determining an african city’s blue economy sttrategy via a ... an african city'… · web...

Determining An African City's Blue Economy Strategy Via A Global Literature Review May 2019, Dr Jack Dyer, Founder of Blue Economy Future.

Contact email [email protected]; Presented on https:\\www.blueeconomyfuture.org.za;

Disclaimer

The following document vision represents only interim conclusions from the perspective of this maritime economist and all intellectual copyright under the 1968 Copyright Act, remains with this author who exerts the moral right of authorship over this paper. Permission to cite/utilise may be offered only through [email protected].

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS............................................................................................................5

1 INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................................7

1.1 Global Blue Economy.............................................................................................................................7

1.2: Africa Blue Economy.................................................................................................................................14

1.3: South Africa and Provincial, Operation Phakisa and eThekwini’s Blue Economy................17

2: REVIEWING INTERNATIONAL BLUE ECONOMY STRATEGIES, POLICIES AND METHOD APPROACHES...............................................................................................................................19

2.1 Regional Strategies: Pacific...................................................................................................................20

2.2 Regional Strategies: Caribbean............................................................................................................21

2.3 Regional Strategies: South America....................................................................................................23

2.3 Regional Strategies: Indian Ocean..................................................................................................25

3: A BLUE ECONOMY FRAMEWORK IN SOUTH AFRICA AND KWAZULU-NATAL...............27

4: CASE STUDIES IN THE BLUE ECONOMY.........................................................................................29

4.1: International Blue Economy Case Studies........................................................................................29

4.2 South African Blue Economy Case Studies.................................................................................32

4.2.1 Aquaculture........................................................................................................................................32

4.2.2 Offshore Oil and Gas Sector...............................................................................................................38

4.2.3 Marine Transport and Manufacturing..................................................................................................40

4.2.4 Coastal and Marine Tourism...............................................................................................................44

5: PUBLIC BLUE ECONOMY INITIATIVES - LOCAL, REGIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL....45

5.1 International.............................................................................................................................................45

5.2 Local and Regional...............................................................................................................................50

6: PRIVATE INITIATIVES - INTERNATIONAL, REGIONAL AND LOCAL......................................52

7: CONCLUSION: A BLUE OCEANS ECONOMY FRAMEWORK FOR ETHEKWINI................55

LIST OF REFERENCES...........................................................................................................................................56

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Table 1.1: Ocean Economy Definitions...........................................................................................................................7

Table 1.2: Ocean and Blue Economy Activities..............................................................................................................8

Table 1.3: Ecological/Economic Functions of Oceans and Blue Economies..................................................................9

Table 1.4: Rival SADC Port Competitors Projected 2013-2033 Demand and Supply..................................................16

Figure I: A Peruvian Blue Economy Method Approach.................................................................................................23

Table 2.1: African Individual Blue Economy Initiatives..................................................................................................26

Figure 4.1: Global Aquaculture Production 1980-2012.................................................................................................34

Figure 4.2: South African Aquaculture Production 1980-2012......................................................................................35

Figure 4.3: South African Fish Processing Industry Sector Market Share 2014...........................................................36

Table 4.1: Operation Phakisa Aquaculture Lab Pilot Project Initiatives 2015-2019+....................................................38

Table 4.2: Operation Phakisa Offshore Oil and Gas Lab Pilot Project Initiatives 2015-2019+.....................................39

Figure 4.4: The South African Merchant Fleet 1985-2015............................................................................................40

Table 4.3 The South African Merchant Fleet 1985-2015........................................................................................41

Table 4.4: Operation Phakisa Marine Transport and Manufacturing Pilot Project Initiatives 2015-2019+....................43

Table 4.5: Operation Phakisa Marine and Coastal Tourism, Pilot Project Initiatives 2015-2019+................................44

Table 5.1: Asia Blue Economy Initiatives......................................................................................................................46

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

ACS Association of Caribbean States

2 | P a g e

Determining an african city’s blue economy sttrategy via a global literature review

AIMS African Integrated Maritime Strategy

ANCORS Australian National Centre for Ocean Resources and Security

AU African Union

BEE Black Economic Empowerment

BRICS Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa

CSIR Council for Scientific and Industrial Research

CSIRO Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

DAFF Department of Agriculture, Forestries and Fisheries

DEA Department of Environmental Affairs

DIA Durban International Airport (former)

DTI Department of Trade and Industry

EU European Union

FAO Food and Agricultural Organisation

FET Further Education and Training

FICCI Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry

GDP Gross Domestic Product

IAPH International Association of Ports and Harbours

ICT Information and Communication Technologies

IMAS Institute of Marine and Antarctic Studies

IMO International Maritime Organisation

KZN KwaZulu-Natal

LAPSSET Lamu Port-South Sudan-Ethiopia-Transport

LNG Liquified Natural Gas

MPA Marine Protected Area

OECD Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development

PEMSEA Partnerships in Environmental Management for the Seas of East Asia

PMAESA Port Management Association of East and Southern Africa

SADC South African Development Community

SAIMI South Africa International Maritime Institute

SAMIC South Africa Maritime Industry Conference

SAMSA South African Maritime Safety Association

3 | P a g e


SAPS South African Police Service

SARS South African Revenue Service

SIDS Small Island Development States

TEU Total Equivalent Units

UN United Nations

UNCLOS United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

UNCTAD United Nations Conference on Trade and Development

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNECA United Nations Economic Commission for Africa

UNEP United Nations Environmental Programme

UK United Kingdom

USA United States of America

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Global Blue Economy

Whilst Africa has historically relied upon agriculture and exploitation of land-based resources, coastal settlements and their economic hinterlands globally are increasingly recognising their dependency on oceans, marine ecosystems and economies. Maritime supply chains and stakeholders contribute over 90% of international trade. The United Nations (UN) recognise that ocean assets are valued at over $24 trillion. More government stakeholders, organisations and individual stakeholders wish to benefit from the projected growth from US $1.5 trillion in

4 | P a g e


economic activity and 31,000,000 direct jobs to over $3 trillion and 45,000,000 jobs between 2010-2030. This literature review specifically defines the scope of the ocean and blue economies internationally, regionally in Africa and locally within the Durban/South Africa context. This specifically aims to assist eThekwini Municipality and other core stakeholders towards developing a holistic, coordinated Durban Blue Oceans, Economic Framework for the most significant ocean/blue economy, port and Maritime Cluster across Africa and the Southern Hemisphere.

Originally stakeholders defined this sector as the ocean, maritime or marine economy; which focused on purely extractive, profit-maximising growth for the short, medium and long term. Several ocean economy activity definitions are summarised in Table 1.1. Many define activities geographically lacking a specifically agreed radius, generally with a direct or indirect physical access to the ocean or economically dependent upon the ocean, sea, lake, coastline, port, ecosystem or activity. For example, Australia’s Great Barrier Reef contributes over $5.7 billion to its coastal tourism economy yearly. Aside from ports and trade; the most significant ocean economy sector activities in terms of macroeconomic contribution include fisheries, offshore oil and gas and tourism.

Historically, sustainability first evolved from the Brundtland Report “focusing on ensuring development today without compromising the interests of future generations.” Sustainable development emerged at the 1992 Rio Summit setting Agenda 21 prior to the Millennium Development Goals. From 2015-2030, the United Nations developed 16 core goals to replace the Millennium Development Goals for poverty reduction and socio-economic advancement at an environmentally sustainable approach for global humanity. More government and maritime stakeholders are increasingly prioritising the transition from direct industrialisation and an extractive ocean economy model, to the emerging “blue economy as catalysts of growth, development, survival and opportunity.” United Nation Sustainable Development Goal 14 specifically concentrates on harnessing oceans. This aims for a more sustainable, long term future through exploiting myriad opportunities. For example, the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) define the blue economy as a “vision of improved well-being and social equity, while significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcity.” The World Bank note it as: “the sustainable use of ocean resources for economic growth, improved livelihoods and jobs, whilst preserving the health of marine and coastal ecosystems.” The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) definition includes “economic activities which produce goods, services and research that seeks to reduce environmental damage to primarily marine environments” (Taylor et. al 2017).

Table 1.1: Ocean Economy Definitions

Country Definition

USA Economic activity which is a) an industry whose definition explicitly ties the activity to the ocean, or b) which is partially related to the ocean and is in a shore-adjacent zip code.

UK Those activities that involve working on or in the sea. Also those activities that are involved in the production of goods or provision of services directly contributing to activities on or in the sea

Australia Ocean based activity either because the ocean resource is the main input or because the access to the ocean is a significant factor in the activity

5 | P a g e


Ireland Economic activity which directly or indirectly uses the sea as an inputChina The sum of all kinds of activities associated with the development, utilisation and

protection of marine resourcesCanada Those industries which are based in Canada’s maritime zones and coastal communities

adjoining these ones or are dependent on activities in these areas for their income.New Zealand Economic activity that takes place in or uses the marine environment, or produce goods

and services necessary for those activities or makes a direct contribution to the national economy

Japan Industry exclusively responsible for the development, use and conservation of the oceansRepublic of Korea Economic activity taking place in the ocean including those using ocean resources as

inputs

Source: UNCTAD 2018.

Blue economy activities and markets are summarised in Table 1.2. They incorporate fisheries and aquaculture, shipping, transport and ports, marine education, training and research, marine, coastal and cruise tourism with recreation, marine construction, offshore oil and gas, navies, marine insurance, finance and business, marine and cargo services. Other emerging sectors include marine protection, security and ocean governance (including drones), renewable energy, biotechnology and sea-bed mining. World Bank and United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs differentiates between exploiting living and non-living resources (2017).

Table 1.2: Ocean and Blue Economy Activities

Ocean Economy Activities Emerging Blue Economy Opportunities

Fisheries, Aquaculture Cabotage Shipping; Transport and Ports Marine finance and insurance; Dry PortsMarine and Cargo Services Undersea mining/BioprospectingNavies - Ocean and Coastal Governance Drones, Robotics/Marine ProtectionOffshore oil and gas Marine Renewable Energy; DesalinationMarine, Cruise Tourism and Recreation Marine Biotechnology; Blue Carbon Education and Training Maritime research and development, Technology e.g. sensorsShip Repair Vessel automation and conversion

Source: This Study based on Taylor et. al 2017; UNECA 2017, World Bank and United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2017; Morillo and Spalding 2018.

Whilst the potential capacity to pursue these activities in a coordinated Blue Oceans Framework varies across climates, marine environments, economic structures, stakeholder demographics, technological access, information and systems, this Literature Review aims to specifically define the scope of blue economy activities through the value or supply chains from point of origin to final consumption/recycling for Ethekwini Municipality. The scope of blue economy activities is not restricted to selective, direct economic extraction by those with the willingness, capacity and resources to do so. It is globally defined to include equity, socially, environmentally and economically sustainable utilisation of marine ecosystems, environments and opportunities for

6 | P a g e


long term livelihoods and optimal welfare. Part of this encapsulates the notion of direct responsibility for the consequences of human actions; often absent in previous ocean related activities. In Europe (UNEP 2016) for example, this includes an Integrated Coastal Zone Mechanism, an Ecosystem Initiative, a Sustainable Consumption and Production Plan along with a revised Mediterranean Strategy for Sustainable Development. Its scope defines the blue economy as all activities dependent on the ocean, its resources and ecosystems.

The World Bank and United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (2017) and UNEP (2016) further extend the concept through the circular economy, which aims to minimise the wasting of finite, scarce resources. It focuses on efficient utilisation. This is especially critical given pressures of a rapidly expanding global population, mass migration movements, economic, social and political fluctuation cycles, pollution and climate change. This challenges Durban and other municipalities or other stakeholders’ capacity to exploit these activities for rapid economic empowerment and ensure effective service delivery. Those pursuing blue economy opportunities, in a coordinated Blue Oceans Economic Framework, therefore focus on minimising adverse externality costs whilst seizing opportunities including evolving technological developments such as the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Increased coordination, focused engagement and awareness across stakeholders and activities is paramount to ensuring effective access, governance, security and resource survival.

Globally the scope of blue economy activities encapsulates the fundamental question of sovereignty - ensuring effective awareness of the potential opportunities and status of each resource or value chain. It includes actual control of the resource and enforcement against those perceiving these maritime assets as part of the ocean economy, for more immediate, (frequently short term) self-interest. Those involved in protecting and governing blue economy resources are increasingly recognising their indirect value and contribution towards socio-economic, environmental and other strategic development objectives as Table 1.3 outlines. Although many nations including South Africa experience significant constraints in prioritising resources, reviewing international blue economy strategies can minimise adverse externality, disruption and opportunity costs. For example, Ebarvia (2016) and World Bank and United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs advise accurately valuing oceanic capital, futureproof against climate change, and map existing and potential blue economy activities (2017).

Table 1.3: Ecological/Economic Functions of Oceans and Blue Economies

Ecological EconomicBiomass/Biodiversity Life Formation and Habitat Life, Food, MaterialConservation Supply of Natural Resources, Reduced ImportsBiological/Physical/Chemical Redundancy against UncertaintyGrowth, Reproduction, Trade, Production, Consumption, Income/ProfitRespiration/Oxygen/Photosynthesis Greenhouse gas mitigation funding/source sinkWater supply/purification. Food security/NutritionProtection Protection – Vulnerability and ResilienceOcean Chemistry, currents, salinity Risk Identification, Monitoring, Prioritisation, AdaptationCoral atolls – geographical physical formation, Risk Enhancement if Ignored – Legal, Reputational,

7 | P a g e


continued growth and survival Insurance, Security, Operational, Impact CostsSand formation, nourishment and sediment OpportunityEvaporation, Condensation and Absorption Insurance against Maladaptation, Climate Regulation –calcification, stratification Future Sustainability and SurvivalCounter eutrophication Knowledge – Existing and Potential/SpiritualDetoxification Stability/Security/ Increased Adaptive CapacityPopulation equilibrium Aesthetic/Cultural/Social

Tourism

Source: This Study.

Pursuing future growth means understanding and not jeopardising existing stakeholders, ecosystems and marine economies which influence ocean health. Earth’s oceans’ heath and blue economy progress is frequently threatened by marine pollution, overpopulation, urbanisation, limited blue economy/carbon finance, climate change and psychological unwillingness to act, among other factors. The 2016 World Ocean Assessment recognised that humanity has overexploited the ocean beyond its ecological threshold capacity. Subsequent developments need to prioritise sustainability and resilience. Part of this scope is recognising the need to facilitate increased awareness and appreciation of the significance and value of the blue economy. The United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) 2015 Blue Growth Initiative especially emphasised food security (FAO 2015) “Eliminating harmful fishing practises and overfishing, ensuring tailor-made measures that foster cooperation between companies, whilst acting as a catalyst for policy evelopment, investment and innovation in support of food security, poverty reduction and the sustainable use of aquatic resources.”

Internationally, ocean governance lacks a formal blue economy strategy and definition internationally recognised, implemented and enforced. Fisheries contributed over $152 billion in direct economic activity in 2017. The scope of the blue economy is increasingly defined globally in relation to all factors which threaten its effective functioning. Therefore greater attention and resources are being invested in blue carbon sequestation, marine protected areas, climateproofing port infrastructure and other pre-emptive efforts to ensure that this sector can remain contributing towards a city, country and stakeholder’s ultimate development and business objectives. Blue carbon sinks are up to five times more effective than global forest counterparts. Offshore renewable energy is increasingly favoured over the emissions of offshoreoil and gas for more conscious consumers and producers. Marine biotechnology with the unknown medicinal/other values of species and sea-bed mining provide further innovative examples of opportunities only emerging comparatively recently over the past decade. Areas include energy, industry, cosmetics, nutrition and pharmaceuticals. This potential to attain greater economic, social and environmental equity has been favoured as needing both mapping an economic value chain and an ecosystem based approach (UNCTAD 2018). UNCTAD define the “blue biotrade” as the maritime/ocean equivalent of the land biotrade “conservation of biodiversity; sustainable use of biodiversity, equitable benefit sharing, socioeconomic sustainability, legal compliance, respect for stakeholder’s rights, clearly defined tenure and access to resources.”

Without a global defined strategy countries, organisations and stakeholders are pursuing their own initiatives, although with a similarly defined scope to the above approach of economic

8 | P a g e


growth, social equity and environmentally sustainable development. Europe identified over 350,000,000 global indirect jobs dependent on the blue economy (European Commission 2017). It considers how many challenges from unemployment to renewable energy to achieving resource and food security, can be resolved by the blue economy. This extends to restoring coastal ecosystems such as mangroves; to ensure we can actually ensure a “business as usual future” given climate change uncertainty. Economist Intelligence Unit (2015) echoes others seeking feasible investment strategies, whilst simultaneously preserving coastal governance. It maintains: “A sustainable ocean economy emerges when economic activity is in balance with the long-term capacity of ocean ecosystems to support this activity and remain resilient and healthy.” Sources do not agree on the proposed method, timeframe, conditions, assumptions, areas, environment or location necessary for a Blue Oceans Economic Framework to sustainably materialise and remain viable. Politics focus more on the blue economy as an economic solution than on sustainability. Nor have existing institutional regulatory frameworks such as the International Seabed Authority; IMO; IAPH, UNCLOS and other international maritime law or stakeholders; evolved to recognise, enforce and secure this evolving paradigm. Many participants still have yet to consider the full risks and possibilities.

Inconsistent definitions also translate to challenges for Ethekwini and other participants to ensure a completely accurate and holistic mapping and measurement of all value chain activities and stakeholders, which will be addressed in Report 3 (Stakeholder Engagement). The framework needs to recognise existing initiatives, failures, risks and opportunities combined with sufficient institutional capacity and awareness of all blue economy aspects. Providing a consistent definition and scope, as this report outlines, further reduces asymmetrical information and uncertainty, so stakeholders can partner synergistically to overcome existing knowledge gaps and other issues from an absence of a Blue Ocean Framework. It will overcome existing ignorance or reluctance to invest and pursue a sustainable blue economy future in Durban, South Africa and Africa. The absence of a framework and a clear vision for the blue economy constrains all hypothetical beneficiaries. UNECA (2017) emphasises the need for this framework to connect to other economic sectors in Africa including employment, education, skills development, technology transfer and beneficiation. It needs to consider multiple users and stakeholders, managing potential conflicts that may emerge. This includes resolving questions of ownership, authority, uncertainty over future impacts and large Exclusive Economic Zones.

Significant political implications exist as the perceived solution to multiple problems (Brent, Barbesgaard and Pedersen 2017) since the 2012 Rio+20 conference highlighting blue ocean growth threats and opportunities. The UN 2013 FAO Growth Initiative and 2013 Global Action Summit further renewed global attention. Yet existing sources and strategies, whilst allocating specific resources to implementing this approach, most commonly fail to mention options on countering risks. Marine spatial planning is increasingly recognised as necessary for effective blue ocean economy governance and protecting the rights of marginalised, vulnerable communities. Small island developing states, with few alternative pathways to development, are especially interested in forming an effective Blue Economy Strategy or framework. President Anote Tong of Kiribati states: “The Ocean plays a pivotal role in the sustainable development of my country. Our vision for achieving sustainable development hinges on the blue economy, on conservation and sustainable management of our marine and ocean resources.” Yet this

9 | P a g e


presents challenges as Tonga, Kiribati and the Cook Islands are evaluating sea-bed mining, without reconciling the paradoxes of marine ecotourism and conservation. Increasingly, the ocean blue economy contains rare resources and minerals needed for a full transition towards a global series of green economies, yet with highly uncertain ecological consequences.

The business and investor sectors are equally starting to register the possibilities of a commercially viable and continuous blue economy with multiple co-benefits (Morillo and Spalding 2018). Nations such as China are focusing on decarbonisation of their economy, linking their perceptions of the blue economy to equivalent land based or “green” activities. OECD estimates exceed US$ 90 trillion. Ocean sinks absorb over 30% of emitted carbon emissions. Europe estimates their Blue Economy to produce around 500 billion euros per year, supporting over 5,4 million jobs (Beedjahur 2016). Seafood profits exceed $4 billion per year. The global blue biotechnology market contributes $5 billion per year but 5% of the total. Key to this has been the development of several integrated stakeholders, legal certainty, technical transfer and expertise, access to finance, blue economy supportive networks and clusters connecting all users, sound institutional capacity and comprehensive frameworks. Europe is also focusing on interviews, surveys and a literature review to establish a database of 228 related projects (Taylor et. al 2017). It follows a similar method approach to Ethekwini Municipality in mapping actors and sectors. Yet many contacted lacked sufficient awareness as to whether their activities constituted part of the blue economy. Others were reluctant to disclose potentially commercially sensitive information. The report highlighted challenges in generating sufficient demand for new products and services, accessing finance, information, market, economic and technical barriers limiting blue economic development. It considered the identification of failures and exchange of best practises as indispensable enablers in developing a successful Framework.

Each separate Table 1.2 activity and associated value chain influences between hundreds of millions to billions of people. Yet these activities have lacked holistic blue economy strategies, universally binding on all stakeholders and for many nations. Accurate valuation, chartering, understanding and protection of these resources is imperative to preserve their future and influence effective decision or policy making. Johnson, Dalton and Masters (2018) identify global value chains, market segments, demand, supply and trends across Europe under the EU Horizon 2020 MARIBE project. They assess operational, regulatory, environmental, financial and product risks inhibiting each sector’s success. As this Literature Review highlights it is essential to identify all related initiatives, so they can be integrated and scaled up into this framework to maximise optimal benefits for each potential participant. ANCORS and Wageningen University (2019) perceive that a blue economy framework needs a social license to operate, contacting and involving as many as possible. It received only 46 survey responses. Challenges currently exist in how frameworks will address individual, organisation and community expectations, needs and priorities, given finite resources or their awareness. Barbesgaard (2018) refers to blue economy growth needing to avoid being merely a power grab for more resources.” It concludes: “Oceans as natural capital, oceans as good business and recognising oceans as integral to SIDS and to small scale fishers’ livelihoods through a thorough valuation of their contribution to entire economies.” (Ebarvia 2016). Therefore, developing a “blue economy framework globally is increasingly defined to apply economic

10 | P a g e


arguments to previous environmental and ethical reasons for pursuing sustainable utilisation of oceans."

1.2: Africa Blue Economy

Global efforts to define and benefit from the new “blue economy” are increasingly mirrored in African stakeholders and Africa-focused institutions. Since 2014, the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA), have perceived its capacity to systematically aid poverty reduction, sustainable development and macroeconomic performance. This also entails sustainable conservation and usage of marine resources (UNECA 2017). Potential participants are advised to foorm inclusive partnerships and cooperation, starting to register the need for frameworks and identify opportunities, especially in conservation, tourism, fisheries, ports, maritime transport and energy. Africa’s largely unchartered maritime domain includes over 13,000,000 km2 of Exclusive Economic Zone as well as 240,000 km2 of lakes with blue economy potential. The source estimated Blue Economy activities can contribute up to 27% of East African nations’ revenue and 33% of exports. Fisheries support the livelihoods of over 730,000 people. Geopolitically, the 2013 African Union’s Agenda 2063 declared:

“Africa’s blue economy shall be a major contributor to continental transformation and growth, advancing knowledge on marine and aquatic biotechnology, the growth of an Africa-wide shipping industry, the development of sea, river and lake transport and fishing, and exploitation and beneficiation of deep sea mineral and other resources.”

The African Development Bank is looking at finance. UNECA 2018 defines the blue economy to specifically incorporate not only ecosystems but cultural and religious perspectives, protection, knowledge and information. It further recognises the roles in ecological economics, conservation (Table 1.2) and in enhancing resilience to climate change, if properly defined, formulated and implemented. 8 African nations are specifically targeting marine protection areas as essential to enable any subsequent blue economy progress (Comoros, Democratic Republic of Congo, Djibouti, Ivory Coast, Madagascar, Mauritius, the Seychelles and South Africa. UNECA mention assisting blue economy frameworks to invest, develop, engage and protect through technical assistance, capacity building, resource knowledge development and strategy support. It further links the blue economy to the 17 Goals of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Therefore the desirable Blue Economy Framework offers:

“An integrated, systematic, dynamic, inclusive, participatory and ecosystem-based approach in which sectoral barriers are minimised at the activity and governance level, and environmental, social and economic dimensions are intertwined and pursued for all blue economy activities,” (UNECA 2018).

Increased trade and investment in blue economy activities are frequently highlighted as the catalysts for effective change. For example, Africa’s GDP could increase by 2% simply from a 25% increase in seaport efficiency (UNECA 2018). The African continent therefore needs to charter existing resources and areas identify areas of underperformance and opportunity, whilst simultaneously investing in the education and institutional capacity to create Blue Ocean

11 | P a g e


Economic Frameworks. It recommends resolving legal uncertainty over all maritime boundaries and resources, investigating blue carbon activities to implement the 2015 Paris Agreement, creating Natural Capital Accounting Systems, tourism marketing and investing in future related research such as an African Blue Economy Atlas. As subsequent sections evaluate, South Africa has responded with Operation Phakisa, producing over 6,400 jobs and R24 billion of investments. Mauritius has a Blue Economy Roadmap, Ministry, National Development Plan and Stakeholder National Ocean Council. It aims for the blue economy to double from 11 to 25%+ by 2025 with a seafood hub, aquaculture, technology, fisheries and cruise tourism. The Seychelles is among the global pioneers in blue economy strategies with its own Blue Economy Ministry, Road Map and University Research Institute. It targeted blue carbon bonds, $21,000,000 debt-for-nature swap and 30% of marine areas to be protected. Kenya hosted a popular Blue Economy Conference in November 2018, revised its Fisheries Ministry to incorporate the blue economy and form a Blue Economy Implementation Committee. Yet, many African nations and stakeholders have yet to consider their blue economic frameworks, transitioning away from the ocean economy (Rustomjee 2018), with limited resources for effective marine governance.

The 2016 Lome Charter specifically emphasises the need for greater investment in maritime security to enforce African sovereignty. In particular, small island, developing states are especially targeted as being capable of gaining from blue economy opportunities, once boundaries are secured and frameworks established. Cape Verde, the Comoros, Guinea Bissau, Mauritius, Sao Tome and Principe along with the Seychelles (UNECA 2014), though vulnerable to resource constraints and other challenges, have expressed interest in their potential to empower coastal communities. Ocean currents, tides, winds and hydropower can resolve electricity restrictions. Their blue biotechnology and genetics market is estimated as hypothetically contributing over $2.4 billion. For example Mauritius sponges possess anti-viral, anti-cancer, anti-tumour and anti-microbial activities. The Seychelles aimed for a Extractive Industries Transparency initiative for offshore oil and gas exploration. It also launched its first blue economy bond in 2017. An $82 million debt-for-nature swap protected 30% of Exclusive Economic Zones from fisheries as a marine protected sanctuary. The source proposes sharing experiences, attracting resources, finance, investing in human capital and environmental impact assessments prior to undertaking any initiative. Existing ports, fisheries, tourism, offshore oil and gas, however, often compete for priority and resources with limited attention as to how these can be synchronised into more sustainable policies, projects and products. Institutional capacity, policies, infrastructure and services also require evaluation in subsequent efforts for a coordinated regional and local Blue Economy Framework, to determine the extent to which these hinder or implement a sustainable future. It identifies challenges including uneven power relationships, limited investment in technical and extension services, poor maintenance, over-regulation and inability to benefit from technology/various stakeholder’s experiences and knowledge.

Although Africa has not proposed a formal blue economy strategy, the value of the ocean/maritime economy sector is implicitly and officially recognised in the 2050 envisioned, African Union Integrated Maritime Strategy (AIMS). Goal I is unlocking the ocean economy. Goal II is engaging with the ocean. Goal III is ‘ensuring healthy, living marine ecosystems.’ Goal IV is ‘contributing to good ocean governance.’ Further implications for SA Shipyards and its

12 | P a g e


competitors include increasing regional government pressure to construct African shipping fleets and pursue cabotage policies to ensure ocean governance, commerce, defence, security and sovereignty over Combined Exclusive Zones of Africa. AIMS 2050 calls for:

‘A tool to address Africa’s maritime challenges for sustainable development and competitiveness, further aiming to foster more wealth creation from Africa’s oceans, seas and waterways by developing a thriving maritime economy and realising the full potential of sea-based activities in an environmentally sustainable manner. The strategy aims to foster overall development and improve independence for African countries.”

Ruppel and Bian (2016) identify that to take back the seas from international fleets, African governments are prioritising cabotage as a strategy regardless of the constraints, challenges and risks. The African Union (AU), through its 2009 African Maritime Transport Charter objectives, include ‘promoting the establishment of national and regional shipping lines and providing them the assistance necessary for their success.’ (Article 8) including legal policies, cooperation, financial incentives and a dedicated specific fund (Article 13). The 2012 African Union, ‘Africa’s Integrated Maritime Strategy,’ specifically challenges governments to support African merchant fleets and become world leading maritime powers by 2050. Article 3:1 states Africa to “Declare, articulate and implement harmonised maritime transport policies capable of promoting sustained growth and development of African Merchant fleets.” The SADC Protocol on Transportation, Communication and Meteorology (Article 8.2) seeks a consistent, coordinated maritime and inland waterway cabotage policy. This includes the promotion of ship owning, ship registration, ship operations and slot chartering, the growth and development of a viable SADC Merchant Shipping Industry including the role of concessions and incentives to improve competitiveness, tonnage capacity in member states, enhanced use of coastal shipping and feeder services and endorsing joint ventures and alliances between ship owners to promote economies of scale, similar to the international liner pooling arrangements. Other African trends include developing regional trade across the BRICS region (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa), encouraging more vessel callers. Nigeria is pursuing its own rapid cabotage policies in developing its fleets. Liberia’s registered shipping fleet is expanding rapidly (3,521 vessels and 3.53% of world total).

Alternative potential exists in the cruise industry, although no formal linkages have been developed to an integrated blue economy or marine tourism framework for any African nation. Sub-Saharan Africa currently has only one cruise terminal and regular cruise company (MSC). Developments are being considered in Cape Town, Durban, Cape Verde and Mombasa. The Indian Ocean Cruise Association, the OECD, (2016) in ‘The Ocean Economy in 2030’, and United Nations Economic Commission for Africa, 2016 have recently indicated it as a future growth chance for the continent’s blue economy. The African Development Bank, New York University Africa House and the Africa Travel Association, (2015), considered unlocking Africa’s tourism potential which in 2014 represented only 5.6% (65.3 million) of the global total of 1.33 billion, over $45.6 billion in revenue, supporting an estimated 8,700,000 Africans in direct employment which cruise tourism can contribute to if sustainably and responsibly managed.

Mozambique discovered 200 trillion cubic feet of offshore gas, increasing offshore gas vessels. Yet, many nations including Gabon and Angola lack their own dock facilities to service the oil and gas industry. There is growing interest by Namibia/Namport in Walvis Bay over repairing

13 | P a g e


oil/gas rigs and fishing vessels. However, aside from Namibia; South Africa and Africa lack suitable floating or dry dock facilities capable of addressing global, regional and local demand market trends. Transnet are currently investigating the feasibility of Africa’s first neo-Panamax or Capesize, floating dock in Richard’s Bay.

Across South Africa and Africa other blue economy opportunities that would especially benefit from the development of regional, national and municipal Blue Oceans Economic Frameworks such as Durban, include myriad African physical port expansions and modernisation programmes. In terms of increasing capacity between 2013 and 2033 no other sector economically could even begin to compete with the opportunities presented by ports and maritime cluster hinterlands from Durban in South Africa to Mombasa, Bagamoyo, Maputo, Port Victoria and Dar es Salaam in East Africa, to Tema and Takoradi ports in West Africa. Table 1.4 illustrates projected container cargo throughput growth in SADC port demand and supply volumes between 2013 and 2033 (Dyer 2015). For example, Durban and Mombasa’s projected port expansion are among two of Africa’s largest current infrastructure projects. These illustrate the potential to transform the local, regional and national economies from a blue economy perspective through associated expenditure, improved infrastructure, services; training and related employment, productivity; revenue, trade, investment and other potential benefits. Although there are always significant social, environmental, opportunity and other associated development costs.

Table 1.4: Rival SADC Port Competitors Projected 2013-2033 Demand and Supply

Source: This Study.1.3: South Africa and Provincial, Operation Phakisa and eThekwini’s Blue Economy

South Africa’s own response to the global blue economy is pursued under Operation Phakisa, launched by former President Jacob Zuma in 2014. Operation Phakisa aims to generate 1,000,000 maritime related jobs by 2030 from 256,000 in 2010, adding R177 billion to GDP. Four target areas of offshore oil and gas with 30 new oil wells; marine transport and ports; industrial aquaculture; maritime manufacturing with ship repair; tourism and 22 new marine protection services/marine protected areas (MPA’s) in 10 years. Opportunities and investments citied under the African Integrated Maritime Strategy and Operation Phakisa including ship repair, maritime education, aquaculture, marine tourism, oil and offshore gas. It claims to maintain and refurbish existing ship repair facilities at all ports. It seeks R2 billion co-funding, targeting 20,000 jobs by 2023 and R6.5 billion projected GDP contribution. Further commitment

14 | P a g e


to the maritime sector, (although not formally defined as a “blue economy strategy” with a specific method framework), is echoed through the 2014 White Paper on National Environmental Management of the Ocean, Comprehensive Maritime Transport Policy 2017 (for marine ecological protection, safety and security); National Transport Master Plan 2050, National Industry Policy Framework (marine manufacturing is especially highlighted), National Transport Policy and KwaZulu-Natal Integrated Maritime Strategy. It extends to the forthcoming eThekwini Blue Ocean Economic Framework and 2030 National Development Plan and New Growth Path. The South African Maritime Safety Authority (SAMSA 2013) proposed utilising African shipping and coastal trade to support infrastructure development and the growth of the African maritime economy. South Africa has also signed a Memorandum of Understanding with China in regard to the ocean economy.

The national port authority, Transnet, is undertaking expansions for 7 ports including more dredgers, tugs and pilots requiring servicing and construction. Durban’s future as the most significant of African ports is challenged further by the ascendency of Post-Panamax size vessels (over 350 metres long, with up to 12,000 containers and a 170,000 deadweight ton carrying capacity), with the potential for ever greater economies of scale, efficiency and productivity, but also increased externality costs for users and seaports able to permit their entry. Its existing port capacity denies their potential macroeconomic benefits, especially from significant forecasted international trade growth and possible container demand exceeding 12 million TEUs by 2044 (Dyer 2015). Geophysically, Durban’s present harbour cannot expand, currently encircled by the city and the Indian Ocean. Transnet has committed to investing a total of R250 billion up to 2050, to convert the former Durban International Airport (DIA) and even potentially the Bayhead Basin, railway marshalling yard sites into further dugout port extensions to reach an annual 20 million TEUs of cargo handling capacity. Until 2019, R33 billion will be invested in enhancing existing port container throughput capacity to its maximum potential of handling 4.8 million TEUs at most, as another constraint requiring a physical port expansion. While these may potentially resolve current problems of port-related capacity constraints; the DIA site alone is projected to cost R100 billion over the next twenty five years to develop. Due to budgetary; environmental, zoning and local community tensions; this development has been paused. Yet Transnet still propose to invest R229 billion in overall infrastructure and services, excluding R750-R800 million in education and training. SA Navy plans exist to refurbish the Naval Station at Durban’s Salisbury Island, currently home to 4 vessels, to a full naval base, after being demoted in 2002.

Although many policy documents and initiatives in South Africa lack specific reference to the blue economy, the need for specific clusters and collaborative frameworks was highlighted at a 2017 South African Maritime Industry Conference in Port Elizabeth (SAMIC 2017). The report estimated Operation Phakisa had directly established over 6,952 jobs and R7,323 billion of investment from 2014-2017, in addition to a currently sustained 427,000 jobs. It also proposes empowering women and youth. Maritime skills, research and training initiatives have been undertaken by SAIMI, SAMSA, Department of Transport and various other stakeholders (Dyer 2017). However only 203 seafarer cadets currently exist. In 2014 a South African International Maritime Institute was also founded to cooperate with Operation Phakisa under the Presidency, in spearheading the ocean/blue economy. Specific projects included the refurbishment of 12 small fishing harbours, new Aquaculture, Marine Spatial Planning and Cabotage Bills; acquiring

15 | P a g e


the SA Agulhas for seafarers and other initiatives. In 2015 Vuka Marine Holdings registered the first 4 South African owned cargo ships since 2009. COEGA are investing in an LNG to Power Plant and terminal, Cape Town its Burgen fuel storage, whilst SA Shipyards are building a 147 metre LNG barge in Durban. Bunkerage services, Durban and Cape Town Cruise terminals and a Marine Tourism Framework have also been investigated separately, although not specifically mentioning the blue economy. As Section 1.4 will evaluate, 35 aquaculture projects have been attempted along with an Aquaculture Development Fund and Development Zones. DEA are forming a National Oceans and Coast Information System. CSIR have published a centralised Maritime Research, Innovation and Knowledge Road Map and document of core blue economy stakeholder contacts. SAMIC (2017) conclude in the need to connect all stakeholders to minimise maladaptation, inaction and opportunity costs or superfluous duplication and wastage of resources. Popular participation and awareness are regarded as imperative for a blue economy framework, as Transnet are pioneering with its inaugural Port Festivals.

2: REVIEWING INTERNATIONAL BLUE ECONOMY STRATEGIES, POLICIES AND METHOD APPROACHES

In order for eThekwini Municipality and other stakeholders to create the most effective Blue Oceans Economic Framework, this section critically evaluates global blue economy strategies, policies and method approaches. This further aims to ensure that the most efficient, sustainable, cost-effective and capable strategy is attained.

The Panorama Strategy aims to further scale up initiatives to benefit from international partnerships with Japan, Norway and BRICS (SAMIC 2017). Europe pioneered this with the 2012 Blue Growth Strategy for smart, inclusive growth. The Mediterranean have launched the BLUEMED Initiative to maximise related employment, centralise information and form a joint stakeholder contact network (UNEP 2016). The blue economy extends to over 600 ports, 1 billion euros in marine biotechnology; 90 billion in port revenue and 550,000 direct related jobs. The source especially includes fisheries, tourism; maritime transport, infrastructure, renewable energy, biotechnology and seabed mining. It focuses on connecting previously separated economic activities and research areas, strengthening education and effective environmental governance, closely aligning objectives to the UN Sustainable Development Goals. This includes resilient infrastructure and systems, stimulating innovation, sustainable procurement, consumption, production and industrialisation, especially in marine and coastal areas. This extends to incorporating marine spatial planning and annexing technological maritime innovation such as for the 4th industrial Revolution. It includes reducing adverse externality costs (i.e. noise; light; smell; pollution; litter) and preserving Mediterranean biodiversity and cultural heritage costs as much as possible. It partially includes depolluting the Mediterranean and historic impacts, extending beyond the global definition of blue economy activities striving towards future ecological sustainability. As for Ethekwini Municipality, limited sub-regional and municipal data exists, as activities and stakeholders are mostly aggregated at a national and regional level for the blue economy, complicating comparison evaluation efforts between initiatives and strategies. A coordinated policy framework will have to synchronise multiple diverse stakeholder requirements and perspectives.

16 | P a g e


The Norwegian Arctic approach to a Blue Economy Strategy further correlates national objectives to the Sustainable Development Goals (Rustad 2019) in relation to the biosphere, society, economy and partnership between stakeholders. It specifically focuses on geo-spatial mapping and identification of all local problems, stakeholders, activities and initiatives as a prelude to being able to prioritise developments. The ocean industry sector was selected as contributing at least 20% of employment with significant aquaculture, bioprospecting, oil, gas and cruise tourism potential. The USA are monitoring progress with the recently formed National Ocean and Coastal Economics Monitoring programme. Alternatively, Washington State specifically aims to be the geographic centre to attract all blue economy sectors in the USA by 2050 through specific investor friendly marketing solutions, infrastructure partnerships, tax initiatives, research and development tax credits (Sewell 2018). It aspires to: “The development of maritime business, technology and practises that promote a sustainable future contributing to ecological health, thriving communities and economic growth.” As part of this it is selecting the development of entrepreneurs, incubation and commercialisation hubs and workforce education. One prototype included electrifying of three ferries, saving 9.5% in total ferry emissions and 3.2 million litres of fuel per year. It recognises the significance of networking, creating a Maritime Innovation Centre, Port decarbonisation and fiscal incentives such as a Clean Energy Fund and Carbon Tax.

2.1 Regional Strategies: Pacific

The South Pacific are targeting the blue economy with its own Blue Economy Conference and Ocean Pathway initiative in 2017 among stakeholders towards attaining UN Sustainable Development Goal 14 (Pacific Islands Development Forum, 2018). Its policies specifically concentrate on ensuring protection of marine and coastal ecosystems (160 voluntary commitments); countering climate change, marine pollution (540 voluntary commitments) and ocean acidification and cultivating fisheries/other blue growth initiatives. It emphasises cultivating research capacity and implementing international maritime law. It also expressed concern that only 5% of ocean territory had been adequately chartered and few existing stakeholders and networks were meaningfully engaged to sufficiently understand the context, risks and potential prospects of a Pacific blue economy. Melanesia alone is estimated as containing over $5.4 billion of blue economy assets each year. The source defined a sustainable blue economy as one which “the use of our oceans today enhances rather than undermines natural capital and does not compromise the ability of future generations to generate cultural, social and economic wealth.” It involves decisive actions against any existing or potential threats to this ability. Governments need to mobilise sufficient resources and reform policies with regional and national steering committees to ensure blue economic growth is meaningful and possible including awareness. Pacific Islands Development Forum (2018) proposes private sector engagement including a Pacific Region Ocean Business Leadership coalition, awareness campaigns and stakeholder awareness sessions. It calls for locally devised enterprise development, research, strategies and policies, rather than being externally imposed, recognising existing information limitations. It maintains that trust, transparency, accountability and responsible, responsive leadership are indispensable enablers for blue economy growth.

17 | P a g e


The Philippines are particularly conscious of ensuring a potent blue economy framework capable of safeguarding its existing $966.8 billion contribution to the national economy (Azanza et. al 2017). It possesses over 26,000 kilometres of coral reef with 3,053 fish, 800 seaweed and 500 coral species. It estimated over $1.5 trillion in ecosystem service based valuation of marine resources capturing total economic, option and non-use values. In contrast, India favour a more commercially orientated, blue economy vision until 2025 (FICCI 2017). The initial 2016 maritime India Summit attracted over $13 billion in port and logistics related investments. It directly concentrates on marine fishing ($5.05 billion in 2016), biotechnology, mining, tourism and leisure, construction, renewable energy, ICT, commerce, education and research, manufacturing, shipping, ports and logistics. It has a direct task Force and stakeholder engagement process to establish a road map, business plan and outcome reports. India’s interpretation of the blue economy includes: “marine-based economic development that leads to improved human well-being and social equity while significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcities.” Yet existing maritime education and training has yet to integrate core blue economy concepts such as sustainable development, ethics and social responsibility. India is currently investigating an Indian Ocean regional approach, rather than developing its framework in isolation, aware of how neighbouring nations and others internationally may affect the extent to which its own strategy will have a successful outcome. In 2014 Bangladesh also sought this via its “Bay of Bengal Partnership for the Blue Economy for nearly 30 million affected value chain participants.”

China’s Five Year National Plan for the Marine Economy includes smart ports, territorial claims and artificial islands, the great Undersea Wall, seabed mining, underwater research stations and residences, submarines, ship repair yards and icebreakers. This aims to extend upon the 35.9 million people directly employed by the blue economy sector, yet has initiated geopolitical tensions around its Exclusive Economic Zone with Japan, the US, Vietnam, Russia, Korea and the Philippines.

2.2 Regional Strategies: Caribbean

The Caribbean’s blue economy strategy approach has been to focus on ensuring the maritime sector can provide the similar job substitution from the coal-based brown economy, quality of life and social development benefits such as poverty eradication as the green economy (Rustomjee 2015). Higher GDP growth is specifically targeted by the Commonwealth from increased food security from renewable fisheries and a higher proportion of GDP with employment from ocean related sources. Whilst South Africa and Durban have no locally registered trawlers, the Caribbean hosts over 25,000 with over $700 million in economic contribution. Yet 35% of stocks are overexploited and need preservation for the future. Limited aquaculture exists as a substitute. Marine Tourism contributes over 75% of regional GDP. The Panama Canal represents a major transhipment hub. The strategy specifically emphasises the benefits of import substitution, energy security, balanced economic growth, disaster risk and climate change mitigation. The 2013 Caribbean Climate Initiative formally recognised this need to accelerate marine environment conservation as 20% by 2020 and was immediately ratified by 9 nations. Significant biodiversity exists from over 12,000 fish and 13,000 unique plant species. The Eastern Caribbean Regional Oceans Policy and Action Plan presents a coordinated

18 | P a g e


response to marine spatial planning and use. Sustainable finance and blue economy entrepreneur incubation hubs are pursued by the UNDP Accelerator Lab/Ministry of Blue Economy in Barbados and the Branson Centre of Entrepreneurship in Jamaica. Richard Branson has also favoured a Carbon War Room to convert Caribbean economies away from fossil fuels. Grenada is forming a Blue Growth Masterplan preserving 25% of its marine environment areas by 2020 plus a Blue Growth and Oceans Governance Institute. A Blue Network to capitalise on innovation and networking collaboration is being formed. Barbuda are forming a community blue economy and integrated coastal zone management strategy via the Blue Halo Initiative.

The Caribbean, however has experienced significant barriers to creating these blue oceans economic frameworks including limited experienced and trained professionals; access to finance; insufficient planning and policies, access to technology, markets, infrastructure, lack of global bargaining power and sovereignty. Limited research capacity exists. Planning for future risks and challenges is not apparent in existing policies, often being reactive rather than proactively anticipating risk events. In 2017 Hurricanes Irma and Mike caused losses of 350% of the British Virgin Islands, 224% of Dominica’s and 51% of the Turk and Caicos Islands’ GDP. Existing approaches lack connections, coordinating each other, as in the South Pacific. Challenges exist as to how sustainable certain activities such as cruise tourism, already operating at high volumes, can be for certain small ports and island communities, if not responsibly managed. From 2007-2017, cruise tourism stakeholders increased by 75% to 29.3 million passengers. Yachting provides up to 53% of British Virgin Island visitor revenue. In response, the Commonwealth recognised seven enablers of Blue Growth that its strategies and methods would need to ensure. These include a healthy, resilient and productive marine environment; infrastructure; technology, research and development; business development, investment and finance; maritime surveillance and enforcement; education and capacity building and ocean governance. It entails decisive leadership; economic diversification, integrated cross-sectional marine spatial and environmental planning, security and engagement in activities. The greater the awareness, will and capacity, the more inclined blue economy stakeholders are to cooperate and participate, the more efficacious, any blue economy framework is proven to be.

Blue Economy access to finance has been established as one of the most significant challenges that any Blue Oceans Economic Framework needs to secure. This is recognised in the Caribbean aiming to promote investment market friendly and entrepreneurial initiatives, given governments alone cannot sufficiently secure this future without private sector willingness to become involved and commit (Caribbean Development Bank 2018). Existing coral reefs decreased over 30% and 70% of beaches are experiencing significant erosion. Renewable energy only comprises 20% of the average total Caribbean power sources. High opportunity and inaction costs exist in favouring a “business as usual” approach. Therefore, states are seeing to reduce moral hazard and asymmetrical information constraints for businesses and individuals. Initiatives such as the 2009 Caribbean Large Marine Ecosystem Project and the Caribbean Regional Oceanscape Project further strive to accomplish this through a formal knowledge hub and evaluation of policies to coordinate effective blue economy growth. A Caribbean Catastrophe Risk Insurance Facility and Oceans and Aquaculture Sustainability Facility have also been prepared. Finance options include climate funds, impact and blue bonds, debt swaps, aid, crowdsourcing, diaspora funding and remittances; insurance, blended

19 | P a g e


financing, taxes and tourism/conservation levies and sovereign wealth funds. These need to be accompanied by ring-fenced safeguarding measures to ensure transparency and accountability so funds are channelled off directly into blue economy related policies.

The Caribbean has undertaken various initiatives to establish ocean governance and the blue economy. These are becoming more integrated into existing instruments such as the Caribbean Regional Fisheries Mechanism (Singh 2016), a Regional Food and Nutrition Strategy and Community Climate Change Centre. 35.5% of global cruise tourism occurs in the region contributing over $30 billion to economies. Each cruise ship passenger contributed on average $222-300 per visit, a total of $2.4 billion, but very rarely came back as a stayover visitor (ACS Directorate of Sustainable Tourism 2016). Existing efforts are directed towards scaling up individual ecosystem, marine protected areas, tourism and other projects to be more effective nationally and regionally. These aim to reduce vulnerability and enhance resilience of coastal communities. Barbados’s ocean economy strategy echoes those of Antigua and Barbuda, the Bahamas, St Kitts and Nevis, St Lucia plus St Vincent and the Grenadines, in enforcing governance over their existing and extended Exclusive Economic Zones (Davies 2018). It focuses on valuation and chartering; then determining action plans the prioritisation of core resources and targets. They have pledged common enforcement, monitoring, awareness and assistance via a Commonwealth Blue Charter. The World Bank echoes the need to target threats first, interested in the macroeconomic potential of what it terms “natural capital,” supporting business supply chain resources and livelihoods simultaneously, ultimately conserving it so it can be expanded for further future production and consumption (World Bank 2017). It argues the economic benefit of ecosystem restoration and promoting responsibility for the consequences of our decisions and actions. Core investment principles it targets in its blue economy approach include: Sustainable Development, Sustainable Livelihoods; ensuring marine ecosystem health; Integrated Ocean Governance; Science based precautionary and effective adaptive decision making. It extends to duty of care and accountability; ecosystem-based management approach along with ocean solutions that will reduce climate change risks and allow the development of climate change related opportunities.

2.3 Regional Strategies: South America

In contrast to other Regions, South America remains one of the increasingly few along with Russia and the Middle East that expresses minimal interest or active involvement in formulating an approach to the blue economy. This absence was identified for Peru, who continues to favour a more extractive approach to fishery exports, helping to undermine global progress (McKinley et al. 2018). 86% of fisheries are industrial and Peru is ranked among the top global exporters of wild fishmeal and fisheries products. A workshop of only 44 stakeholders particularly focused on the blue economy, tourism and transport as one of the few sources to refer to forging a blue oceans economic framework or method approach. It seeks greater awareness and active involvement with global concerns; given increased reputational and other risks in not favouring the same direction as many other global nations. It recommends forming a greater marine protected area network and ecosystem impact assessment of current sectors as an initial step forward. Increasingly it utilises the concept of the more familiar green and low carbon economies, to adapt towards the Peruvian blue economy, but with a similarly defined scope as the global blue economy as illustrated in Figure I. Peru’s existing 1992 Fisheries Laws

20 | P a g e


and other institutional frameworks are perceived as increasingly ineffective to secure these components, preserve biodiversity and natural resources for forthcoming generations. Tourism and the guano industry have also lacked equivalent attempts to connect directly to a more sustainable, long term planning approach. It further aims to investigate more individual blue economy value chain sectors along with people’s awareness and psychological perspectives; in order to consciously influence enduring behavioural changes.

Figure 1.1: A Peruvian Blue Economy Method Approach

Source: McKinley et. al 2018.

2.3 Regional Strategies: Indian Ocean

Although not formally aligned to national, regional or local blue economy initiatives, Africa stakeholders are pursing various related projects such as a New Suez Canal and ports in Lamu, Bagamoyo, Badagry, Boegoebaai, Lekki and Kribi (UNECA 2017) with value chains and multiplier benefits towards employment, development and related developments. E-commerce (growing from $8 billion in 2013 to 18 billion in 2018) and the 4th Industrial Revolution also need to be core parts of any framework or policy initiative concerning the maritime sector. These need to be specifically integrated into policies and Blue Oceans Economic Frameworks such as those of Durban port and Operation Phakisa for eThekwini’s equivalent strategy. Logistics costs, poor maritime connectivity and maintained infrastructure, high logistics costs and cargo dwell time hinder development of seaborne and lake trade. Few fleets exist for effective cabotage and ship repair facilities are present. Whilst no African nation is ranked in the top 35 shipowner countries, more are favouring local and pan-African fleets. Tourism supports over 22,000,000

21 | P a g e


jobs and 8.5% of continent GDP, 95% situated in coastal nations with blue economy potential. Fisheries contributed over $6.5 billion to exports but lost another $1.5-$2 billion in poaching. Ghana has enacted the first prototype wave generating energy source in Africa, producing 100 megawatts. Yet most of Africa lacks the technological, skills and financial capacity to engage with marine renewable energy and other emergent areas. A Mauritius Ocean Economy Strategy (Kelleher 2015) devised seven principles of Economic Efficiency; greater Equity and Social Justice; Ensure Ecological Sustainability; Social Partnership; Safety and Security of People by the Sea; Compliance with International Instruments along with Facilitate Ocean Knowledge and Understanding. It created seven clusters and an Ocean Economy Ministry.

A West Indian Ocean Strategy for the blue economy including African nations (Kelleher 2015) is defined as “marine-based, environmentally sustainable economic growth and social wellbeing.” Its prime objectives emphasise the need to measure the blue economy prior to identifying more efficient and viable principles capable of accelerating their contribution to various ecological, political, social and economic targets of stakeholders. A greater regional knowledge network and connectivity are viewed as necessary. The challenge exists in creating a regional framework to encapsulate cross-national areas, beyond individual territorial jurisdiction on the high seas, averting the “tragedy of the commons” or “moral hazard” concern over collective access to resources. It proposes GDP as a measure needs to consider one metric monitoring the state of natural blue or ocean capital and another measuring socio-economic distribution effects of blue economy benefits. A framework needs too entail these benefits remain protected; costs are minimised as much as possible and equitably distributed. Access to funding is necessary. Actions need to reconcile multiple participant’s agendas with blue economy priorities for conflict resolution. It further anticipates forming a response to the reactions of existing extractive industries which may refuse to adapt, resisting change. These may undermine efforts to enhance sustainability and the circular economy.

The Seychelles Blue Economy Strategic Policy Framework and Roadmap (Commonwealth Secretariat, 2018), aim to implement a blue economy vision by 2030 linked to the Paris Agreement on Climate Change and 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda. “The Blue Economy vision is to develop a blue economy as a means of realising the nation’s development potential through innovation, knowledge led approach, being mindful of the need to conserve the integrity of the Seychelles marine environment and heritage for present and future generations.” Its 4 central goals include economic diversification and resilience; shared prosperity through high value jobs and local investment opportunities; food security and wellbeing; integrity of habitats and ecosystem services through sustainable use. As part of this framework, its methods specifically aspire towards economic efficiency, sustainability, social equity, good governance, resilience, research and innovation combined with partnerships across all stakeholders. It requires proactive risk management, investigating and exploring new opportunities. Ecosystem based accounting is considered a capable tool of attaining its optimal marine spatial planning approach by 2020. Its decision to incorporate a monitoring review mechanism will enable it to continuously modify its blue economy framework to ensure it attains the above goals and Sustainable Development Goals continuously; which many other international strategy methods lack.

22 | P a g e


In contrast Kenya are determined to prioritise economic growth, without specific reference to how its marine environment will be protected. It specifically targets fisheries and aquaculture; maritime transport, ports and logistics services; extractive industries and culture, tourism, leisure and lifestyle (Omingo 2017). Its prime instrument emphasises the need for maritime safety and security to preserve territorial and resource integrity. It emphasises linkages towards the African Maritime Development Agenda investing in maritime infrastructure and industry. Government cargo is worth $0.14 billion, providing options of 54,570 containers to support a domestic shipping company. In 2015, marine tourism contributed $0.6 billion to the Kenyan economy; fisheries $0.5 billion and maritime transport/ports $0.73 billion. Specific projects include Mombasa and Lamu’s port expansions, a national shipping line and aquaculture. Inland aquaculture established 48,000 ponds, 3,000 Lake Victoria cages supporting 2,000 jobs, 4 mini processing facilities and 5 billion Kenyan shillings. It dreams of African fish consumption averages increasing from 4.6 kg to 10 kg per year. Aquaculture only contributes less than 1% to GDP but expanded from 4,452 tons in 2008 to 18,700 in 2015. It is also focusing on reducing the cost of seed, seaweed, cosmetics, feeds and other inputs The Blue Economy Presidential Task Force targeted Kilifi, Shimoni and Lamu fishing ports plus enabling human resources aiming for 10,000 seafarers.

Kenya also hosted Africa’s first Blue Economy and International Association of Maritime Economists Conferences. It is aiming for a new repair industry, marine cargo insurance and Maritime Cluster Development Funds to create an extra $4.3 billion to Kenya’s GDP by 2019. However, certain concerns have been highlighted (Benkstein 2018) about how nations such as Kenya can afford to ensure capable governance and sovereignty; social cooperation; economic inclusion and ecological protection). For example, piracy cost Kenya $300-400 million from 2008-2012, while illegal fisheries poaching cost over $100 million per year. 4,600 local fishermen were paid $17,500,000 and promised LAPSSET training, in response to a court judgement over rapidly expanding Lamu port. Further individual stakeholder and organisation responses that can be classified as African blue economy initiatives are summarised in Table 2.1

Table 2.1: African Individual Blue Economy Initiatives

Project Name Countries Involved AimBlue Ventures Madagascar Blue carbon and marine

conservationMikoko Pamoja Mangrove Carbon Conservation Project

Kenya Carbon and marine conservation provide >$12,000 revenue

23 | P a g e


ASCLME (Agulhas and Somali Large Marine Ecosystem)

Comoros, Kenya, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mozambique, Seychelles, Tanzania

Marine Ecosystem Protection

Nairobi Convention Clearing House Mechanism

Comoros, Kenya, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mozambique, Seychelles, Reunion, Tanzania

Marine Knowledge and Research

ODINAFRICA (Ocean Data and Information Network for Africa).

Comoros, Kenya, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mozambique, Seychelles, Reunion, Tanzania

Marine Knowledge and Research

COAST-MAP-IO Comoros, Kenya, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mozambique, Reunion, Tanzania

Data collection and marine surveillance/exploration

TRANSMAP (Transboundary Network for Sustainable Marine Protected Areas

Mozambique, South Africa, Tanzania, Marine Protected Areas

WIOFISH Database Kenya, Mozambique, Seychelles, Tanzania, South Africa

Fisheries

WWF Coastal East Africa Initiative

Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique Community based natural resource management

Source: Author Derived from UNECA, 2017,

3: A BLUE ECONOMY FRAMEWORK IN SOUTH AFRICA AND KWAZULU-NATAL

Although South Africa does not currently possess a national, provincial or municipal framework with direct reference to the blue economy, this report proposes specifically identifying and reviewing existing marine/maritime/ocean economy policies that could facilitate Operation Phakisa if directly integrated into future strategies such as the eThekwini Blue Oceans Economic Framework. This would provide clearer awareness and focus for existing stakeholders, policies, institutions and resources to concentrate on the previously cited global and African objectives of the blue economy and Sustainable Development Goals. This would avert further squandering of finite resources and priorities; prior to subsequently identifying existing and potential case studies related to the blue economy for South Africa, KZN and Durban directly in subsequent sections. For example, sound socio-ecological resilience is advised as imperative to secure marine ecosystem protection capable of transforming South Africa towards the long-term blue economy. A minimum of 10% of its continental maritime domain is advised to be protected by 2020 and 30% by 2030 (Harris and Lombard 2018). South Africa needs to ensure its new Marine Spatial Planning Bill and proposed investments in navy and coastal protection are sufficiently adequate to protect any existing or future investment in a blue economy framework and associated activities under Operation Phakisa. Existing fisheries still need adequate monitoring to avoid a several decade, historic decline, especially for KwaZulu-Natal.

To enable a capable framework for South Africa, a coordinated and integrated coastal/ocean governance approach for South Africa connecting all stakeholders and policies needs to be established with specific reference to the blue economy, climate change, marine biodiversity, pollution, UNCLOS and other international obligations. This needs to connect to sound ocean risk awareness, information and environmental protection or ecological rehabilitation. South Africa’s Marine and Antarctic Research Strategy (Klarenbeeck 2016), although consistent with many blue economy principles, is weakened as a coordinating mechanism through specifically ignoring its definition, scope and principles. It aims to ensure the capable management and

24 | P a g e


survival of marine and polar resources in order to facilitate research, improve South African’s quality of life, create employment and inform society of their intrinsic value in conservation. It prioritises ocean and marine ecosystems under climate change; Earth systems observations; Ecosystems, biodiversity and bio-discovery; human enterprise; innovation and development. Its aims - to devise national marine and coastal information systems, networks and infrastructure - could be correlated with international methods towards the blue economy, proposing an initial quantification of all potential benefits, values and risks for the marine environment, prior to developing a sustainable pathway forward. It has previously invested in research vessels, bases, robotic arrays, drones, satellites, technology and laboratories to aid understanding. It is investigating the marine bio-economy and has possibilities of generating innovation in other Operation Phakisa and blue economy emerging areas.

Although South Africa does not specifically connect to the blue economy, it has undertaken several strategies and research sources focusing specifically on maritime human capital, education and training as essential towards developing Operation Phakisa. These need effective reviewing to specifically ensure participants are sufficiently aware, experienced and qualified towards all requirements and priorities of eThekwini’s and other Blue Ocean Economic Frameworks both nationally and globally. One maritime sector skills report identified the existing scarcity of educational capacity to create Operation Phakisa without sufficient, subsequent investment (Human Resources Development Council of South Africa, 2014). It reviewed existing institutions including the 2015 proposed South Africa International Maritime Institute, originally envisioned as the progenitor of maritime education and research across South Africa. It advised more specialised qualifications, maritime high schools, awareness programmes and bursaries, without directly mentioning how it would attain the core enablers needed for blue economy growth to emerge and thrive. This is also conspicuously absent in the National Skills Development Strategy, which identifies existing challenges of a limited work ethic and motivation, skills capacity, funding, experience and entrepreneurship.

In 2013 South Africa’s maritime or blue economy directly contributed 13.6% to GDP prior to developing a formal strategy via Operation Phakisa. It is targeting 12,000 seafarers by 2019, although possessing only 4 registered cargo vessels. South Africa also has experienced limited vocational guidance and skills shortage for those seeking to participate in the blue economy. Those with the capacity to contribute, including many financed to study abroad; are invariably not active members in determining blue economy strategy frameworks or plans for any identified related value chain or initiative such as South Africa’s proposed port expansion and Cruise Terminal developments. No central database exists of blue economy stakeholders, initiatives; research and projects; policies and ecological information/opportunities, aside from the 2019 recent, private website approach in section 2.6. The private sector remains notably silent or reluctant to engage in any blue economy mapping or strategy framework formation; unlike other international counterparts. South Africa’s own Comprehensive Maritime Transport Policy (Parliament 2017) completely ignores reference to both the blue/ocean economy and Operation Phakisa but aims for a globally competitive port system; effective maritime transport; small harbours; coastal shipping and cabotage. It especially emphasises the need for mortgage financing, taxes and other incentives to establish this. Yet, endorsing the Blue Oceans Economic Framework would facilitate not only safety; security and development of people, ships and cargo but also the marine and coastal environment. A localised shipping fleet would reduce

25 | P a g e


distances needed for cargo and potential associated adverse externality costs, becoming more eco-conscious if sufficiently modernised.

4: CASE STUDIES IN THE BLUE ECONOMY

To facilitate eThekwini and KwaZulu Natal province’s blue economy progress, this section specifically analyses various examples of blue economy activities both internationally and within South Africa under Operation Phakisa nationally, the Western and Eastern Capes. The creation of South Africa’s and Africa’s first municipal strategy to facilitate this emerging horizon of opportunities can provide informative examples to inspire stakeholders to willingly participate and discover more about popular engagement with the blue economy. Effective communication and local community participation or ownership are regarded as equally important to gain social acceptance rather than strife and dissent.

4.1: International Blue Economy Case Studies

Container shipping has grown at least at 10% per year globally. Aquaculture is growing at 7.5% and cruise tourism is accelerating at 8.5% annually for the past 3 decades. Over 4.2 billion people consume marine related products. Over 3 billion directly depend on it for survival. Internationally certain community solutions include Antigua and Barbuda’s Youth Stewardship “Adopt a Coastline”, sea cucumber aquaculture in China (Global Environment Facility 2018), solar energy fish drying in India, and sustainable community fisheries in Morocco, Kenya and Samoa. These have produced profitable long-term livelihoods whilst restoring ecosystems. For example, the sea cucumber project provided $70,000 income for 500 people. Another project restored 300 acres of Chinese mangroves in Guangxi. In 200 hectares of a marine protected area, Kenya safeguarded 64 coral and 250 fish species. The challenge remains not just to value socioeconomic benefits of marine ecosystems but ensure these remain compatible with development needs. Cities aiming to prioritise the blue economy will therefore take responsibility to minimising waste and other discharged effluent affecting thriving environments. Vietnam has initiated revolving funds and loans to attract those with simple blue economy themed ideas to create thriving businesses, where marginalised by the reluctant commercial sector.

In Australia, the government’s task appears to facilitate blue economy growth through innovation, research and entrepreneurship incubation (CSIRO 2017). A specialised blue economy research hub exists at the Universities of Wollongong and Western Australia, whilst the Australian Maritime College/ Institute of Marine and Antarctic Studies (IMAS) in Tasmania, as the only specifically traditional maritime economy sectors, are completely separate from this trend, only emerging in the past 7 years. Australia offers 79 ports, 10% of global sea trade and the third largest global Exclusive Economic Zone, maritime domain of 8.2 million km2. From 2012-2025, blue economy activity is projected to accelerate from $47 to over $100 billion, excluding $25 billion of ecosystem services. CSIRO increasingly is prioritising the status of the Indian and Pacific Ocean’s health to preserve this. Increased data, information and access to experience via international partnerships with “blue economy champions” is perceived to ensure even more proficient and capable decision making for those establishing blue economy

26 | P a g e


frameworks and approaches. This framework will have to adapt to increased labour mobility and changing technological developments such as improvements in shipping efficiency, largely autonomous without local municipalities and national governments intervening or being involved. In Australia participants were asked to determine effective action tasks based on potential relevance to the target region, its possible impact; time, speed and path to market or success and whether Australia has sufficient existing capacity to make it become a reality. CSIRO has developed coastal management tools; testing mobile solutions to monitor the marine environment, form off-grid cold storage facilities, renewable powered small fishing and recreation vessels, artisanal microfinance and accelerate a bio-prospecting entrepreneurship program. It is investigating a talent scout program to demonstrate best practises and a marine ecosystem restoration crowdfunding platform. The South Pacific through Fiji and the World Wildlife Fund have proposed the Great Sea Reef project aiming to prevent the loss of 90% of its coral species and 44% of reef species by 2050 (Pacific Islands Development Forum 2018). It is prioritising forest and mangrove regeneration, organic agriculture, renewable energy, sustainable fisheries and sea transport.

Portugal has developed its own port technology cluster network and Bluetech Accelerator Initiative in response to the blue economy (Santos 2019), to expand beyond the 0.05% existing research contribution to GDP. These serve as innovation and entrepreneur hubs to connect all stakeholders across ports and their commercial value chains. It and the private sector co-finance promising start ups to mature and accelerate. The Mediterranean have invested 999,600 euros (Taylor et. al 2017) in a “Blue Jobs and Responsible Growth in the Mediterranean project” for Algeria, Italy, Malta, Mauritania, Morocco, Libya; Portugal, Spain, France and Tunisia. It aims to generate 120-140 blue economy specialists each year between 2019 and 2023. It created workshops, a master’s programme, online portal and summer school along with Blue Network. Other projects include Earth’s first wave energy park in Sotenas Sweden and first commercial scale tide device in Strangford Lough Northern Island. Spanish marine biotechnology research is investigating anti-cancer drugs. Germany and Denmark are experimenting with hybrid ferries Italy and Slovenia are preserving salt pans as marine protected areas. Taylor et al recognised very few actual start-ups for the blue economy; most being actual existing companies. It mentioned the problem of learning from failures as few wish to publicise them. People often experience reluctance to participate.

The Black Sea are pursuing shared experiences including connectivity, research and innovation, blue skills and careers guidance (Facility for Blue Growth in the Black Sea, 2019). Only Romania and Bulgaria gained 200,000 jobs and 2 billion euros to their GDP in directly identifying these particular sectors as blue. It found out how existing business models need to be adapted to follow more sustainable directions for more stable and productive jobs, increasing income and production more responsibly. It mentions the limitations of existing marine data and continuous need to upgrade skills, education and experience. Limited coordination and involvement of most core relevant stakeholders appears to exist. All need to collaborate and professionals encouraged/recruited with improved employment conditions so as to not emigrate or be discouraged from wilful participation towards a blue economy. It also favours advancing technological capacity to maximise potential benefits from new progress. The global blue bio-economy market has been found to offer myriad blue economy opportunities (Lloyd-Evans 2018) and beyond food for marine ecosystem species. This includes partially offsetting at least

27 | P a g e


$50 billion of estimated fisheries bycatch product waste not consumed and 20% spoiled. Algae biotherapy is another possibility. Existing research has identified top products and usages, size of demand, investment trends and implementation strategies for nations. However, very few European nations have a specific marine biotechnology strategy, plan, policy or related legislation. South Africa also lacks these and it is not covered in the 2019 revised Copyright Act. Europe possesses 360 angel, venture capitalist investors that could be approached. However, the source specifically focuses on providing mentoring guidance, marketing support and access to product development to create blue economy, biotechnology entrepreneurs.

In the Caribbean, Barbados includes the specific example of aquaculture (Simpson 2019), increasing production by 29% on average per year from 2006-2018 from 2 tons to over 26 tons. It generated $256,000 in revenue in 2016, 96% dominated by red tilapia followed by red claw crayfish for local markets. This prioritised import substitution. Yet it only supports 15 minor aquaponics producers and 1 commercial farm. Simpson cites the absence of aquaculture support and recreation; existing land and marine environment shortages, information limits and allocation of resources towards tourism dominates. It has introduced aquaculture as school feeding schemes and proposed future projects are powered by renewable energy. Jamaica also recognises prospects for the blue economy for blue carbon sequestration, coastline protection, bio-filtration, fishing, tourism and shipping once a database of resources is initiated (Green 2017). It specifically tried to profit from dive tourism, recognising its over $11 billion contribution towards the US economy, with 4.56 million visitor days per year and supporting 26,000 jobs in dive trainers/leaders; boat captains and crew plus service technicians. It estimated one dive shop can generate $4,500 per dive site per day. It recognises ecological and physical carrying capacity need to be considered, with eco-literate and professionally trained instructors. Aquaculture is not fully commercially developed but Jamaica has a prototype oyster and Irish moss facility in Bowden Bay. It is starting to investigate species such as mangrove turnicates and black sea rods for biotechnology prospects. Yet existing ecosystems have experienced so much significant loss, it is considering a 100 metre buffer coastal zone protected against encroaching development. It also aims for indicators to track and monitor how various activities are progressing, which would assist eThekwini Municipality and other stakeholders.

The FAO’s Blue Growth Initiative (FAO 2015) has inspired significant development in Kenyan aquaculture with an initial workshop of 78 stakeholders. The state is focusing on increasing knowledge and awareness of the core ecosystem drivers and threshold in a coastal database that need to be preserved then expanded; prior to enticing more investment in mariculture. A workshop also facilitates the necessary active stakeholder engagement to work out practical, socio-economically responsible and technically feasible business plans, simple enough to be implemented. Stakeholders received training on monitoring ecosystems to become more eco-sensitive. It also focused on conflict resolution, aware of disputes emerging over use and access to marine resources. Kenya improved landing site infrastructure, increased availability and use of ice, fish containers, processing facilities, retail markets, value added products, marketing, stakeholder capacity, promote excellent handling and manufacturing processes technical assistance and equipment.

28 | P a g e


4.2 South African Blue Economy Case Studies

4.2.1 Aquaculture

South African examples of the blue economy mostly include aquaculture case studies in the Western and Eastern Cape. Devising a Blue Oceans Economic Framework is increasingly perceived to indicate how related activities can benefit from the Fourth Industrial Revolution (University of Stellenbosch Business School, 2017). Total African aquaculture expanded from 558,888 to 1,615,608 tons between 2004 and 2013. Yet fisheries and aquaculture contribute merely 0.1% to local GDP, R6 billion and 108,000 jobs. 89% of fishing stocks are collapsed. South Africa has invested in the “Working for Water and Fisheries” initiatives to improve water conservation and management practises along with a National Aquaculture Strategic Framework, an Aquaculture Management Chief Directorate under the Department of Agriculture, Forestries and Fisheries. Economic spill-over multipliers in developing aquaculture are projected to benefit bio-refinery and biofuels, biotechnology; synthetic biology, genetics, protein transition, sensor technology, logistics and renewable energy plus manufacturing simultaneously.

From 2015-2019, Operation Phakisa aimed to produce 15,000 additional jobs with 23 pilot projects, adding R3 billion to local revenue and 20,000 tons of fish. The Aquaculture Competitiveness Improvement Programme identified constraints in training, supporting rural infrastructure, access to finance; excess legislation and bureaucracy; high production costs, water security, problems of accessing quality inputs and involvement by women, youth and those with disabilities. Its budget expanded slightly from R32,290,000 in 2015/2016 to R36,152,000 by 2017/2018. South African aquaculture possessed 34 marine and 161 freshwater farms in 2012, employing 2,227 people, 26% in the Western Cape, 22% Mpumalanga, Gauteng 12% and Limpopo 10%. Few exist in KwaZulu-Natal. The Western Cape have developed a specific aquaculture market analysis, development initiative and strategy including research digital technology, supportive networks, improved transparency and product quality, public feeds, cold stores, coordinated marketing and input supplies.

An extensive private review of South Africa’s aquaculture sector called “Harvesting the Coastal Sector” was conducted by Dyer in 2017. Historically, South Africa’s attempts at economic autarchy extended to the aquaculture sector with thirteen state hatcheries from the 1960’s, compared to three at present, extending to other successful projects in the private sector. Ever since the state endorsed Jonkershoek, (Stellenbosch) and Pirrie Hatcheries (Eastern Cape) introduced inputs for game fishing, trout and other game fisheries have a long history in private sector dams for game and recreational/luxury fishing but also commercially since eggs were first imported in 1896 (Rouhani and Britz 2007). For example, commercial tilapia was introduced to feed bass in 1959 but failed economically with a pilot farm employing 2 staff re-introduced in 2008. Integrated pond centred, polyculture combine tilapia, carp and catfish projects. The Knysna Oyster Company started farming in 1948. However, with inefficient production, marketing and clear legislation along with access to Namibian and South African fishing stocks, limited coordinated policies, devoted research and specific support, the aquaculture sector rapidly declined with trade liberalisation in the 1990’s (Shipton and Britz 2007).

29 | P a g e


Despite considerable market demand, with the arrival of trawlers primarily from Asia and noted rise in poaching - despite the introduction of a permit system - supplies of wild fisheries rapidly declined with SASSI declaring many formerly commercially available species seriously endangered or at high risk of extinction (orange or red). Few private sector aquaculture projects managed to survive; aquaculture being not previously considered a major government priority until Operation Phakisa. Although certain sources remain for private sector game fishing such as Dullstroom in Mpumalanga and the Natal Midlands. However even the Natal Midlands suffered commercially with perceptions towards trout and other species being considered ‘alien invaders,’ displacing endemic species. However, although trout, bass, tilapia and other species had little noticeable threats to local biodiversity, they gradually disappearing from supermarkets and restaurants. Many sources are now being imported which could be locally produced via aquaculture. South African restaurants commonly serve dorado as a main linefish imported from South America, when previously so much choice was available.

After 1994 and prior to Operation Phakisa, various South African government agencies endorsed several aquaculture projects including those summarised below, several of which still exist, supported though significantly underutilised compared to former capacity, which could be modernised. Remaining government aquaculture facilities in various stages of operational capacity include the Western Cape Elsenberg Institute of Animal Production, Rustenburg Wine Farm, Ceres Agricultural Enterprise, the Cape Olive and Worcester Projects. The Eastern Cape possess the Umtata and Pirie Hatcheries, facilities at Rhodes University and Tsolo College of Agriculture and rural aquaculture projects. The KwaZulu-Natal Amatakhulu Hatchery failed from a lack of operating capital, limited skilled labour lacking technical education and inexperienced local authority management. The province has the Makatini Research Centre, the Mpontshini Primary School and Mboza Aquaculture Projects. The Limpopo Province had the Turfloop Breeding Station, Dzindli Fish Project and Tompi Seleka College of Agriculture. Other cited issues, further summarised as potential risks and disadvantages (Rouhani and Britz 2007) for project failures in South African aquaculture, include a lack of experience; insufficient records; low prices; limited markets; scarce availability of water sources and environmentally-based decisions to no longer produce exotic fish such as trout, despite market potential, responsible for the closure of all four government hatcheries in KwaZulu-Natal.

In South Africa, Scholl (2006) identified the ecological failure of introducing foreign salmon into Gansbaai ranching, with significant volumes of biological (disposal of unconsumed fish feed), antibiotic, pesticide, organic and chemical pollution overfishing, parasites along with specific salmon/human diseases and potential consequences for the local ecosystem including shellfish and crustaceans; if not sustainably managed. Nelson Mandela Bay Tourism (2014) objected to a proposed Algoa Bay sea-based aquaculture zone as having adverse effects on existing property values and coastal tourism, including visual and noise impacts, existing watersports, recreational fishing, beach access and leisure along with adverse health and environmental externality cost consequences. Other constraints that restrict aquaculture in South Africa include few appropriate sites given limited water supplies and coastal bays, with high potential environmental externality costs including habitat loss, alternative land use and monoculture. Scholl advocates polyculture over monoculture allowing species biodiversity, contributing to higher potential output and preserving the local ecosystem as much as possible, as in China for

30 | P a g e


4,000 years to minimise negative externality costs and maximise stakeholder economic, environmental, social welfare.

Total world aquaculture production volumes increased from 41,908,847 tonnes in 2004 to 70,189,130 tonnes in 2013, with a value increase of $59.9 billion to $150.3 billion by the World Food and Agricultural Organisation as in Figure 4.1. By 2015, just over 195 aquaculture farms exist throughout South Africa. South Africa’s aquacultural production increased from 2,819 tons in 2000 to 5,999 tons by 2012, (0.00003424% of the world’s total production) in Figure 4.2, compared to equivalent marine wild catch fisheries of 663,195 to 715,320 tons respectively. However, in 2013 it decreased to 4,010 tons out of a total 416,520 tonnes produced. South Africa produced 14,583 tons of aquatic plants, only 2,000 tons derived from aquaculture (Beveridge 2013). South African aquaculture products exported and for domestic production include abalone, seaweed, shrimps, West Cape Rock Lobster, trout, tilapia and others but not tuna, sardines, pilchards, dorado, kingklip and other popular products. The South African Department of Agriculture, Forestries and Fisheries (DAFF) estimate aquaculture could sustain a minimum of 140,000-210,000 jobs by 2033 and an annual R4-6 billion in GDP. However, in 2012, aquaculture was estimated by Morokolo (2013) to only employ 1,607 compared to wild fisheries which employed approximately 30,000 directly (many subsistence farmers without alternative income sources), supporting around 100,000 indirectly (DAFF 2014).

Figure 4.1: Global Aquaculture Production 1980-2012.

Source: FAO Fish Stat 2013.

Figure 4.2: South African Aquaculture Production 1980-2012.

31 | P a g e


Source: FAO FishStat 2013.

The World Food and Agricultural Organisation (2014) project significant economic industry growth prospects for seafood and other aquaculture products. Its 2022 fish model predicts that in 7 years, (based on projected high per capita fish consumption from 20.7 kg per year to 22.4 kg per year, high population growth and limited land areas to expand land based agricultural alternatives), world aquacultural production will expand from 66,000,000 tons to a projected 85-99,000,000 as wild fisheries start precipitously declining from a peak of 95,000,000 tons downwards. However, demand estimates for aquaculture depend significantly on fish per capita consumption, fish prices, export and input cost per unit, employment and economic activity, inflation, production and consumption along with climate change, pollution, overfishing and human damage to aquatic environments. Statistics South Africa, in its 2015 Environmental Economic Accounts, record a continued historic decline in hake, West Coast Rock Lobster, Cape horse mackerel and other wild species. Despite potential demand in certain sector as a staple for the poor and higher value luxuries for the higher income levels, South African wild fisheries have been considerably depleted – the fate of many species consigned as endangered or nearly extinct.

Southern African central aquaculture representative stakeholder associations include the Aquaculture Association of South Africa, The Abalone Farmer’s Association of South Africa, the Marine Finfish Farmers Association of South Africa and, the Mpumalanga Trout Forum, the Western Cape Trout Association, the World Aquatic Veterinary Medical Associations and the Marine Farmers’ Association of Namibia. These associations provide support, research, technical advice, training, feed source, contacts; information and education, technology and equipment sourcing along with marketing support. South African fish processing industries include over 355 stakeholders, of which the top 6 have a cumulative 2014 market share of 45% (Figure 4.3), being more competitive than mining, the financial, retail and other South African oligopoly sectors.

Figure 4.3: South African Fish Processing Industry Sector Market Share 2014.

32 | P a g e


Current South African aquaculture industry concerns, noted by stakeholders in World Wildlife Fund (2011) and a DAFF report, include over-regulation and high compliance/long processing time costs, issues in accessing formal finance (especially from the private sector), limited existing market, limited trained and equipped labour, limited research and development (The Presidency 2014). South Africa’s existing aquaculture market has experienced limited market demand, demonstrates a need for quality supplier feed, high barrier to entry costs, underdeveloped rural infrastructure and issues over wild fisheries from foreign competitors.

Currently those who wish to establish freshwater rather than marine aquaculture related businesses in South Africa experience significant administrative and legal compliance barriers. South Africa currently operates on a permit based licencing system. Apart from the National Aquaculture Policy framework; they need to consider the appropriate diverse legislation of the South African Treasury, Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Department of Economic Development, Department of Water Affairs, Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Department of Rural Affairs, Department of Higher Education and Training, Department of Public Enterprises along with Operation Phakisa in the Treasury, plus equivalent provincial government legislation across several departments and local municipality bylaws, with significant legal compliance costs, risks and uncertainty. However, South Africa has sought to facilitate the reduction of these legal barriers through a coordinated 2013 South African National Policy Framework

A. To encourage an integrated and holistic approach to aquaculture development in South Africa, which promotes participation, intergovernmental co-ordination and partnerships;

B. To promote the responsible and sustainable development of globally competitive aquaculture in South Africa by identifying current constraints, and by proposing action aimed at creating an enabling environment for effectively addressing those constraints;

C. To facilitate and support the optimal growth of the aquaculture sector to ensure that aquaculture contributes to economic growth, food security and job creation in the country.

D. To promote on-site research, demonstrations and practitioner-to practitioner advice to increase social and economic benefits from aquaculture.

33 | P a g e


E. To promote private sector participation through access arrangements to areas specifically designated for aquaculture and through the provision or facilitation of the necessary support services;

F. To co-operate, where necessary, in the promotion of inland and marine ranching and stock enhancement;

G. To promote investment in research and technological development that ensures industry growth, diversification, competitiveness and sustainable development;

H. To monitor and regulate the introduction of exotic or biologically transformed species to aquatic eco-systems;

I. To establish norms and standards (including regulations) and guidelines for environmental impact assessments

J. To monitor diseases and control the spread of diseases relevant to feral and cultured species

K. To promote sustainable aquaculture development from a social, economic and environmental perspective. This includes the provision of advisory services to cater for needs such as statutory aid to participants.

L. To facilitate the integration of previously disadvantaged individuals, communities and demographic entities into the aquaculture development process

M. To establish an effective and efficient extension service that supports aquaculture development;

N. To ensure compliance and establish an aquacultural inspectorate to support enforcement of the legal framework.

By 2019 the sector aims for an additional 17,644 tonnes, contribution R1,841,000,0000 and 2,584 new jobs. The industry has tried pilot projects and small-scale aquaculture farms for a diversity of species including trout (47 farms), tilapia, abalone, dusky kob, oysters, mussels, oysters and catfish (Britz and Venter 2017). Other new projects yet to be implemented include crayfish and salmon. The Presidency website is proposing several numerous initiatives summarised in Table 4.1. To speed up 1-3 year delays in establishing an aquaculture farm (890 days to 240 days), an Inter-Department Authorisation Committee has been initiated and developed along with greater marketing and awareness efforts. The Aquaculture Development Fund is planned to be endowed with R500,0000,000. A centralised market database of all suppliers has also been proposed but not implemented. Yet there are no aquaculture research officers, state aquatic vets and extension services present in 6/9 provinces, not even KwaZulu-Natal, only the Western/Eastern Capes and Limpopo.

4.2.2: Offshore Oil and Gas Sector

Under Operation Phakisa, South Africa’s blue economy potentially expands to the offshore oil and gas sector. Projected reserve estimates include over 9 billion barrels of oil, excluding the February 2019 discovery offshore the northeastern South African coast. It extends to 11 billion barrels of natural gas. Table 4.2 summarises core national initiatives and pilot projects from 2015-2021. Targets include 130,000 jobs and 30 wells plus locally owned and repaired oil rigs along with a seismic research vessel under the local flag. Yet this is estimated to cost around R3-5 billion Potential production could exceed over 370,000 barrels per year (South Africa Presidency 2014).

34 | P a g e


Whilst the South African government is streamlining bureaucratic processes to facilitate this sector, this report cautiously notes that extensive future research will have to be conducted as to whether or not this is compatible with international and national efforts at developing a Blue Oceans Economic Framework. This specifically prioritises long term environmental sustainability, survival and human quality of life in the transition towards a low carbon economy and trade system. In contrast South Africa’s 10 initiatives in marine protection services and ocean governance appear more promising and in alignment with international interpretations of formulating a blue economy future. This has culminated in the 2017 Marine Spatial Planning Framework/Bill and proposed Oceans Bill. Although yet to be independently critically evaluated, its intentions proclaim “to implement an overarching, integrated ocean governance framework for sustainable growth of the ocean economy to maximise socio-economic benefits whilst ensuring adequate ocean environmental protection within the next 5 years.” Currently responsibility varies between the DEA, Navy, DAFF, provinces, national, Admiralty Courts, Transnet, local and district municipalities, SAMSA, Department of Transport, SARS Customs, SAPS, Public Works, Parks Boards and myriad other authorities, complicating centralised planning and coordination. Individual objectives include an enhanced and coordinated enforcement programme, developing a national ocean and coastal information management system plus water quality monitoring programme. It incorporates the creation of a marine protected area, representative network; reviews of legislation and policies long with a marine discovery, research and awareness monitoring programme. (South African Presidency 2014). The Working for Coasts programme aims to train 60 unemployed youth as rangers to produce 1 per 50 kilometres to extend protection for the entire coastline.

Table 4.1: Operation Phakisa Aquaculture Lab Pilot Project Initiatives 2015-2019+

Initiative Pilot Project Percent of Initiative Activities Complete1a Doringbaai -Abalone 70% of Initiative Activities Complete1b Blue Sapphire Pearls 19% 1c West Coast Oyster Growers 85%1d Paternoster -Oyster Hatchery Expansion 0%1e Imbaza Mussels 47%1f Hamburg Oyster Expansion 57%1g African Olive Trading 60%1h Oceanwise Pty Ltd Expansion 26%1i Oystercatcher Aquaculture 15%1j Overberg Abagold Abalone 150%1k Requa Enterprise 30%1l JSP Abalone 400%1m Southern Atlantic Sea Farms 57%1n Hermanus Salmon 0%1o Vaal Fisheries 35%1p New Hamburg Cluster Kob 33%1q Molapong Aquaculture Trout/Salmon Farm 34%1r Saldanha Blue Ocean Mussels 31%1s Richard’s Bay Sea Cage Farming -Dusky Kob 5%1t Hondeklip Bay Abalone Hatchery 41%1u Diamond Coast Abalone 4%

35 | P a g e


1v Marine Growers Abalone Farm 15%2 Establishment of a globally recognised certification

standard, monitoring and certification system26%

3 Resource Aquaculture South Africa (Aqua SA) for marketing

62%

4a Improve and coordinate market intelligence initiatives 44%4b Strengthen emerging producers through increasing value

chain ownership and product/service delivery.0%

4c Promote responsible, fair regulation and environmental certification

33%

Source: This Study based on Operation Phakisa Secretariat, South African Presidency website 2019.

Table 4.2: Operation Phakisa Offshore Oil and Gas Lab Pilot Project Initiatives 2015-2019+

Initiative Pilot Project Percent of Initiative Activities Complete1a Development of phased gas pipeline 104% of Initiative Activities Completed1b Joint Industry-State Emergency Response Drills and

Plans 103%

1c Operationalise the International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund

100%

1d Enhance and exploit sectoral research 100%1e Develop a Local Content Roadmap 110%1f Local Skills Development 82%1g Develop capability for subsurface research and data

gathering100%

1h Develop a streamlined institutional structure for regulation of offshore oil and gas

53%

1i Enhance environmental governance capacity of the Oil and Gas Regulator

100%

1j Promote awareness of the oil and gas industry 85%


4.2.3 Marine Transport and Manufacturing

Marine Transport and Manufacturing has not only focused on the previously highlighted investments in port and related supply chain expansion activities, it has principally concentrated on cabotage. A 2016 study by Dyer (“Should South Africa Implement a Cabotage Policy?”) on cabotage extensively chartered risks and opportunities. It emphasised the historic decline of the domestic shipping fleet and factors contributing towards this, contrasting with international and African approaches towards developing cabotage. Table 4.3 and Figure 4.4 illustrate this. In 2015 it registered its first 2 vessels, but is unable to capitalise on high cargo throughput volumes and assist the increasing supplies of seafarer graduates being trained, but unable to acquire service placements. The historic decline in South Africa’s domestic shipping fleet and its failure

36 | P a g e


to capitalise on coastal trade is currently been revised through the government’s endorsement of Operation Phakisa. Hare (2012) summarises a number of reasons that consider why indigenous shipping and maritime trade has failed and continues to be marginalised in South Africa by its supply chain stakeholders. These include the geographical hazards of Namibia’s Skeleton Coast, the Cape of Good Hope and beyond with higher shipping risks; the fact that Transnet offer some of the highest port pricing rates in the world (Dyer 2015); and the liberalisation of trucking/road haulage in the 1990’s reducing shipping price competitiveness. It extends to inadequate coastal facilities with intermodal transport connections in South Africa’s current and future port modernisation projects and free trade zones and the absence of formal and existing cabotage legislation against foreign competition or to provide incentives to participate. This section details the present state of South African cabotage policy and outlines the proposed changes of South Africa to address its absence of formal cabotage legislation and guidelines. This report considers it essential for supply chain stakeholders to consider these factors when determining whether or not cabotage really represents the future of Southern African shipping and if it can survive competitively both domestically and internationally. The 1996 National Transport White Paper was the first attempt by the South African government that specifically articulated its vision for the maritime transport sector whilst the South African Maritime Safety Authority was specifically established and legally empowered to defend South Africa’s maritime interests, complementing the 1983 Admiralty Jurisdiction and Regulation Act: ‘To encourage and support government strategies for economic and social development whilst being environmentally and economically sustainable.’

Figure 4.4: The South African Merchant Fleet 1985-2015.

37 | P a g e


Source: This Study.

Table 4.3 The South African Merchant Fleet 1985-2015.No of vessels

1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015

Total Fleet 791 662 523 299 282 285 365 369 368 59 104 166 198 64 60 65Oil tankers 63 64 33 1 1 2 8 5 5 4 3 10 9 17 17 17Bulk carrier 280 226 170 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2General cargo

99 15 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 2 0 0 0

Container 274 274 274 216 199 199 262 262 262 30 30 30 30 0 0 0Other 75 83 78 82 82 84 95 102 102 25 71 122 157 47 43 41

Source: This Study.

South Africa’s maritime policy objectives specifically include the following to encourage and support the South African maritime transport industry to enable it to compete equally with the maritime carriers of other nations and South African land-based carriers:

Developing maritime awareness, Assisting in the creation and foster of an economic environment for the maritime

transport industry which will allow it to compete with other nations,’ Contributing to the release of the full potential of the maritime industry in South

Africa The modernisation of South Africa’s shipping administration.’

38 | P a g e


The establishment of a modern shipping register which is efficient, which balances the interests of the nation, shipowners and seafarers in an internationally acceptable manner, and which accords with principles of international law relating to the necessity of a genuine link between the state of registry and the shipowner in contrast to flags of convenience.’

Chasomeris (2010) notes that South Africa continues to experience a liberal cabotage exempt policy towards the maritime transport industry despite historic legislation and that currently proposed for Operation Phakisa. For example, the December 2003, BEE Maritime Charter proclaimed a long-term vision to develop South Africa to become one of the world’s top 35 maritime nations by the year 2014,” (clause 2.1.1). It sought for ‘a clear strategy/plan for the majority of South African cargo, going through South African ports to be carried on South African ships, to substantially increase the number of SA flagged vessels and develop new SA shipping companies that are globally competitive.” By 2008, it aimed for local cargo owners/brokers to increase the cargo carried on South African ships to 25.1% of total port cargo throughput. Yet this policy has failed to avert the decline in the maritime fleet over the last few decades as in Table 3 above. The 2008 South African Maritime Transport Policy enshrined South African maritime coastal trade freedom to domestic and international shipping and would require revising to consider the cabotage restrictions. These include establishing a shipping register with incentives, crew, construction and other requirements, as identified in this report for other countries, if cabotage is to work for South Africa. However, Chasomeris considers existing legislation does not legally allow cabotage and preferential treatment by domestic companies even if stakeholders themselves wished to favour cabotage and local shipping, as with Anglo American and the two new South African bulk carriers. Given the preferential treatment to road haulage, South Africa’s Grindrod/Unicorn and Ocean Africa Container Lines/Safmarine have avoided investing in expanding additional coastal cargo feeder services between domestic ports such as Cape Town-Port Elizabeth to East London to Durban and beyond.

Currently, the 1998 Shipping Registration Act legally permits South African vessels to fly the country’s flag but offers no specific inducements to do so nor to formally register as part of its merchant fleet. South African supply chain stakeholders have met with government representatives since 2005 but have not found any current advantages to offset time, administration and other costs, especially if these guidelines are voluntary or without incentive. Nor can foreign vessels currently use it as a flag of convenience (Hare 2012). Additionally, under the 1983 Admiralty Jurisdiction and Regulation Act; South Africans may be potentially unable to obtain mortgage finance, as mortgage claims rank lowly in the prioritisation of judicial claims during a dispute.

The South African National Department of Transport in its 2015 Strategic Plan reaffirms South Africa’s commitment to prioritise cabotage and the development of indigenous shipping/coastal trade as another means of efficaciously facilitating a maritime centred economy. In 2016 South Africa introduced an envisioned Cabotage Policy for Coastal, Regional and International Waters and African Maritime Transport Charter, a March 2017 Cabotage Bill and in 2018 it proposed an updated Maritime Transport Policy White Paper and Merchant Shipping Bill. It also proposes revising exchange controls, and recently through its new Income Tax Act, removing/reducing maritime related income tax, dividends tax, capital gains tax and seafarers, a cross-border

39 | P a g e


withholding tax on interest and historically has provided significant depreciation allowances, especially for vessel assets. South Africa is also proposing a tonnage tax which would favour South African registered vessels who comply with the higher crew wage and maritime standard required of South African registered vessels that may currently discourage it, whilst simultaneously acquiring tax revenue from foreign vessels.

The National Department of Transport (2011) identifies future policies to reform maritime education and training, the potential development of a green ship recycling facilities, possible shipbuilding and ship repair incentives (existing capacity up to 140 metres), the establishment of a transhipment hub and port modernisation program as further areas to consider for the future of Southern African shipping. Currently inconsistent definitions relating to cabotage and a lack of a formal cabotage policy as the present state of South Africa demonstrates that until this issue is resolved, stakeholders will prefer to register in other jurisdictions which are articulated more coherently or utilise foreign owned shipping.

Various sector initiatives and pilot projects are categorised in Table 4.4. Alternatively, South Africa is also investigating the possibilities of the ship repair industry with Transnet interested in a floating neo-Panamax dock at Richard’s Bay plus investing in renovating existing facilities. For example, South Africa services only 4 oil rigs per year at present. Many international shipping companies are currently bypassing Durban and other ports, focusing on international competitors. The Maritime transport and manufacturing sector are currently investigating 18 initiatives including 200 jobs for the Richard’s Bay repair dock; developing over 4,000 jobs by reserving certain mineral exports for South African registered vessels under cabotage and promoting localised component fabrication and import substitution for local boat builders. Other projects include a dedicated oil-gas facility at Saldanha Bay. The overall sector aim is to increase the sector from R7 billion to 22-36 billion GDP by 2033. This would stimulate local jobs from 6,000 in 2010 to 22-38,000 jobs by 2033. It aims to train 2,550 TVETs and 18,572 artisans along with 1,200 ratings and 720 officers per year.

Table 4.4: Operation Phakisa Marine Transport and Manufacturing Pilot Project Initiatives 2015-2019+

Initiative Pilot Project Percent of Initiative Activities Complete1a Create a Supportive Funding and Revenue Model 0% of Initiative Activities Completed1b Ensure Purpose Built Oil and Gas Infrastructure

Mossgas Quay and Berth 205.0%

1c Prioritise TNPA funding towards marine manufacturing 0%1d Maintain and refurbish existing facilities 88%1e Establish Centres of Specialisation in Saldanha and

Richard’s Bay0%

1f Create and Implement a Public Procurement and Localisation Programme

58%

1g Develop a strategic Marketing Campaign and value proposition for target markets

64%

1h Support local registry of vessels through incentives and encouragement of using SA flagged vessels

34%

40 | P a g e



4.2.4 Coastal and Marine Tourism

Finally, the Coastal and Marine Tourism sector, more closely aligns to international blue economy strategies through its aim of creating a: “world class and sustainable coastal and marine tourism destination that directly benefits South Africans.” It wishes to expand beyond the 155 of South African beaches with blue Flag Status. It has undertaken research into the viability of Cruise Terminals for Durban and Cape Town. Currently 7 national parks with marine boundaries and 23 marine protected areas exist. It aims to expand jobs from 64,000 to 116,000 between 2010 and 2033 with R43.3 billion contribution to GDP. It targets economic growth, transformation and sustainability. Blue economy activities potentially identified include marine wildlife tourism, recreational fishing, scuba diving and snorkelling, water sports, ocean experiences such as cruise tourism, marinas and underwater archaeology along with dining and shopping recreation. Other options include spiritual experiences, coastal heritage and events; aquariums; education and scientific excursions and sport. Certain specific initiatives are identified in Table 4.5. The integration and evaluation of all these objectives in alignment to the principles and frameworks that have ensured the effective implementation of these and other related blue economy initiatives; will enable successful Ethekwini and other Blue Ocean Economic Frameworks in South Africa.

Table 4.5: Operation Phakisa Marine and Coastal Tourism, Pilot Project Initiatives 2015-2019+

Initiative Pilot Project Percent of Initiative Activities Complete1a Enhance the promotion of Coastal and Marine Tourism 27% of Initiative Activities Completed1b Assist to unblock legislative constraints: Mkambati Nature

Reserve11%

1c Research to develop a framework to measure the economic impact of coastal and marine tourism

0%

1d Research on governance and coordination 0%1e Port St Johns Beach Waterfront 0%1f East London Esplanade Development and Aquarium

relocation86%

1g Cruise tourism port infrastructure in Durban, Richard’s Bay, Port Elizabeth.

0%

1h Enhance existing coastal and marine tourism awareness programmes

0%

2 Improve service excellence levels along the coastal towns 0%


5: PUBLIC BLUE ECONOMY INITIATIVES - LOCAL, REGIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL

Further local, regional and international, public sector and organisational blue economy initiatives and the experiences/lessons are assessed with specific implications for eThekwini’s

41 | P a g e


creation of Africa’s first municipal Blue Economy Strategy. These frameworks need to be sufficiently flexible to respond to changing international circumstances, climates, environments, risks and stakeholder priorities (PEMSEA 2017).

“We understand the Blue Economy to be a practical ocean-based economic model using green infrastructure and technologies , innovative financing mechanisms and proactive institutional arrangements for meeting the twin goals of protecting our oceans and coasts and enhancing its potential contribution to sustainable development, including improving human wellbeing, reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcities.”

5.1 International

Thailand hosted a Blue Economy Forum, mirroring Kenya’s efforts to emphasis awareness of its intentions and engagement with those most qualified enough to provide inputs. Includes a specific realignment of activities to retain essential ocean health as good business practise. The source contrasted the value of several Asian ocean economies from $1.97 billion in Timor Leste to $959.4 billion in China with the poor implementation of coastal planning protection and only 0.5-4.5% as marine protected areas. This necessitated integrated coastal zone management and preservation of sound water quality to levels suitable for aquaculture production and consumption. For example, Potts et. al (2016) focus on marketing the eco-sustainability of their locals’ seafood products, a market accelerating at 35% growth per year, worth US $11.5 billion in 2015. It is primarily dominated by Peruvian anchovies (29%), cod (16%), salmon (15%), tuna (8%) and mackerel (4%). Traceability and independent quality assessments are needed to ensure consumer trust. This becomes even more significant for aquaculture as a future, given global overfishing estimates of over $50 billion per year and $2 trillion from 1974-2007.

Specific Asian blue economy initiatives are summarised in Table 5.1. Providing awareness of these initiatives presents myriad alternatives, aimiing to connvince policy makers, businesses and individuals that there are significant benefits, impacts and tradeoffs to pursuing this approach. These activties not only aim to protected ecosystem advantages but simultaneously generate viable livelihoods and facilitate adequate capacity building against climate change, population and ecological pressure growth plus other emerging risks. This requires adjusting existing education and training to empower humans to contribute. International initiatives include re-examining existing transboundary usage of marine areas, promoting greate blue economy awareness and accurate ecosystem/econnomic valuation of resources. Developing more supportable Western and Central Pacific fisheries includes eco-labelling, tuna supply chain analysis, proactive vessel register and traceability. It includes minimum efficient environmental standards of ships and ports. Maritime supply chains are anticipated to face extended producer responsibility for marine pollution. Domestic policies and laws need to be unified with international counterparts.

Other blue economy approaches recognise existing risks to their maritime domain and sovereignty, integrating it into their strategies, as previously outlined. Ethekwini Blue Ocean’s Economic Framework could learn the significance of maritime security governance from Indonesia (Dinarto 2017) by connecting to the SA Navy and others to ensure sufficient

42 | P a g e


protection. Indonesia is also forming regional partnerships, recognising the need to extend awareness of risks and maritime/coastal defences with its neighbours, too jointly pool resources as necessary. Over $3 billion has been lost each year from poached fisheries. Other threats included 108 piracy attacks in ports alone and 1,300,000 tons of maritime debris. A 2017 National Ocean Policy helped to visualise this coordinated approach and activities conceptually, to faciliate greater cooperation.

Table 5.1: Asia Blue Economy Initiatives

Cambodia Sustainable tourism and zoning in SihanoukvilleSustainable port and waste treatment in Sihanoukville

China Eclogical Remediation of Mangroves South ChinaShandong province artifiicial reefs, coastal tourism and aquaculture zoning

Indonesia Mangrove restoration and coral reef rehabilitation, Ecotourism and MPA’s; PROPER program compliance of industries to pollution regulations and recognition system. Green ports -PT Teluk Lamong. National Action Plan on Marine Plastic Debris 2017-2025.Fisheries Improvement Project, Pollution reduction.

Korea (Republic of) Wetland conservation sites, marine protected areas; Fisheries Resources Protection Zone, TAC program, Marine ranching, Comprehensive Plan for Green Busan Port, Coastal Total Pollutant Control System in Masan Bay, Siwha-Incheon, Busan, Ulsan, Gwangyang.

Malaysia Marine parks and ecotourism with monitoring, Green Ports -shore power/marine sanctuary and ballast water, Sustainable marine aquaculture and fisheries; Alternative livelihood seaweed cultivation and tourism, Climate Change Response: National Coastal Vulnerability Index study; Integrated Shoreline Management Plan implementation, Adaptation Measures

Philippines Sustainable fisheries -seasonal closure, Amended Fisheries Code, ecosystem-based approach; registration of fisherfolk; conservation of blue crabs and swordfish, ban on sargassum and black corals, Habitat restoration and conservationBe GREEN recruited over 5000 youth, From Hooks to Books produced 33% increase in payments to fishing communities. PHP 35 million was paid to local community as boat rentals. 12 beaches protected 5600 hatchlings. Palawan Materials Recycling Factory averted 80-83% of total waste from the landfill site and oceans.

Thailand Koh Mak, low carbon tourist destination project, Crab Bank Model in Chumporn and Surat Thani; Seagrass Seeding Bank

Timor Leste Sustainable fisheries and aquaculture, 8 MPA’s, Mangroe rehabilitation, Solid waste management Ecobank annd Green Schools

Vietnam Mangrove restoration in Ca Mau and Tien Giang province, Biodiversity connservation to respond to climate change, Climate smart aquaculture, Green growth for 28 provinces (UNEP)

Source: PEMSEA 2017.

Conversely China and the US, as two of the most formidable economic superpowers, with significant navies and maritime domains, have yet to fully conceptualise the transformation of their ocean economies towards a more ecologically and socially conscious model. Considerable marine environment threats jeopardise this but have yet to be sufficiently prioritised along with climate change. Rapid economic growth has been facilitated by fossil fuels but cannot remain indefinitely. China’s perspective has been to focus on a coordinated coastal planning and

43 | P a g e


stakeholder response in the 2008 National Industrial Marine Development Plan rather than targeting the environment as with other blue economy strategies globally. Conathan and Moore (2015) recommend the need for a joint ecosystem-based valuation; joint ocean planning, Blue Technology clusters, experiences of best practises and oceanographic data. This approach would be advantageous to pursue to be more internationally credible, reducing reputational, environmental and other risks. China have also pioneered a specific “Blue Economic Zone or free trade area specifically for related activities. This will provide specific incentives and plans, favouring a holistic approach rather than the isolated stakeholder and activity based initiatives of its more free market, international counterparts.

Greater cooperation over individual US regions’ mutual abilities to plan and modify ocean/waterway usage was formed with the 2010 National Ocean Policy, Implementation Plan. Conversely, the US have established a National Ocean Economics Programme, targeting “aspects that contribute or rely upon healthy oceans and coasts that simultaneously serve or have the potential to serve as major economic drivers in their own right: sustainable fisheries, recreation and tourism, coastal ecosystem restoration, and offshore renewable energy development” (Conathan and Moore 2015). It seeks sufficient information for the most capable long-term decision making for communities and policy makers. San Diego and the Maritime Alliance have formed a joint 2012 partnership in a blue economy cluster, which eThekwini’s Maritime Cluster could be specifically leveraged to occupy a similar role for common marketing, economies of scale and support.

Bangladesh’s blue economy is focusing on accurate valuation of ocean ecosystems as natural capital, model policy reform scenarios to set targets and develop public investment strategies along with coordinating the planning process and future directions to consider long term consequences of actions or inactions (World Bank 2018). Accurate valuations are only considered possible once the true status of ecological degradation is accurately and comprehensively captured. It entails identifying all activities and their geographic value chains, separating the blue economy sector from measuring its economic hinterland where possible. Scenario mapping is advised to consider both a “brown economy business as usual scenario” and a blue economy, whilst considering changing risks, trends and opportunities. It includes specific penalties and incentives to convert ocean sector participants to more sustainable alternatives. Encouraging stakeholders to relinquish information, to avoid prevarication and prepare is also seen as essential to ensure mutually advantageous, blue economy future outcomes are achieved and remain. Core elements were summarised in its policy framework: D.I.R.E.C.T. + MAX. This translates to Develop and strengthen national policies to better integrate blue economy factors; Implement policies for a healthy, resilient and productive ocean space. It adds: “Raise Awareness with measures such as a virtual common education platform,” “Ensure ocean wealth is kept national and local, “Construct infrastructure (soft/hard/blue/green); and “Transform research and development and national knowledge centres via national links. A public-private sector partnership is proposed under MAXimize to ensure sufficient finance as available, leveraged and allocated.

Australia’s blue economy approach has prioritised ensuring sufficient institutional capacity and private sector interest or willingness to engage by highlighting oceans as natural capital, livelihoods, good business and drivers of innovation (ANCORS 2016). It recognises how

44 | P a g e


various individuals, organisations and governments perceive oceans/coasts and respond differently. For example, those aiming to preserve natural capital utilise tools such as marine spatial planning and protected areas. Those as livelihoods often favour community consultation and projects to attain their aim. Businesses aim for policies, incentives, deterrents and infrastructure. Those focusing on innovation propose additional research networking, incubation entrepreneur hubs as start-up accelerators and data. Maritime security also remains essential. The source recognised opportunities in ecosystem protection; blue coastal zone management; defence and surveillance; blue industry and energy production including desalinisation, deep sea mining and offshore renewable energy; along with blue harvesting via fisheries and aquaculture. Others have increased finance, partnerships and institutional capacity (European Investment Bank, 2017) including 12.4 billion euros to maritime transport related projects between 2007-2016, enhancing competitiveness, improved vessel efficiency; climateproofing infrastructure and reducing fossil fuel dependency. It included canal bank and shoreline protection. Funding conditions support cabotage and international marine environmental standards or performance.

Public-private sector partnership are increasingly favoured, given state constraints for many nations. Understanding the behaviour and psychology of investors to invest in the European Union’s Blue Growth Strategy has also been investigated, given risk-averse expectations dominate (Van Den Burg et. al 2017). Lessons for eThekwini include the need for “stable, predictable, and effective government policies and support schemes,” to offset financial and other risks for investment decisions. It created a literature review, survey and investor database (MARIBE) of 315 actors with identified activities, investor type and contact details. They identified: compatibility with sustainable profile and business aims; attractiveness of return on investment; innovation potential; degree of policy support and incentives/penalties; nature of legislation, access to finance; public resistance, lack of markets and information, legal and regulatory risks. One investor cited: “You invest in growth potential and the scale of businesses not the development of technology. The technology is already there, it is about investing in the right companies to continue marketing and thereby change the aquaculture industry in a positive way.” The sector suggested tax breaks, loans, bonds, guarantees, equity, infrastructure, research and education training as mechanisms to stimulate investment and development growth.

Economic diversification and recognition of the ocean’s potential, if responsibly managed, is being increasingly recognised by island states such as Mauritius with its roadmap, blue economy strategy and Ocean Ministry (FICCI 2017). India’s equivalent of eThekwini’s Blue Oceans Economic Framework is mentioned as requiring several characteristics to succeed including to “ensure a just and equitable environment for securing the business opportunities in the Indian Ocean region.” It aspires to “ensure coordination between mature and emerging sectors. Since mature sectors (e.g. shipping, ports, maritime logistics etc.) have the experience of accounting for security challenges, they could provide valuable lessons to the new emerging sectors (e.g. minerals exploitation and renewable energy) in best accounting for security threats.” It extends to “including elements of national and human security, marine safety and ecological integrity, both in planning and in operations.” The culmination of this strategy would establish an Atlas of Blue Economy Assets and a Compendium of Best Practises, to share experiences.

45 | P a g e


The Cape Verde Government’s blue economy approach includes improved port facilities e.g. the container, commercial fishing and cruise terminal. It extends to augmenting naval construction/repair facilities from 2,000 to 3,800 tons (12 million euros), creating an Oceanarium, port logistics centre and real estate (Cape Verde Government, 2018). It possesses 1,717 fishing vessels. Mostly it envisions itself as a passenger and maritime service hub, experiencing 22.6% trade growth in 2017. Projects favour a public-private partnership. A new cruise terminal is anticipated to attract 30 million euros in investments, generating 120-215 jobs, excluding 45-90 euros per passenger per visit. A 17,000,000 euro Oceanarium hopes to attract 100,000 tourists per year, whilst facilitating marine environment education. The port aims to attract 12,000,000 euros in investment primarily for new cranes and other equipment whilst a 5,000,000 euro container freight station could support up to 2,000 jobs. A 3.3 hectare waterfront real estate commercial and residential precinct could support 150 direct and 250 indirect jobs, contributing over 12,000,000 euros.

5.2 Local and Regional

South Africa mirrors other global and African nations aiming to capitalise on emerging blue economy opportunities, but numerous existing policies and legislation need to be reviewed, to avoid superfluous duplication of resources. eThekwini’s Blue Oceans’ Economic Framework could be sufficiently motivated to overcome any policies currently ignoring reference to the blue economy or Operation Phakisa., along with the National Development Plan (Chapters 5, 9 and 15) and SIP Projects, which could aim to increase service delivery, community and economic development. Through awareness, import substitution, pilot projects, commercialisation, skills and technology transfer, experience, information/research, advice, assistance, networking and funding, mutual objectives can be achieved. The Presidential Infrastructural Coordinating Commission is responsible for implementing Operation Phakisa under the Treasury. It aims to consider a long-term perspective – which higher education including our existing maritime universities and colleges can assist in. The National Infrastructure Plan allocated an initial R827 billion to updating infrastructure. SAIMI and other maritime stakeholders can ensure that maladaptation is minimised especially for marine/coastal environments, climates and participants. It can facilitate local source procurement and contracts, minimising foreign exchange and balance of payment costs as much as possible. Individual projects would find it more cost effective to sponsor specific faculty/students to research specific problems. Specific plans to be reviewed include:

2015-2020: Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Strategic Plan. 2013-2018: Department of Communications: Strategic Plan. 2015-2020: Department of Defence Strategic Plan. 2015-2020: Department of Higher Education and Training Revised Strategic Plan. DHET Research Agenda. 2014-2019: Department of Mineral Resources Strategic Plan. Department of Rural Development and Land Reform. Department of Science and Technology Innovation Plan. Department of Trade and Industry Industrial Policy Action Plan.

46 | P a g e


2015/2016-2019/2020: Home Affairs Strategic Plan. 2015-2020: International Relations and Cooperation, Revised Strategic Plan. 2017: National Tourism Sector Strategy. 2015/2016-2019/2020: Water and Sanitation Strategic Plan.

Aside from marine and coastal tourism objectives, the maritime knowledge economy could aid the 2017 National Tourism Sector Strategy intentions via Pillar One: Effective Marketing. Pillar Two facilitates ease of access. Pillar Three focuses on the Visitor Experience and Pillar Four on Destination Management. Targets such as the Department of Science and Technology Innovation Plan need specific revision to incorporate the human and institutional capacity capable of generating human resources and knowledge infrastructure to overcome the ‘gap’ between research results and actual socio-economic attainments. It can attain this via specific employment, employability skills, new businesses, enhanced competitiveness, tax revenues and other measurable indicators. Maritime education providers can assist the pharmaceutical industry target of 350 jobs and R1.5 billion through research in marine contact, ecosystems, seaweed/aquaculture products, maritime health and psychology or human factors. In particular local products/species could be tested for medicinal purposes and commercially developed. Agro-processing could benefit similarly for agriculture and aquaculture techniques. Campuses could aid business and communities through access to lectures, courses, training, seed capital, special facilities, an extension service, experience, IP and funding advice, marketing, business and technology. Research into marketing, logistics, maritime business, economics, law and even shelf extension life can aid agriculture and other exports. The plan indicates the ‘Farmer to Pharma’ bio-economy value chain ignoring oceans. This is mirrored in the DTI Plan to aid the pharmaceutical, agriculture and aquaculture industries. Biotechnology only produced 5 start-ups. Part of this focuses on maximising the possible contributions of each blue economy stakeholder through specialised resources, recruitment and support.

Other blue economy opportunities include the space economy – especially satellites, technology and precise, small components manufacturing. In 2015 the satellite industry offered over $90 billion of opportunities. The Innovation Plan’s objective of energy security could benefit from research into ocean renewable energy, maritime geography/surveying risk management, climate change and uncertainty with maritime futures. It could investigate engineering, logistics and resource capacity for the plans’ desire to capture 25% of the global hydrogen fuel cell market –using comparative advantages in platinum group metals endowments. The blue economy sector could assist the newly conceived Climate Change Research Institute and focus on global change science. The plan also mentions subsidiary goals to increase the number of enrolled students, research output and PhD’s produced, outlined as possible through the recommendations in this report. It mentions how scholarship could be sustainably financed and supported over its lifecycle –applicable to other research institutions and topics. The following approach of South Africa’s National Skills Development Sector through the maritime sector could apply equally to other African nations seeking to formulate a Blue Economy Response Strategy or framework: “4.1 Establishing a credible institutional mechanism for skills planning, 4.2 Increasing access to occupationally‐directed programmes, 4.3 Promoting the growth of a public FET college system that is responsive to sector, local, regional and national skills needs and priorities 4.5 Encouraging better use of workplace‐based skills development with the potential to follow 4.6 assist through community training initiatives to reduce the impact of

47 | P a g e


climate change/ improve skills from existing and future research and 4.8 Building career and vocational guidance. 4.7 Increasing public sector capacity for improved service delivery and supporting the building of a developmental state.”

6: PRIVATE INITIATIVES - INTERNATIONAL, REGIONAL AND LOCAL

Although the majority of blue economy tools, methods and strategies have concentrated on governments and major organisations, this Literature Review considers how eThekwini’s Blue Oceans Economic Framework can benefit from the experiences and lessons of private sector international, regional and local initiatives towards developing this emergent economic sector. New Zealand’s marine economy has focused more on the efforts of local Maoris to maximise value, whilst preserving biodiversity and recognising ecological limits (Williams 2016). It stresses the importance of stimulating relationships among local communities, small enterprises and individuals, whist respecting indigenous culture. Iceland focus more on voluntary interactions of professionals electing to establish their own ocean cluster with individuals and organisations’ related common interests (Gestsson 2012) It includes joint marketing to technology firms and start-ups, whilst improving service to additional callers. These experience mutual self-interest in measuring, monitoring and maximising direct, indirect and other economic multipliers including productivity and employment. It assists in overcoming changes in taxes, other risks and regulatory uncertainty. Developing this sector contributed 26% to GDP in 2010, supporting 25,000-35,000 jobs (Sigfursonn and Arnason 2012). This recognised the value of mutually interdependent and supportive, related supply chains such as metal, packaging and plastics, wood and other raw resources, chemicals, research, manufacturing and government. Similar activities have been recognised as aiding product innovation and development, commercialisation and exports. These activities developed in responses to the commercial prospects offered by market requirements rather than a coordinated government policy framework.

Many have agreed to voluntary, self-enforcement measures out of pragmatic self-interest. These include avoiding genetically modified organisms, protects endangered species and averts invasive species. It includes “Potential markets should be identified, and competitive advantages consolidated.” “All activities should exercise due diligence and comply with national and local legislation related to the sustainable capture, harvesting, use of, and trade in, goods and services derived from coastal and marine biodiversity.” Human, gender and property rights are considered essential to include in any intended frameworks as access to finance conditions (European Investment Bank 2017). This source recognised how commercial finance has selectively targeted research and development for the blue bio-economy, with limited support for commercialisation. Greater awareness is needed of existing sources and their criteria along with an information and knowledge sharing exchange. It acknowledged that regulations, market and demand need to be carefully formulated otherwise they can present severe adverse risks not just opportunities. Effective coordination and communication remain critical. High risks are perceived to exist from new, uncertain technology, current regulatory gaps and viability of markets with supportive ecosystem resources for full commercialisation. UNTAD (2017) cites examples of Green Wave 3D and other forms of seaweed farming; algotherm cosmetics (from well protected sanctuaries); Baja California whale watching and an Ecuador sustainable,

48 | P a g e


wetlands originated products such as crabs and shellfish. UNCTAD (2017) specifically emphasise commercial attention towards the blue bioeconomy towards establishing significant value chains. Examples include market access, focus, partnering, innovation, collaboration and information sharing. Fisheries creates myriad economic opportunities from harvesting to cleaning, processing, logistics and distribution; certification, services and marketing. These products have yet to affirm the same capacity for cashflow, profit, sales revenue, throughput, cost reduction, economies of scale, productive and allocative efficiency as ocean economy or carbon economy rivals. It projects the decline of fossil fuels combined with increased pressure for food and other global resources; as sufficient further motivations for the commercial sector to formulate their own responses and initiatives that will have to be increasingly considered. It selectively highlights future capacity to attain autarky, attain import substitution and continuity for many resources, maintaining competitiveness and reducing ecological/carbon footprints. In Brazil knowledge networks are proposed by academics as imperative to gain from other nations with greater interest, awareness and experience for cross-scale transformations towards a blue economy, given a lack of constant prioritisation by any tier of government or major corporation, (Gerhardinger et. al 2018). These networks would resolve issues surrounding ocean governance, marine protected areas via spatial planning and forming an ecosystem-based approach.

Although the Kenyan government worked with other stakeholders to form Africa’s first Blue Economy Conference, the free choice of individual entities elected to establish blue economy networks and disseminate core lessons for Africa blue ocean economy efforts (SBEC Technical Review Committee, 2018.) Sections targeted smart shipping and ports; employment and poverty reduction; a resilient coast and infrastructure program; sustainable energy, fisheries, maritime security and safety along with a socially inclusive and financed blue economy. Youth, academics, diaspora migrants, civil society businesses and political leadership all focused on separate events to pledge commitments and identify ideas. 16,250 participants from 184 countries attended. Curriculums need to be developed. Evidence based knowledge and technology was prized as crucial for capable decision making with the need for regional research centres and financing sources, with firm actions against threats. Climateproofed maritime supply chains, processes, infrastructure and ecosystems were particularly highlighted as necessary. Alternative private initiatives include investing in the economic, social and environment/research prospects of blue carbon or coastal ecosystems (Thomas 2015), to maximise long term benefits. This includes establishing prototype supply chains, mapping out stakeholders and their interdependent relationships. It entails pinpointing and working to resolve legal, commercial, environmental, fiscal and other unknown risks as much as practically possible. Current challenges include competent enforcement and monitoring processes; accessibility; emarket entry barriers, equity, efficiency, a long-term profitable rate of investment return and capable governance.

Various international organisations and private firms are seeeking to ensure the blue economy via blue carbon funding (Gordon et. al 2012) as compensation for payments incurred and services provided. The REDD+ experience requires blue carbon to be as competitive as its green economy carbon pricing alternative. It would create a cap and trade market requiring evidence based, verified emissions reductions and improved ecological performance. However it notes that 13 out of the top 25 nations with extensive mangrove systems, lack any

49 | P a g e


conservation plans and few collect meaningful data. Asia contains only 38% of magroves but 63% of stuiis, Africa hosts 22% of mangorves but only 7% of infrastructure. Over 240,000,000 tons of carbon diocxide originates from mangrove deforestation each year. Restricted stakeholder engagement exists. Ethekwini, Richard’s Bay and other coastal settlements could further profit from including the concepts of blue carbon conservation into their blue economy strategic framework (UNEP 2016). For exampple Madagascar’s 2011 Blue Ventures involves safeguarding 27,015 hectares of mangroves and defendingrights of 23,000 people for a marine protected area. Another case study includes blue carbon financing of marine ecosystem conservation in Abidjan. Preserving existing mangroves would be worth a minimum $569.8 million over 20 years. This inclues 44.7-147.3 million in Nigeria, 19.3-36 million in Gabon and 3.2-14.2 million in Sierra Leone. This approach favours indigenous tenure, culture and presevation of knowlesge. It includes equitable compensation to the economically marginised and distribution of benefits. In Durban and South Africa, several private sector initiatives have been undertaken. Dormac along with Transnet envision further investment repair facilities by adding additional capacity from 2016 another company are proposing to modify the existing quay in its shipyard located within the designated Ship Repair Area to allow for a floating dry dock to be moored alongside the upgraded quay (160m in length). The purpose of the project is to improve facilities to supplement services to the international maritime industry. The proposed alterations aim to: improve shipyard attractiveness to vessels entering the Port for repair work; and increase service capacity from 8 to 25-42 vessels per annum. Total discovered potential oil reserves of 1 billion barrels off South Africa’s coastline, possibly generates increased demand for offshore supply and gas repair vessels. Dyer over 2015-2019 completed several individual voluntary initiatives on local blue economy projects including reports on cruise tourism; drones and ocean governance; Durban port expansion/developments; maritime education and training; blue economy finance; aquaculture; cabotage. A self-financed Blue Economy Future Website and organisation was established. It includes sections on lectures, centralised news and events, core stakeholder contacts, revised jobs, funding and other opportunities. It adds jobs, funding opportunities, employability skills presentations, research projects and other ideas. It aimed to publicise ideas, achievements, skills availability, research, projects, dreams and opportunities. People can pitch for funding, sell related products/ideas/debate, find out networking links and information. In “Establishing Operation Phakisa From Dreams to Reality,” Dyer (2018) noted whilst there have been several reports, manifestos and pilot projects; limited attention has focused on the practical side of ensuring a maritime future occurs. Africa is a historically land orientated continent, in a world with few concrete examples of completely, marine oriented economies, educations, policies, financial support and practical case studies. It aspires to illuminate the potential contribution the maritime sector could make to the future of Africa, its states and its individuals. This argues its significance for us all through improving vocational prospects, once we seek to rectify scarce skills. Without investing in maritime education legislation, specialised facilities, ensuring funding, enthusiastic students, capable entrepreneurs, forming partnerships and networking and aligning these to key priorities; Africa’s maritime future will swiftly fail into obliteration. It proposed providing a constitutionally enshrined, well defined, funded, coordinating sector institution such as SAIMI so that existing and future maritime education, policies, businesses, stakeholders, research and projects flourishes. Its overarching objective would be to improve existing and future maritime related, institutional capacity, wherever necessary.

50 | P a g e


To empower students, researchers, businesses, individuals, communities and other aquaculture value chain, potential stakeholders to achieve prosperous, sustainable aquaculture under Operation Phakisa, further investment is needed by both the private and public sector in education and research. The curriculum should define aquaculture and related stakeholder requirements for any who wish to participate in it. It would outline production processes, economics, ecological and species issues, marketing, business, storage, transport, distribution, financing options, policies, laws and how to become a part of the aquaculture value chain. (Dyer 2016) Education in this and other aspects of the blue economy should be combined with physical work experience opportunities/domestic and international academic exchange to gain practical experience from existing and pilot projects. African case studies/business plans would be pursued as most relevant wherever possible.

South Africa and Ethekwini and would benefit from prioritising research areas related to improving marine ecosystem security, literacy, resilience, survival and value via aquaculture and other blue economy sectors. It gains most from species health and knowledge, value adding/export increase and import/input substitution facilities, pharmaceutical potential, species health, improving commercialisation/economics, marketing, storage, existing product quality, quantity, transport capacity, business and commercial law/policies awareness. It could concentrate on unique species/biodiversity and increasing public awareness to stabilise demand and supply. South Africa would gain from concentrating on its own requirements – climate change, food security/diseases, establishing sustainability and export growth/research for localised marine ecology and value adding along with the value of both professional/recreational fishing and community aquaculture stakeholders. Existing opportunities include expanding into Africa/Southern hemisphere, establishing marine reserves, investigating local and foreign species implications in further pilot programmes. E.g. reviving hatcheries, promoting water security/quality, health products, the ornamental market, improving recreational/game fishing. Projected aims include eventual internationally recognised specialised qualifications in all section mentioned areas – undergraduate, postgraduate, research and basic skills/vocational/ community developed courses/technical education and key skills.

7: CONCLUSION: A BLUE OCEANS ECONOMY FRAMEWORK FOR ETHEKWINI

This literature review’s core aim was to define and review all significant aspects and sources relating to the global, African and local South African/Durban blue economy. This aims to assist in formulating an effective Blue Economy Strategy for eThekwini Municipality. The African Union AIMS (African Integrated Maritime Strategy) identifies the following macroeconomic opportunities for the ocean or blue economy in bullet points. Each of these exists only under this general framework without examples of specific projects, research, initiatives, finance, education, training and other practical outcomes. This report therefore proposes South Africa under SAMI and other maritime economy/education participants could provide these opportunities. It proposes chartering Africa’s Exclusive Economic Zones, coastal and territorial waters as a first priority to identify the extent of natural resources and the degree to which exploitation is ecologically, economically, socially and technically feasible. It proposes identifying core education capacity, research capacity and funding capacity. It advocates

51 | P a g e


working with other governments and businesses to establish core African continental and individual nation/company/society priorities and requirements. The African Port Management Association, PMAESA, the Union of African Shippers and the Maritime Organisation of West and Central Africa provide regional associations to contact. Local associations could extend networking, partnerships, expertise and investments beyond our borders, especially where most profitable and advantageous. They could aid in regional capacity building, feasibility studies, projects and consultancy.

A: Combined Exclusive Maritime Zone of Africa

B: Maritime Safety and Security

C: Regional Maritime Operational Centres

D: Fisheries and Aquaculture

E: Integrated Marine Tourism and Leisure

F: Giant Africa Aquariums

G: Integrated Maritime Human Resources

H: Disaster Risk Management

I: Hazardous Maritime Materials and Dangerous Goods

J: Delineation of Maritime Boundaries

K: Maritime Governance

L: Maritime Legal and Regulatory Regimes

This report counsels investigating existing constraints and risks. It recommends developing shipping, aquaculture and marine industry offshoots into other African nations. It suggests evaluating local and foreign competitors. It advises on considering local laws, policies and incentives –and lobbying for modifications when beneficial. It also promotes the following AIMS and other related macroeconomic opportunities prior to investigating the potential of other local South African and African economic sectors for specific maritime research and skills development applications. They also propose the need for research in maritime organised crimes; illegal fishing; natural disasters, marine environmental degradation and climate change. They identify the need for secure African strategic communications systems; modern navigational aids, hydrographic surveys, charts and maritime safety information. They need advice in maritime environment and biodiversity monitoring. Finally, for Ethekwini to devise its own capable Blue Oceans Economy Framework it needs to stimulate sufficient Blue Economy Awareness, Education and Funding among existing and new stakeholders (Sakhuja 2016).Core factors to succeed requires increased awareness and popular recognition; overcoming psychological reluctance to prioritise action; to preserve intellectual property rights; accessible blue economy scholarship and data access; sufficient technically skilled, trained and experienced labour forces through a specialised curriculum and incentives, specific initiatives to overcome current problems, knowledge and economic gaps It includes the value of foreign and local direct investment; coordination and networking.

52 | P a g e


LIST OF REFERENCES

ACS Directorate of Sustainable Tourism 2016, “Cruise Tourism in the Greater Caribbean Region”, Kingston.

ANCORS, 2016, “The Blue Economy in Australia,” University of Wollongong Report, Wollongong.

Azanza R, Junio-Menez M, Cabral R and Pernia E, 2017, “Valuing and Managing the Philippines’ Marine Resources Towards A Prosperous, Ocean-Based Blue Economy,” Public Policy, viewed 13 May 2019, https:\\www.researchgate.net.

Barbesgaard M, 2018, “Blue Growth: Saviour or Ocean Grabbing?” Journal of Peasant Studies, Paris.

Beedjahur Y, 2016, “Oceans 2030: Blue Economy Development Framework”, World Bank, Washington.

Benkstein A, 2018 “Prospects for the Kenyan Blue Economy,” South Africa Institute of International Affairs, Pretoria.

Brent Z, Barbesgaard M and Pedersen C, 2017 “The Blue Fix: Unmasking the Politics Behind the Promise of Blue Growth.

Britz P and Venter S, 2017, “Aquaculture Review South Africa,” World Aquaculture Review, Miami.

Cape Verde Government, 2018, “Cabo Verde: The Mid-Atlantic Gateway to the World’s Economy Blue Economy Sector, Cape Verde Government, Mindelo.

Caribbean Development Bank 2018, “Financing the Caribbean Blue Economy”, Caribbean Development Bank, Kingston.

Chasomeris M, 2013, ‘South Africa’s Maritime Policy and the Transformation of the Shipping Industry,’ University of KwaZulu-Natal Discussion Paper, Durban.

Commonwealth Secretariat, 2018, “The Seychelles Blue Economy Strategic Policy Framework and Roadmap Charting the Future 2018-2030”, Commonwealth Secretariat, Port Victoria.

Conathan M and Moore S, 2015 “Developing A Blue Economy in China and the United States,” Centre for American Progress Report, Beijing.

Davies, S, 2018, “An Oceans Economy and Strategy for Barbados,” Bridgetown.

Dinarto D, 2017, “Indonesia’s Blue Economy Initiative: Rethinking Maritime Security Challenges.”

Dyer J, 2018, “Establishing Operation Phakisa: From Dreams to Reality,” https://www.blueeconomyfuture.org.za.

Dyer J, 2017, “Cabotage and the Future of South African Shipping,” https://www.blueeconomyfuture.org.za.

Dyer J, 2016, Cruising and Cruise Ships as Tourism Gateways into African Shores: Potential Risks and Prospects for Cruise Tourism, the African Maritime Economy and Operation Phakisa in South Africa,” https://www.blueeconomyfuture.org.za.

53 | P a g e


Dyer J, 2016: “Harvesting the Coastal Sector: The Potential Future of Aquaculture for South Africa’s Maritime Economy,” https://www.blueeconomyfuture.org.za.

Dyer J, 2015, “Is Durban’s Proposed Port Expansion Really Necessary?”, UKZN Master’s Thesis, Durban https://www.blueeconomyfuture.org.za.

Ebarvia M, 2016, “Economic Assessment of Oceans for Sustainable Blue Economy Development,” Journal of Ocean and Coastal Economics, Vol. 2, Issue 7.

Economist Intelligence Unit, 2015, “The Blue Economy Growth, Opportunity and a Sustainable Ocean Economy,” Economist Intelligence Unit, London.

European Commission, 2017, “Investing in the Blue Economy. Unlocking the Potential of the Ocean to Create Jobs and Boost its Economy,” European Commission Report, Brussels.

European Investment Bank, 2017, “Support to the Blue Economy,” European Investment Bank, Batumi.

European Investment Bank 2016, “Access to Finance Conditions for Investments in Bio Based Industries and the Blue Economy”, European Investment Bank, Paris.

Food and Agricultural Organisation 2015, “Report of the FAO Workshop Launching the Blue Growth Initiative and Implementing An Ecosystem Based Approach To Aquaculture in Kenya,” FAO Report, Rome.

FICCI 2017, “Blue Economy Vision 2025,” Harnessing Business Potential for India Inc and International Partners,” FICCI, New Delhi.

Gestsson H, 2012, “Iceland’s Ocean Economy: The Economic Impact and Performance of the Ocean Cluster in 2011,” Iceland Ocean Cluster, Reykjavik.

Global Environment Facility, 2018, “Blue Economy Community Solutions,” UNDP Report, New York

Gordon D, Murray B, Pendleton L and Victor B, 2012, “Financing Options for Blue Carbon: Opportunities and Lessons from the REDD+ Experience,” Nicholas Institute, Due University, Durham.

Green C, 2017, “The Blue Economy: Prospects, Challenges and Opportunities for Jamaica, University of West Indies, Kingston.

Hare J, 2012, ‘The South African Maritime Flag. An Indigenous Fleet? Myth or Reality?’ South African Maritime Industry Conference, 4th–6th July 2012, Cape Town.

Harris J and Lombard A, 2018 “Socio-Ecological Resilience in South Africa’s Blue Economy: The Role of Marine Protected Areas,” South Africa Institute of International Affairs, Pretoria.

Human Resources Development Council of South Africa, 2014, “Maritime Sector Skills Technical Task Team Report,” HRDC, Pretoria.

Johnson K, Dalton G and Masters I, 2018, “Building Industries at Sea: Blue Growth and the New Maritime Economy,” River Publishers, Gistrup.

Kelleher, 2015, “Building the Blue Economy in the Western Indian Ocean,” Blue Economy and Ocean Governance Workshop, Mahé.

54 | P a g e


Klarenbeeck T, 2016, “South African Marine and Antarctic Research Strategy,” National Research Foundation, Pretoria.

Lloyd-Evans M, 2018, “Blue Bioeconomy Situation Report and Perspectives, EMOFA, Paris.

Local R, 2018, “The Ten Knots Group of Companies and The Blue Economy,” Ten Knots Presentation, Palawan

McKinley E, Rojas O, Hattam C, Germond-Duret C, Martin I, Hopkins C, Aponte H and Potts T, 2018, “Charting the Course for a Blue Economy in Peru: A Research Agenda,” Environment, Development and Sustainability, Lima.

Morillo R and Spalding M, 2017, “A Sustainable Blue Economy, Rockefeller Insights Report, New York.

Pacific Islands Development Forum, 2018, “Symposium Report SD14 Pacific Commitment 2018 Action Agenda”, Pacific Islands Development Forum, Suva.

Pacific Islands Development Forum, 2018, “First High Level Pacific Blue Economy Conference Summary”, Pacific Islands Development Forum, Suva.

Parliament 2017 Comprehensive Maritime Transport Policy, Parliament, Cape Town.

PEMSEA 2017, “Blue Economy Forum 2017 Proceedings,” Bangkok.

Potts J, Wilkings A, Lynch M and MacFatridge S, 2016, “State of Sustainability Initiatives Review: Standards and the Blue Economy,” International Institute of Sustainable Development,” Winnipeg.

Rouhani Q and Britz P, 2007, “Contribution of Aquaculture to Rural Livelihoods in South Africa: A Baseline Study,” Water Research Commission Report, Pretoria.

Rustad M, 2019, “Sustainable Blue Economy in the Norwegian Arctic, DNV GL Report, Centre for Ocean and the Arctic, Oslo.

Rustomjee C, 2018, “Green Shoots For the African Blue Economy,” Centre for International Governance, New Delhi

Rustomjee C, 2015, Caribbean Blue Economy Report, World Bank Report, Paris. Rustomjee C, 2015, Caribbean Blue Economy Report, World Bank Report, Paris.

Sakhuja V 2016, “Blue Economy Awareness, Education and Funding”, Maritime India, Chennai.

Santos C, 2019, “Policies for Innovation in Ocean Economy -Port Tech Cluster Initiative of Portugal, Directorate General of Sea Politics, Lisbon.

SBEC Technical Review Committee, 2018, “Report on the Global Sustainable Blue Economy Conference 26tth-28th November 2018, Nairobi Kenya,” Nairobi.

Scholl M, 2006, “Salmon Farming in Gansbaai: An Ecological Disaster,” White Shark Trust Report, Cape Town.

Sewell S, 2018, “Washington’s Blue Economy: Accelerating Innovation for a Sustainable Maritime Future,” Department of Commerce, Washington.

Sigfursonn T and Arnason R, 2012, “The Importance of the Ocean Cluster for the Icelandic Economy,” Reykjavik.

55 | P a g e


Simpson N, 2019, “Ocean Economy and Trade Strategies Project. National Stakeholder Consultation Barbados, Bridgetown.

Singh A, 2016, “The Blue Economy. Opportunities For Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation: A CARICOM Perspective,” Kingston.

South African Maritime Industry Conference, 2017, “Report Proceedings and Outcome,” SAMIC Conference, Port Elizabeth.

South Africa Presidency, 2014, “Unlocking Operation Phakisa Offshore Oil and Gas Exploration Final Lab Report,” South African Presidency, Pretoria

South Africa Presidency, 2014, “Unlocking Operation Phakisa Marine Protection and Governance Final Lab Report,” South African Presidency, Pretoria

Taylor S, Hudson J, Xirou H and Tsiarta C, 2017, “Green Jobs in the Blue Economy,” Eunomia, Economic Commission, Brussels.

The Presidency 2014, “Operation Phakisa Aquaculture Lab Report,” The Presidency, Pretoria.

Thomas S, 2015, “Blue Carbon: A Study of the Potential of Coastal Ecosystem Resource Management in Global Climate Policy and Carbon Markets,” University of Queensland PhD Thesis, Brisbane.

UNCTAD 2018, “Blue Bio Trade. Harnessing Marine Trade To Support Ecological Sustainability and Economic Equity,” UNCTAD 2018, New York.

United Nations Economic Commission For Africa, 2018, “Africa’s Blue Economy. Opportunities and Challenges To Bolster Sustainable Development and Socioeconomic Transformation, UNECA Report, Addis Ababa.

United Nations Economic Commission For Africa, 2017, “The Blue Economy,” UNECA Report, Addis Ababa.

United Nations Economic Commission For Africa, 2014, “Unblocking the full potential of the African Blue Economy. Are African Small Island Developing States Ready to Embrace the Opportunities?” UNECA Report, Addis Ababa.

UNEP, 2017, “Blue Carbon Financing of Mangrove Conservation in the Abidjan Convention Region A Feasibility Study.” UNEP Report, Abidjan.

UNEP, 2016, “Blue Economy for a Healthy Mediterranean -Measuring, Monitoring and Promoting an Environmentally Sustainable Economy in the Mediterranean Region, UNEP Report, Paris.

University of Stellenbosch Business School, 2017: The Future of the Western Cape Agricultural Sector in the Context of the 4th Industrial Revolution/ Review Aquaculture,” University of Stellenbosch Report, Stellenbosch.

Van Den Burg S, Stuiver M, Bolman B, Wijnen R, Salness T and Dalton G, 2017, “Mobilising Investors for Blue Growth,” Frontiers of Marine Science Vol. 3, Issue 291, New Delhi.

Williams M, 2016, “Creating Value From A Blue Economy,” Sustainable Seas Foundation, Auckland.

World Bank 2017, “Towards A Blue Economy: A Promise For Sustainable Growth in the Caribbean, World Bank 2017 Report, Washington.

56 | P a g e


World Bank, 2018, “Towards A Blue Economy: A Pathway for Bangladesh’s Sustainable Growth,” World Bank Report, Washington.

World Bank and United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2017, “The Potential of the Blue Economy: Increasing Long Term Benefits of the Sustainable Use of Marine Resources for Small Island Developing States and Coastal Least Developed Countries. World Bank, Washington.

World Wildlife Fund, 2011, “Fisheries: Facts and Trends - South Africa,” World Wildlife Fund Report, New York.

57 | P a g e


determining an african city’s blue economy sttrategy via a ... an african city'… · web...

Documents