WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/SPS/GEN/687 
6 April 2006 
 (06-1636) 
Committee on Sanitary a nd Phytosanitary Measures Original:   English 
  
 
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE RELATED TO FISHERIES SECTOR- 
EXPERIENCE FROM THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA 
 
Communication from Tanzania
 
 
 
 The following communication, received on 30 Marc h 2006, is being circulated at the request 
of the Delegation of Uganda.  
_______________ 
 
 
I. INTRODUCTION 
 
 
 
Lake 
Tanganyika Indian Ocean
L. Nyasa L. VictoriaG/SPS/GEN/687 
Page 2  
 
  1. Tanzania lands between 350,000 to 400,000mt of  fish per annum and exports about 20% of 
this quantity.  The fisheries sector employs about 2 million people directly and indirectly.  Between 
1996 and 1999 it suffered three major bans, the worst being in 1999, which lasted 11 months.  All the 
bans were based on the precautionary measure, non ha d a scientific justification.  First case was a 
cholera scare in Mozambique, the second cholera in East Africa and the third was suspicion of 
pesticide residues in fishery products in Uganda. 
2. The following were the major effects of the bans: 
• Loss of foreign exchange earnings (e.g. fo r the 1999 ban alone about US$ 90 million was 
lost);  
• Around US$ 8 million was reinvested by the G overnment and the industry to address the 
perceived hygienic non compliances; 
• Collapse of ancillary industries such as soft drinks and small scale enterprises associated 
with the fish trade, i.e. ice production, net mending, fish transportation, food vending etc; 
• Collapse of stakeholders' incomes resulting in  high incidences of school dropouts, poor 
health, unemployment; 
• Fall in price of fish from US$ 0.8 of a dollar to US$0.2; 
• High incidences of social vices;  and 
• Total fishery product exports fell by 40%. 
 
II. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE  
3. After the bans and much cry, the internationa l community rallied to our rescue at different 
times since 1998.  So far, Tanzania has receiv ed technical assistance from the following 
organisations:  UNIDO, World Bank, FAO and the European Communities. 
A. UNIDO 
4. In 1998, UNIDO ran two training workshops on h ygienic production of fish and fishery 
products.  The main beneficiaries were the compet ent authority, fish processing industry and the 
supply chain.  In total around 400 people were trained in 60 days. 
5. Where as the effort by UNIDO to assist w as commendable, the training was not successful 
mainly due to: 
• Training needs assessment was not conducted prior to designing the training; 
• Lecture materials were not appropriate to the situation at hand/environment; 
• Project design was  a cut and paste situation;  and 
• The technical experts came with pre-conceive d ideas as to what should be the solution to 
issues. 
 
6. UNIDO came again after the 1999 ban, providi ng technical assistance for a quality assurance 
system for monitoring and evaluating chemical re sidues in fish as well as the upstream situation. 
7. Different from the first project, this one was successful mainly because:  
• 
UNIDO collaborated with the Government and other main stake holders to identify 
priority areas, project design, implementation and even evaluation; 
• The UNIDO approach was to listen to stakehol ders' concerns and sugg estions.  Thereafter  
a way forward was formulated based on best and appropriate scientific or administrative 
practices.  G/SPS/GEN/687 
 Page 3 
 
 
  • The implementation was by local experts and UNIDO retained only the monitoring and 
evaluation functions.  Such an approach r esulted into cost reduction by about 40% and 
increased coverage by about 50%. 
• The recipient owned the project and through ac tive participation capacity for local staff 
was much enhanced. 
 
8. The resultant effect of UNIDO intervention was market confidence in the Fish Quality 
Assurance systems in Tanzania and therefore pr emium prices for products, i.e. Tanzanian products 
were fetching 15 cents more per k ilogramme above their competitors with similar products.  At home, 
livelihoods were re-sta bilized and enhanced. 
B. THE  EC SANITARY  PROJECT  FOR  ACP/OCT  COUNTRIES 
9. The project was launched before the media in September 2003, with promises to support the 
artisanal fishers, Competent Authority, private sector and laboratories.  To date only terms of 
reference, work plans and budget have been prepared  despite the fact that consultants have been 
coming and going.  Among the problems associated with such delays are: 
• Inability to align our resources to address such issues because of the promise, including 
locking out assistance from other donors; 
• Creates Government distrust by the public; 
• The long time lapse may result in reduced benefits in terms of increased prices and 
situation changes;  and 
• All this has a net effect of underdevelopment  rather than the envisaged development. 
 C. IMPLEMENTATION
 OF FISHERIES  MANAGEMENT  PLAN  PROJECT    
10. This is an EC-supported project aiming to im prove the management of the Lake Victoria 
fisheries resources. 
11. It is a good and quite useful project, however, there are some shortcomings, which include:  
• The project design involved the donor and government agencies, excluding other main 
actors such as the industrialist s, fishers, suppliers etc. 
• The project became effective in April 2004, bu t the start up was delayed, because of lack 
of grass roots involvement right from the start. 
• Political considerations take precedence over t echnical/scientific consideration, e.g. there 
is an equal allocation of the resources desp ite major differences in the number of fish 
landing sites:  Kenya (6% - 6 landing sites), Ta nzania (51% - 6 landing sites) and Uganda 
(43% - 6 landing sites). 
• Inflexibility: e.g. too big monitoring and surv eillance boats were specified during project 
design.  According to the current situation, th e boats will be too expensive to run, but the 
donor is not willing to change to manageable boats. 
 
D. FAO/COMESA/COMMON  FUND  FOR  COMMODITIES  PROJECT  ON VALUE  ADDED  
PRODUCTS 
12. This was a two-year project starting early 2002.  It was designed to add value to Nile perch 
fish and Sardines, the two being most important co mmercial species in Lake Victoria.  The funding 
agency is the Common Fund for Commodities (C FC) and the executing agency is the Common 
Market for East and Southern Africa (COMESA), wh ile the recipient is the East African Community.  G/SPS/GEN/687 
Page 4  
 
  The only work done to date was to conduct a study on the stock status of target species and markets 
for the envisaged value added products.  
13. Reasons for non-performance: 
• The project design did not allow contact betw een the donor and the recipients, rather the 
contact is with the third party (COMESA Headquarters in Lusaka) who do not identify 
with the project results in any manner;  and 
• Lack of clauses, to hold parties accountable for mistakes. 
 E. WORLD
 BANK/GEF  LAKE  VICTORIA  ENVIRONMENT  MANAGEMENT  PROJECT 
14. This is a World Bank/GEF funded project and executed by the three East African countries 
(Tanzania, Kenya and Uganda).  Among the component s were the development of some landing site 
facilities and procurement of laboratory equipment.  The project output was successful because of the: 
• Participatory nature during the desi gn phase leading to ownership;  and 
• Involvement of local experts during implementation. 
 F. FAO
 TRAINING OF TRAINERS COURSE  
15. FAO, under the umbrella of COMESA, provided technical assistance on training of trainers 
on HACCP to local experts in 1999 and January 2000.  This has been another successful story 
because of the involvement of stakeholders from the beginning to end. 
III. SUGGESTIONS 
16. Whereas we appreciate the spirit demonstrated  by the donor community and urge them to 
continue and where possible increase support to LDCs , consideration is requested in the following 
areas:  
(1) Most donor assistance is only available after a crisis has already occurred.  It can be 
equated to post mortem tears!  
(2) Enhanced transparency:  e.g. the European Communities may slap you with an unjustified 
ban where you loose so much money and many  lives are affected, and the same European 
Communities at a later date may give you technical assistance.  In essence all could be 
avoided through discussion leading to understanding the issues;  
(3) Local experts are deployed in all project as much as practicable; 
(4) Local stakeholders are fully involved in project design and implementation; 
(5) More training is offered to LDC countries so that they are fully compliant with 
SPS Agreement requirements;  and 
(6) Realistic and timely funding a nd implementation of projects. 
 
 
__________