A.1006(25) The Linkage Between the Integrated Technical Co-Operation Programme and the Millennium Development Goals

Resolution A.1006(25)

THE LINKAGE BETWEEN THE INTEGRATED TECHNICAL CO-OPERATION PROGRAMME AND THE MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS

(Adopted on 20 November 2007)

THE ASSEMBLY,

RECALLING Articles 2(e) and 15(k) of the Convention on the International Maritime Organization concerning the functions of the Organization in relation to the facilitation and promotion of technical co-operation,

RECALLING ALSO United Nations General Assembly Resolution A/RES/55/2 on the United Nations Millennium Declaration, which calls for greater policy coherence and better co-operation between the United Nations, its agencies and other multilateral bodies with a view to achieving a fully co-ordinated approach to the problems of peace and development,

RECALLING FURTHER Resolution A/RES/60/1 adopted by the UN General Assembly on the 2005 World Summit Outcome, which calls for action by Member States, civil society, other stakeholders and by the UN system as a whole to be more effective and efficient across the breadth of their agenda and to demonstrate greater coherence in undertaking concrete measures to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs),

RECALLING IN PARTICULAR resolution A.986(24) on the Importance and Funding of Technical Co-operation as a Means to Support the United Nations Millennium Declaration and the MDGs, which requests the Secretary-General to explore sources of funding to support IMO’s contribution to the achievement of the MDGs,

MINDFUL of the obligations and responsibilities of all Member States, including the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing States (SIDS), to implement systems and procedures, in accordance with the instruments to which they are parties, to the best of their abilities and in a co-ordinated way, so as to contribute to their long-term development,

RECOGNIZING the important role that a safe, secure, efficient and environmentally sound shipping and port sector plays in the sustainable development of all States and the achievement of the MDGs,

RECOGNIZING ALSO the enabling role played by IMO in providing an internationally acceptable regulatory framework within which the maritime sector can thrive and contribute to sustainable development,

RECOGNIZING FURTHER the fundamental importance of IMO’s technical co-operation activities, channelled through the Integrated Technical Co-operation Programme (ITCP), in enhancing the capacity of developing countries to implement the aforementioned international regulatory framework,

HAVING CONSIDERED the recommendations of the Technical Co-operation Committee at its fifty-sixth and fifty-seventh sessions on the issue of linkage between the Organization’s ITCP and the MDGs,

1. INVITES Member States and donor organizations to recognize the importance of building maritime capacity in achieving the MDGs and to ensure that consideration is given to the inclusion of the maritime sector in Official Development Assistance (ODA) programmes;

2. INVITES Member States and partner organizations to use IMO as the mechanism for co-ordination in relation to technical co-operation in the maritime sector, so as to ensure strengthened coherence and co-ordination;

3. INVITES Member States to voluntarily utilize the Maritime Capacity Checklist, annex 1, and the Maritime Capacity Analysis tool, annex 2, to analyse and assess the levels of maritime capacity progress in developing maritime capacity over time;

4. REQUESTS the Technical Co-operation Committee to give high priority to those activities, which not only promote the early ratification and effective implementation of IMO instruments but also contribute to the attainment of the MDGs, taking into account the special needs of the LDCs and SIDS, and the particular maritime transport needs of Africa, and ensure that these needs are reflected in the ITCP;

5. ENCOURAGES all IMO Member States and international organizations concerned to provide and, as the case may be, increase their financial and in-kind support for the delivery of the ITCP individually and through bilateral and multilateral development aid programmes;

6. URGES all Member States to make every effort to ensure that technical assistance is acted upon;

7. REQUESTS the Technical Co-operation Committee to keep this resolution, including the annexes, under review and take action as appropriate.

Annex 1.
MARITIME CAPACITY CHECKLIST

1. The Maritime Capacity Checklist shown is a holistic tool that can be modified by individual countries to meet their needs. The proposed key requirement is to provide a systematic ongoing tool that can be used to measure progress in maritime capacity over time. The Maritime Capacity Checklist can be used as a strategic tool complemented by the Maritime Capacity Analysis (MCA) found in annex 2.

2. Measurements of specific business areas/processes should be devised in order to provide a clear input that can be used to target resources for specific improvement.

3. The goal is measurable and overall maritime capacity will require significant improvement in the following areas: Institutional, Security, Human, Economic, Environmental, and Safety.

4. To assess adequacy, the following descriptions may be used:

Poor

Fair

Satisfactory

Good

Very Good

The above-mentioned scale recognizes that realistic targets based on national/regional best practice will help provide useful progress and realistic expectations.

5. To measure priority, the following scale may be used:

Not relevant

Low priority

Medium priority

High priority

6. The indicators shown can be used to evaluate the adequacy of the measures shown. For example, if port delay time and costs are increasing, it would indicate that port infrastructure, procedures, etc. would need to be evaluated.

7. Supporting notes may be formulated nationally or regionally taking into account relevant circumstances.

Type of Capacity	Criteria	Priority	Adequacy	Recommendations
1. Institutional	Institutional capacity should be assessed as a means of supporting good governance and direct realization of: MDG 1 – Reduce poverty and hunger MDG 3 – Empowerment of women MDG 7 – Ensure environmental sustainability MDG 8 – Developing a global partnership for development
1.1	Ratification of international agreements and standards.
1.2	Achievement of an effective and comprehensive legal framework for implementing conventions to which the country is a party.
1.3	Effective maritime administration: Is there a dedicated, well-resourced governmental or semi-governmental unit responsible for maritime administration?
1.4	Institutional capacity to monitor enforcement of laws as flag State (e.g., an inspectorate, coastguard).
1.5	Institutional capacity to monitor enforcement of laws as port State (e.g., an inspectorate, coastguard).
1.6	Legislation on safety of non-Convention vessels including domestic passenger vessels and ferries.
1.7	Legislation on protection of fish stocks by security infrastructure.
1.8	Dedicated maritime budget.
1.9	Inspectors: how many? Sufficient for requirements?
1.10	Coastguard/marine policing capacity.
1.11	For landlocked countries: do agreements exist that facilitate transport through transit corridors?
1.12	Ability to enforce legislation and regulations through due legal process.
1.13	Investigative and police resources, coastguard.
1.14	Prosecutorial resources.
1.15	Courts and dispute resolution (specialized courts of enquiry or Admiralty courts, or sufficient capacity within general courts and dispute resolution procedures).

Type of Capacity	Criteria	Priority	Adequacy	Recommendations
1.16	Maritime lawyers: are there specialist maritime lawyers? Are they organized in an association?
1.17	Completion of voluntary audit.
1.18	Effective legal framework and governmental administration of coastal zones.
1.19	Empowerment of women.
2. Security	Security capacity should be assessed as a means of providing good governance to realize: MDG 1 – Reduce poverty and hunger MDG 3 – Empowerment of women MDG 7 – Ensure environmental sustainability
2.1	Port facilities and vessels in conformity with ISPS requirements.
2.2	Adequate port security measures (sufficient police, legal and private security resources).
2.3	Adequate coastal zone and inland waterway security available for public order and environmental protection.
2.4	For landlocked countries: do security agreements exist to facilitate transit through transit corridors?
2.5	Empowerment of women.

3. Human resources	Human resources capacity should be assessed as a means of realizing: MDG 1 – Reduce poverty and hunger MDG 3 – Empowerment of women MDG 6 – Combat HIV/AIDS MDG 7 – Ensure environmental sustainability
3.1	Sufficient literacy, numeracy and IT skills of all staff at all levels?
3.2	Do foundation skills exist to move to higher level skills?
3.3	If needed, are skills remedial programmes available to maritime transport personnel?
3.4	STCW certificates or local equivalents held as required by seafarers, port personnel: Is there a register of seafarers? Are seafarers required to register?

Type of Capacity	Criteria	Priority	Adequacy	Recommendations
3.5	Managerial and technical competency of staff engaged in shipping and logistics management, e.g., compliance with IMO, ILO, give example. ISO certification?
3.6	Maritime training and education institutions for seagoing skills: Quantity, quality, placement record of graduates?
3.7	Does training for seagoing personnel include HIV/AIDS awareness?
3.8	Maritime training and education institutions for shipping and logistics management: Quantity, quality, placement record of graduates?
3.9	Do formal and informal networks exist to assist seagoing and shoreside graduates in finding employment with international private sector companies?
3.10	Empowerment of women in training and education: students and candidates.
3.11	Empowerment of women in training and education: staff and management.
4. Economic	Economic capacity should be assessed as a means of realizing: MDG 1 – Reduce poverty and hunger MDG 3 – Empowerment of women MDG 8 – Developing a global partnership for development
4.1	Evaluation of the following resources should include public and private sector organizations. For example, if port authorities systematically plan for future requirements, governmental overview may suffice without the need to duplicate the activity.
4.2	Ports: is there a dedicated, well-resourced public or private organization for each port?
4.3	Efficiency, including freight costs, connectivity, port congestion, delays, cargo losses.
4.4	Infrastructure and equipment performance: capacity versus current and forecast requirements, utilization, preventive maintenance, readiness, down time.
4.5	Value-added processes: does the sector assist end users with logistics and supply chain management?

4.6	IT capability and use in operations, commercial and general management functions.
4.7	Does sufficient intermodal access to ports exist? Are bottlenecks identified? Is there a plan to remove them?
4.8	Are facilitation procedures in place to reduce customs and inspection delays?
4.9	For landlocked countries: Is transit corridor capacity sufficient?
4.10	For landlocked countries: are facilitation procedures in place to expedite transit through transit corridors?
4.11	Evaluation of performance: is there a systematic evaluation of current performance as described by above-mentioned economic criteria?
4.12	Planning process: is there a systematic evaluation of future requirements?
4.13	Are there research institutions to improve performance in maritime transport?
4.14	Shipping: Shipping of various types is sufficient to serve economic activities.
4.15	Insurance: sufficient insurance is available to support economic activities at reasonable cost.
4.16	Empowerment of women.
	Indicators used to track economic progress include:
	freight costs as % of GDP;
	liner service connectivity index;
	port congestion, congestion charges, demurrage cost;
	avoidable cargo losses due to inefficient handling and inadequate storage;
	facility utilization and readiness;
	customs and inspection procedures: time requirements; and
	fishing output as proportion of sustainable limits.

Type of Capacity	Criteria	Priority	Adequacy	Recommendations
5. Environmental	Environmental capacity should be assessed as a means of realizing: MDG 3 – Empowerment of women MDG 7 – Ensure environmental sustainability
5.1	Suitable legal framework consistent with international agreements for ports and coastal zones.
5.2	Institutional capacity to monitor the environment (e.g., an inspectorate).
5.3	Institutional systems to prevent, prepare for and respond to pollution from maritime-related incidents.
5.4	Sufficient pollution prevention, control and clean-up equipment available?
5.5	Sufficient training for pollution prevention, control and clean-up among responsible personnel?