1. The meeting was convened at the Bronte Hotel, Harare, Zimbabwe on 5 October 1988. A list of participants and observers is attached as Appendix 1.
2. Mr E.D. Muyanga, Chairman of the ALCOM Advisory Committee called the meeting to order wishing a fruitful discussion on the Programme's ongoing and future work.
3. Dr H.F. Henderson, Chief, Inland Water Resources and Aquaculture Service, welcomed the participants on behalf of Dr Edouard Saouma, Director General of FAO, and on behalf of FAO Fisheries Department. He noted that the Programme, now known as ALCOM, had already begun to attract considerable interest and attention, and highlighted its ambitious aim of establishing a methodology to ensure a meaningful impact of fish farming on increased welfare in rural communities. He pointed out that the task with which this Second Advisory Committee Meeting was confronted was to decide on the Programme's future approach on the basis of the foundations it has already laid.
Thanks were extended to the Government of Zambia for having hosted ALCOM and for its able Chairmanship during the inter-sessional period. The Government of Zimbabwe was thanked for its hospitality and for the facilities put at the disposal of the Advisory Committee Meeting.
4. Mr Chimbuya, Chief Ecologist, National Parks and Wildlife Management, Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, Zimbabwe, welcomed the participants on behalf of his country and of the Ministry of National Resources and Tourism. He reminded the meeting of ALCOM's role, that of facilitating Governments' plans rather than performing or executing them on their behalf. He noted the different levels of aquaculture development in each of the participating countries and drew attention to the potential of ALCOM's role as a facilitator and catalytic element in enhancing fish farming development. The First Advisory Committee Meeting had established priority areas for ALCOM's work and it was the responsibility of the Advisory Committee to give guidance on effective implementation of the chosen methodological trials, in line with Governments' plans and goals.
5. The delegate of Lesotho proposed the election of Zimbabwe to chair the Committee Meeting and the delegate of Mozambique seconded the proposal.
6. Following a proposal by the delegate of Lesotho, seconded by the delegate of Mozambique, the Agenda (Appendix 2) was adopted with the addition of a session on Friday, 7 October, at 19.00 h, to allow the meeting to review the draft report of the Advisory Committee Meeting, thus facilitating its adoption the following day and ensuring that a final version would be available for delegates to take with them.
7. The Programme Manager introduced this Agenda item inviting the Committee to clarify the role it wished the SADCC Sub-Committee on Fisheries and Wildlife to play in the Advisory Committee.
Following contributions by the delegates of Lesotho, Mozambique, Zambia and Zimbabwe, the Committee unanimously recommended that the SADCC Coordinator of Fisheries be invited to the Committee's meetings as an observer. In reaching this decision, the Committee took note that it was essential that the Coordinator be present at its meetings, but that the channel of communication between the Advisory Committee of ALCOM and SADCC would necessarily be through the Sub-Committee on Fisheries and Wildlife, whose actions on such matters would subsequently be conveyed to the Council of Ministers by the Coordinator for Fisheries. The Committee then adopted the draft terms of reference of the Advisory Committee, amended to specify the procedure to be used by ALCOM in reporting to the SADCC Sub-Committee on Fisheries and Wildlife (Appendix 3).
8. In presenting the Progress Report the Programme Manager drew attention to the nature and character of ALCOM's preparatory phase. The work was intended to lay the foundation for a second phase and focused on identification of problems facing rural communities and households in starting fish farming, elaborated guidelines for the introduction of rural small-scale fish farming, and identified pilot activities to be undertaken during the second phase. During the reporting period fish farmer surveys, regional formulation missions for the preparation of a second phase, and a pilot project in Eastern Province of Zambia had been the main elements of the work. As a recent development, it was reported that activities related to aquaculture and human nutrition had been initiated in collaboration with the Department of Fisheries in Zambia and the National Swedish Board of Fisheries.
9. The Programme Aquaculturist gave a separate presentation of the pilot project in Eastern Province of Zambia, elaborating on the participatory approach chosen, the development of extension methods, and the results achieved.
10. The Committee noted that the pilot project in Eastern Province had made considerable progress, gaining experiences which could at a later stage be shared with other countries and providing guidelines for introduction of small-scale rural aquaculture. It noted that the pilot project at this stage had not achieved one of its aims, that of involving women in undertaking fish farming in the Province. It was discussed to what extent special efforts should be undertaken to that end. Food production systems in the region are to a large extent based on the work of women and therefore efforts to actively involve women in aquaculture development efforts should be continued.
11. In discussing the pilot project in more general terms it was emphasized by the Committee that the sustainability of any project activity should be seriously considered, that the viability of fish farming in rural households should be ensured, and that fish farming as one option for rural households to diversify and/or improve food security should be clearly demonstrated.
12. The Committee appreciated that one pilot project had been initiated, and in spite of several shortcomings pointed out by the Committee, had made progress in disseminating information to rural households on fish farming enabling them to decide whether or not to engage in this activity. It noted that the approach chosen, when further tested, would help to ensure sustainability and self-reliance, and that the pilot project was providing guidelines which can be further tested also in other countries.
13. The regional formulation missions were discussed. The delegates from the countries visited expressed their satisfaction with the way the missions had been carried out, basing the work on the priorities expressed by the countries during the First Advisory Committee Meeting. The reports of the missions provide a foundation for the further preparation of pilot activities for a second phase. Zimbabwe noted that the mission, in her case, had not had sufficient time and resources to fulfil her expectations on problem identification, analysis and initial project formulation.
14. In concluding the discussion on the progress report the Committee expressed satisfaction that the work had been carried out according to the work plan endorsed by the First Advisory Committee Meeting and that progress had been made in the major undertakings.
15. An introduction to the discussion of this item was made by the Project Operations Officer for ALCOM who explained the nature of the evaluation team's task and how the team was selected. She summarized the context and conclusions of the report. The Chief, Inland Water Resources and Aquaculture Service, continuing with the introduction, indicated that one of the important issues raised by the evaluators concerned the balance which was desirable between the participatory approach the Programme has been using in the pilot project, and more direct interventions. While the Programme's current approach is aimed at achieving lasting results, the more direct action could lead to quicker results and a more readily quantifiable impact of the Programme in the short term.
16. The Committee appreciated the evaluation exercise which provided a useful source for reflection. The difficulty of obtaining a thorough insight and a correct interpretation of all issues by independent consultants was noted. The representative of Zambia called the Committee's attention to one of the errors in the report regarding the staff available in Zambia for aquaculture as opposed to fisheries extension, and a misunderstanding of the level of support given by the Government to the Programme. He noted that the Government had not been informed of the types and extent of facilities required until the start of the Programme's activities. As soon as these became known, every effort was made to provide them. Nearly two million Kwacha have been made available by Zambia for supporting facilities for the Programme.
17. The representative of the National Swedish Board of Fisheries noted that SIDA regarded the evaluation as a completely independent view of the Programme's work. He stressed that the balance SIDA wanted to see between practical work and investigations had not always been correctly interpreted in the report. He pointed out that the investigations and implementation could in many cases proceed hand-in-hand. He further noted that the experimental element of the Programme was important in finding new and practical means of promoting rural development.
18. While expressing high appreciation for ALCOM's participatory approach at both community and governmental level, the Committee sought clarification on a number of issues raised in the report concerning the aims and activities of the Programme. It was particularly concerned with the emphasis given to investigations as opposed to implementation of the Programme's findings, and with the extent to which the Programme would be able to assure the continued viability and sustainability of any pilot projects it undertakes.
19. The Programme Manager explained that the main aim of ALCOM was to assist members in overcoming the constraints to the development of fish farming in their countries, particularly through identifying and trying new practical approaches. Such assistance would be limited to helping with the formulation of appropriate activities and with identification of other sources of funding for those activities which were not clearly experimental.
20. In further discussion, the Committee noted that each member country faces different problems in achieving advances in aquaculture production. It further emphasized that each country gives rather different priority to the problems which need to be addressed most urgently. While recognizing that ALCOM's limited resources and mandate would not permit it to respond directly to many of these priorities, the Committee felt that ALCOM should pay close attention to these priorities, and give more support to practical demonstration, training and production activities where these were Government priority.
21. The observer from ICLARM remarked that although the evaluators recommended that ALCOM collaborate with other similar programmes, especially in Africa, the evaluators had given little attention to current collaboration in the region or to the ways in which collaboration might be improved.
22. At the Thirteenth SADCC Technical Consultation Meeting on Fisheries and Wildlife held in Gaborone, Botswana, 16–18 March 1988, ALCOM was presented and its scope, nature and approach discussed. The Sub-Committee on Fisheries and Wildlife endorsed the preparatory phase of ALCOM and expressed the hope that SADCC would endorse it.
23. On behalf of the SADCC Coordinator for Fisheries, the delegate from Lesotho read a statement from the SADCC meeting report:
“It was stated that the main objectives of ALCOM Programme are geared towards Rural Aquaculture Development including Inland and Marine Fisheries with emphasis on Southern African countries, despite its inter-regional nature. ALCOM is also strictly for small pilot projects which are compatible with the technological and financial capacities of the rural communities. Emphasis is further given to encouraging information flow between countries in an endeavour to facilitate countries share ideas…
It was strongly emphasized by SADCC delegates that ALCOM Programme should not [only] embark on pilot projects without taking into consideration implementation after the pilot phase. This results in pilot projects being doomed to failure if the national governments cannot afford to finance them.”
24. The Programme Manager presented the Work Plan for 1989. It was pointed out that this was formulated on one hand to conclude the preparatory phase, focusing on the objectives for that phase, and on the other hand to provide the basis for a timely initiation of the second phase. The main elements of the Work Plan were:
finalization of surveys on fish farmers
continuation and expansion of activities in the pilot project in Eastern Province of Zambia
preparation of pilot projects for the second phase
initiation of a pilot project related to intermittent harvesting strategies, and
a technical consultation on aquaculture and human nutrition
The Work Plan is attached as Appendix 4.
25. All countries expressed interest in the concept of aquaculture and human nutrition, since it was felt that the potential role of aquaculture was little understood. The Committee requested the Programme to provide a comprehensive prospectus for the proposed technical consultation meeting. Lesotho offered to host the meeting. It was also proposed that the meeting should be followed up with national meetings, for which ALCOM support was requested, and a second regional meeting after one or two years to review progress made at national level and sharing of information gathered.
26. The concept of, and the need for investigations and pilot activities related to intermittent harvesting were discussed by the Committee. Several countries expressed their interest in participating in and drawing upon the experiences gained in the proposed activities. It was stressed that results obtained in previous research on these harvesting strategies should be fully utilized and that the ALCOM activities should emphasize the potential socio-economic costs and benefits of such strategies and evaluate their long-term impact on the viability of fish farming systems employing them.
27. The other activities proposed in the Work Plan were endorsed by the Committee without further discussion. The Committee did, however, stress that linkages should be pursued with other institutions and projects, such as ICLARM, in elaborating the activities and for the exchange of information and data. The Committee also requested that the Programme should consider supporting the countries in obtaining literature on aquaculture and rural community development.
28. The Committee concluded that the Work Plan was realistic in relation to the resources available and would ensure that the objectives of the preparatory phase were achieved.
29. The Programme Manager presented an outline for a 5-year Programme to follow the preparatory phase of ALCOM. The outline was based on the recommendation of the First Advisory Committee Meeting that the second phase should concentrate on six target areas, and on the consensus reached during that meeting regarding the objectives and approach.
30. The Committee commented on the scope, nature and approach of the second phase, on the six target areas, and the resources needed for the implementation.
31. Recognizing that ALCOM was a programme primarily for elaboration and development of methods and techniques, concern was expressed as to how it will ensure national follow-up of results obtained in pilot projects. The Committee recommended that the programme could initially concentrate on the target areas related to the demonstration of the social and economic opportunities of aquaculture. The Committee emphasized the need for the programme in collaboration with the respective member countries to identify the priority areas for pilot projects, complete their formulation/write-ups to clearly indicate the commitment for their successful implementation by ALCOM and the respective Governments. In this regard, FAO and SIDA are requested to review the terms of reference of ALCOM in order to fully accommodate the interests of the participating countries.
32. The Committee emphasized that a high degree of flexibility should be maintained in the operation of the Programme to enable it to respond to the different and changing needs expressed by the participating countries. This flexibility could be maintained within the frame of the broad target areas identified in the project document, which allows a considerable scope to adapt the pilot activities to the country's declared needs. Detailed Work Plans should be prepared annually and presented for discussion and endorsement by the Advisory Committee. This arrangement would allow the inclusion of new pilot activities as the need arises.
33. The outline for the second phase was prepared immediately after the First Advisory Committee Meeting. It was agreed that the results of the activities carried out during 1988 should be included in the revised project document.
34. The Committee felt that the budget, as presented in outline form, would not allow the desired flexibility in implementation, and it recommended that the budget be revised to provide more funds for operating expenses, and supplies and materials.
35. It was proposed and agreed that the revised project document should include a section on the organization of the Programme and methods of implementing the proposed activities. The section should also reflect the need for the appointment by participating Governments of focal points or national coordinators for programme activities.
36. While appreciating the need for problem identification and surveys as a basis for pilot projects, the Committee felt that the Work Plan, as described in the present document, did not reflect the intended increased emphasis on practical pilot projects during the second phase. The Committee stressed that the proposal, in describing the activities to be undertaken, should give more emphasis to the pilot projects which comprise the main efforts in terms of time and resources and less to the necessary but not so time-consuming studies and reviews. These may be further reduced by making full use of information that can be compiled through collaboration with Governments or with other sources.
37. The ALCOM approach to deal with problems and needs as identified and expressed by the participating countries was highly recommended by the Committee. It was recommended that the role of the Committee should be steering in nature rather than advisory. The representative of FAO expressed reservations regarding the feasibility of implementing this recommendation, and agreed to ask FAO to study its implications.
38. All delegates expressed full endorsement and their Governments' interest in participating in the second phase of ALCOM. Swaziland took the opportunity to inform the meeting that official endorsement of the Programme's preparatory phase had been communicated through official channels.
39. Noting that a headquarters for the Programme must now be established for the second phase, Zambia, Tanzania, Lesotho and Zimbabwe all expressed the interest of their Governments to host the headquarters. It was agreed that discussions would be taken up at a later stage with Governments and the location would be decided as objectively as possible, following the criteria indicated in the report of the evaluation mission, to ensure that the most practical and efficient functions of the Programme could be achieved.
40. The SIDA delegate expressed satisfaction with the orientation, scope and approach of the proposed second phase, which fall well in line with the SIDA policy for support to this type of Programme. SIDA was, at present, not in a position to commit funding for the second phase but would consider the request sympathetically when forthcoming in the light of all of its Programme.
41. The Committee recommended that endorsement by the SADCC Sub-Committee on Fisheries and Wildlife should be sought also for the second phase, and that SADCC be requested by the Sub-Committee to include ALCOM in its Action Plan.
42. The Committee discussed possible funding sources for the second phase. It strongly recommended that in addition to the present donor, other potential donors should be contacted to secure adequate funding for all the Programme's activities.
43. It was agreed that the Third Advisory Committee Meeting should be held at a convenient time to conclude the first phase and provide guidelines for the Work Plan for the following year. September 1989 was tentatively decided upon as the time for the meeting. Lesotho kindly offered to host the meeting. The Committee, expressing its thanks for this invitation, decided that Lesotho would be the venue.
44. There being no other matters the Chairman closed the day's session.
45. The Chairman thanked all participants for the honour given to Zimbabwe in electing her to chair the meeting.
46. The representative of FAO thanked the Government of Zimbabwe on behalf of the executing agency. He praised the good arrangements provided by the Government and by the Committee's Secretariat and commended the participants for their frank, active and constructive contributions which would enable a better implementation of the Programme.
47. On behalf of the donor agency, the representative of SIDA expressed his appreciation for the active engagement of all participants, especially member countries. He thanked the host country for the hospitality and the Secretariat for the excellent preparations and accomplishment of all documentation which had facilitated the Committee's work.
48. The delegate of Zambia thanked, on behalf of the delegates, the Government of Zimbabwe for their hospitality.
49. The Chairman declared the meeting closed, thanking all participants for their interest and for the contributions provided.
