steering committee meeting. Meanwhile the MEDRAP Coordination is asked to examine the data relative to each of these two sub-networks in order to favor a rational procedure.

5. In view of preparation of a permanent structure on legal matters, an ad hoc committee ought to be constituted to formulate such structure after consulation with the concerned Governments.