Ten Years of GEF Partnerships in Latin America

The Brazilian Experience with the Ballast Water Management

Programme (GloBallast)Ministry of Environment – Brazil

General Comments

General Comments

• The Global Ballast Water Management Programme (GloBallast), in its first phase, was funded by GEF through the UNDP and executed by IMO

• The programme implementation began on 1st March 2000 and was initially scheduled for a period of three years (2000-2003)

• The programme was extended until December 2004 due to the delay for adoption of the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships Ballast Water & Sediments (13 February 2004)

• GloBallast encompassed 06 pilot countries: Brazil, China, India, Iran, South Africa and Ukraine.

• Brazil was selected as the Pilot Country representing South America during the GloBallast Pilot Phase, due to: – (a) the involvement of the Brazilian

delegation with ballast water issues at International Maritime Organization

– (b) the innovative dilution method developed by Petrobras (Brazilian Oil Company)

• The Port of Sepetiba served as a demonstration site. This Port is located on the southern coast of Rio de Janeiro State.

Country Focal Point Arrangements For the Inplementation of GloBallast

in Brazil

National Commision

for IMO Affairs

InternationalMaritime

Organization

GloBallast Programme

(PCU)

Ministry of Environment

(CFP)CFP-A

IBAMA Env StateAgencies

National TaskForce

Supervisor &Consultants

RegionalTask Force

Rio UniversitiesShipownersPetrobras

Ministry of TranspHealthy Authority

NGOs

SepetibaPort

IEAPM/Navy

Golden MusselProject

Golden MusselNat Task Force

IEAPM04 StateUniv

EMBRAPA(Agric)

EnergyAgricult

Fed PoliceWater Res Env Agenc

Main Activities

The main activities were related with:

• Communication/Awareness Raising Activities (Interviews, Press Releases, Folders, Posters, Book on “Ballast Water and Bio-Invasion”, Leaflets, T-shirts)

• Port Baseline Surveys (Species: 1060 found; Crew: 42 taxonomists; New occurrences: 66 for the Port of Sepetiba, 13 for Rio de Janeiro State, 8 for Brazil)

• Risk Analysis (Target Species x Environmental Similarities)• International Seminars (1st International Workshop on

Guidelines and Standards for Ballast Water Sampling, 1st International Workshop on Global Monitoring Systems for Invasive Aquatic Species – both in April 2003)

• Training Package on Ballast Water Management and Control (The delivery and validation of the training package was held in Rio de Janeiro in 2003. The course was developed in cooperation with the TSC Brazil)

• Diplomatic Conference to adopt the New Ballast Water Management Convention (13 February 2004) - Brazil signed the Convention on 25th January 2005, subject to the ratification

Regional Cooperation

• Participation in 03 Meetings of the Working Group No. 6 – Environment from the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUL) to present concerns about ballast water and invasive aquatic species and start a technical cooperation process

• Regional Workshop in Brasilia – DF, Brazil (16 – 28 April 2004) to approve and adopt a Regional Strategic Plan of Action - delegates from Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, PCU and Observers (Chile, Colombia and a NGO)

• Support to Argentinean (Golden Mussel concerns) and Colombian (Pathogenic concerns) scientists and technicians on theirs researches

Diagnosis of the Golden Mussel (Limnoperna fortunei) Invasion

1991

1995 ________

1997_ ____

1998

2001

2001

2002

1998

2003

2004___ ___

BRAZILIANWATERWAYS

US$ Figures

• Amount received from GloBallast:US$ 448,665.03

• Brazilian in-kind contributions and co-financing: US$ 627,935

Conclusions and Lessons

• GloBallast was very important for Awareness Raising on Ballast Water and Invasive Aquatic Species Concerns in Brazil

• The Pilot Countries would need more time to conclude all activities established in the Work Programme

• Confidence between the Parties (PCU x Country Focal Point) is fundamental when executing this kind of Project

• Local concerns and initiatives are so important as Global aims and templates

• Institutional arrangements are fundamentals for national activities

• The support (financial, and information) given to the demonstration site to effectively execute assignments was sufficient, but it could be much better if we had more flexibility and speed to take some decisions

• The close coordination between between GEF and UNDP was not well reflected in Brazil to support the Programme. All the activities were accomplished without any support of UNDP-Brazil

• The programme had a positive impact (locally/nationally/regionally) with respect to reducing the negative environmental impacts associated with ballast waters, mainly regarding the combat and control of the Golden Mussel invasion in the Southwest America internal waters (Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay, Uruguay, etc) 

• it’s very difficult to demonstrate the environmental improvements mainly because GloBallast didn’t develop environmental even physical indicators to check if it was reaching up the goals proposed in the planning phase. Evidently with the tools developed within the Programme and a new regulatory framework, plus the Convention, we can guarantee a better environmental quality. GloBallast help us out to surpass some barriers (technological, institutional, political).

• A set of indicators should be developed for GloBallast Partnerships

• The end of GloBallast weakened our regional activities.

• Directions/Contacts:Directions/Contacts:• Robson José CalixtoRobson José Calixto• Phone: 55 (61) 40091156Phone: 55 (61) 40091156• Fax: 55 (61) 40091759Fax: 55 (61) 40091759• Robson-Robson-

jose.calixto@mma.gov.br orjose.calixto@mma.gov.br or• Jellyfish_7000@yahoo.comJellyfish_7000@yahoo.com