UGA - Support to Quality Assurance for Fish Marketing Project (QAFMP)
| Recipient | Uganda |
|---|---|
| Sector - DAC | Fishery services - 31391 |
| Type of Aid | Project-Type interventions - C01 |
About the project
| Project Number | UGA31391-0901 |
|---|---|
| Partners | Government of Uganda through the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF) |
| Thereof Implementing Agent | Government of Uganda through the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF) and ICEIDA |
| Project Title: | UGA - Support to Quality Assurance for Fish Marketing Project (QAFMP) |
| Short Description: | Quality assurance in fisheries - The main objective of the project is to improve the marketing of fish-products, both national and international, by reducing wasting because of poor quality. The project includes the building up of human resources, capacity building and construction in order to assure quality in fishing and fish processing. |
|
Long Description
The overall objective of the Project is to reduce poverty among fishing communities throughimproved quality and safety of fish for the domestic, regional and export market as well as improving the livelihoods of fish dependent communities. The immediate objective is to increase volume of marketed fish both in the domestic and export markets through reduction in post harvest losses. The following outputs are expected to be reached through the Project activities: • 15 national fish inspectors and 20 district inspectors trained as district- and/or BMU trainers. • 150 BMU´s from prioritized districts around lake Albert and Kyoga received extensive training in fisheries and quality assurance • The national fish inspector's offices and documentation/Rapid Alert System1 centre refurbished, furnished and equipped at the Ice Plant in Bugolobi. • Nine district fisheries offices constructed, refurbished and equipped with transport and inspection means. • Seven fisheries service centres furnished (two of type (A)2 at landing sites in Kalangala and five of type (B)3 in Buliisa, Soroti, Amolatar, Nakasongola and Kamuli districts) including 1 motor cycle each. • Quality Assurance manual for CA prepared for the fisheries inspection services. • 60 lake districts inspectors and 180 community fish inspectors refreshed in quality assurance, inspection and certification procedures and Regional cooperation meetings/study tours attended by 10 inspectors per year • Establishment of selected clean water and sanitation facilities in at least 20 fishing landing sites. • 16 national and 40 district fish inspectors trained in ICT and Information Management • Fisheries inspection database functional (one at central with focal points in each of the 11 districts including Kalangala) • Code of practice for fish farms prepared and 10 aquaculture inspectors and 100 farmers trained. • Code of Practice for artisanal fish processing Prepared |
|
Period
| Commitment Year | 2009 |
|---|---|
| Final Year | 2014 |
Cross-cutting issues
| Gender | Women in fishing communities play important roles in fish processing and marketing activities. They are majority in the artisanal fish processors group that process fish for local and regional markets. They also undertake many of the non-fishing related income-generating activities that compensate for the seasonality and day-to-day variability of fishing. As well as shouldering the major responsibilities for childcare and household tasks, they also often assume responsibility for family food security, health, social and education expenses. Women's income from fish processing and other post-harvest work leads to their active involvement in financing fish catching operations, providing up to 60% of the cash flow needed. This suggests that there is strong potential for further business growth and entrepreneurship by women with improved support and training. Therefore, sensitization, training and support of women, will improve their level of income, which will in turn translate into the communities improved standard of living. Women's participation in resource management and in professional associations or community bodies related to the fisheries sector is usually limited, often because cultural perceptions regard shore-based fishing and post-harvest activities as less important or not as critical to the promotion of the sector. |
|---|---|
| Environment | Over exploitation of natural resources and degradation of ecosystems is becoming increasingly critical in Africa. Increasing population pressure and unsustainable resource use practices are the main causes of this environmental degradation, leading to an unprecedented biodiversity loss from land, freshwater and coastal marine waters. Intensified pressure from commercial but increasingly also artisan fleets has pushed many of Africa's fish stocks to their limits. Estimates from Lake Victoria, suggest that fishing mortality of Nile perch is about 40% above the optimum. Experts urge that unless action is taken, the potential for degradation of the resource is prevalent. To sustain benefits for the millions of poor people who depend on fish for income and food security, innovative responses to over exploitation of fisheries resources are required, including diversification of economic opportunities for small-scale fishers, and enhanced capacity among communities for resource use planning and socially adaptive management of fishing effort. If fisheries are to make their full contribution to Africa's economic development, the poor need to be able to harness a fairer share of the benefits these recources provide. In the decentralized government, the functions of the BMUs are viewed as a tool for improving public accountability, facilitating social and legal empowerment of poor and vulnerable groups and environmental sustainability of natural resource use. |
Documents
| PD | PD | PD | External Evaluations | External Evaluations | External Evaluations | Other Internal Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Uga-QFAMP-Project-Document-2009-2014 | ||||||
Budget
| ICEIDA Amount | $3.411.369 |
|---|---|
| Local Cost | $513.867 |
| Total Project Cost | $3.925.236 |
Aid Effectiveness
| Is this contribution aid to the government sector? | Yes |
|---|---|
| Is this contribution aid to the government sector? | .. |
| Is this contribution aid to the government sector? | .. |
Use of partner country public financial management systems |
|
Use of partner country public financial management systems |
|
Use of partner country public financial management systems |
|
| Are Partner Country budget systems used? | No |
| Are Partner Country budget systems used? | .. |
| Are Partner Country budget systems used? | .. |
| Are partner country financial reporting systems used? | No |
| Are partner country financial reporting systems used? | .. |
| Are partner country financial reporting systems used? | .. |
| Are partner country audit systems used? | No |
| Are partner country audit systems used? | .. |
| Are partner country audit systems used? | .. |
| Are all 3 partner country public financial management systems used? | No |
| Are all 3 partner country public financial management systems used? | .. |
| Are all 3 partner country public financial management systems used? | .. |
| Are partner country procurement systems used? | No |
| Are partner country procurement systems used? | .. |
| Are partner country procurement systems used? | .. |
Use of programme based approaches |
|
| Does the contribution fit within a single programme/budget framework? | Yes |
| Does the contribution fit within a single programme/budget framework? | .. |
| Does the contribution fit within a single programme/budget framework? | .. |
| Is the contribution led by the host country/organisation? | No |
| Is the contribution led by the host country/organisation? | .. |
| Is the contribution led by the host country/organisation? | .. |
| Is there a process for co-ordinating donors? | Yes |
| Is there a process for co-ordinating donors? | .. |
| Is there a process for co-ordinating donors? | .. |
| Are at least 2 partner country systems being used? | No |
| Are at least 2 partner country systems being used? | .. |
| Are at least 2 partner country systems being used? | .. |
| Is this a programme based approach? | No |
| Is this a programme based approach? | .. |
| Is this a programme based approach? | .. |
| Which MDG (MDG´s) is being targeted? | .. |
| Which MDG (MDG´s) is being targeted? | .. |
| Which MDG (MDG´s) is being targeted? | .. |

