The analysis of the 1985 and 1995 marine fishery censuses yields a wealth of information on the changes in the fishery sector as a whole. Information on small-scale fishermen and their households is part of the picture: it is unavoidably fragmentary and excludes qualitative information. As small-scale fishermen and their households comprise the majority of fisherfolk and of marine capture fishery households in Thailand, a field study of two fishing communities were carried out in early 1998 to supplement the information culled from the censuses. It consists of field surveys and individual interviews.
The objectives of the surveys and of the interviews were: to provide current information on small-scale fishermen and their households, especially the social and demographic aspects that are not adequately covered by the censuses; to provide qualitative information on small-scale fisherfolk which cannot be obtained from the censuses; and to gauge the likelihood of their effective participation in integrated coastal zone management programmes.
Sites of the field study
Two villages were selected for the field study: Sai Dang village in Ranong province and Koh Maphrao village in Phuket province. The main criterion of selection was that, studied together, they should provide a dynamic profile of fishing communities in Thailand and an indication of future developments in the characteristics of fishing communities in Thailand.
Sai Dang village was selected at the recommendation of a former provincial fishery officer in Ranong, to represent a rapidly changing fishing community. Koh Maphrao village was selected for the purpose of comparison, as it is a more stable fishing community. Both villages are in Coastal Zone V, which excludes differences between zones, admittedly at the expense of neglecting other zones. Nonetheless, Zone V is the zone where small-scale fisherfolk predominate and where marine capture fishery is rapidly growing. The locations of the villages in their respective province are shown in Figures 1.1 and 1.2.
Sai Dang is a coastal village about 23 km north of the town of Ranong and is within the Muang Ranong district. It is bisected North-South by the Petchkasem inter-provincial highway. The eastern section is adjacent to a range of hills and consists exclusively of agricultural house-holds, whereas the western section forms the eastern side of the Kra Buri estuary, the western shore of which is Burmese territory (Figure 1.3). This estuary is part of the Andaman Sea and the majority of households there are fishing households. The population is exclusively Buddhist. There are about 144 households in all, only half of which were randomly selected. The survey was carried out on 9–10 February 1998 with the assistance of 10 interviewers from the public health office of Ranong province.
Koh Maphrao is an island village situated about 10 minutes by outboard-powered boat away from the main island of Phuket. It has a total of 116 households clustered into three groups, one along the western shore adjacent to Phuket Island, one in the middle part of Koh Maphrao and one near the eastern shore. The population is exclusively Muslim and the majority of households earn their living from fishing or from rubber orchards or from both. Efforts were made to survey all the households during the survey period (4–6 March 1988), but only 94 were eventually surveyed because of the inability to reach some heads of household who were out fishing or at the sites of their green mussel cultures. The survey was conducted with the assistance of 10 interviewers from the provincial health office of Phuket.
The survey of both communities was based on two sets of questionnaires, one for the heads of household, the other for married women aged 15–44 within the households. The survey was supplemented by systematic interviews of a small number of villagers. Before the survey findings are presented in the following chapters, the provincial context of the surveyed villages needs to be explained.
Provincial context of the field study
Ranong province, where Sai Dang village is located, is in the upper southern region of Thailand, 568 km from Bangkok. It has an area of 3,298 sq km, 14 percent of which is coastal land and 86 percent mountainous area, and it includes 62 islands of various sizes. The coastline extends for 69 km. Adjacent to Ranong province are Chumphon to the north, Chumphon and Surat Thani to the west, Phangnga to the south and the Andaman Sea as well as Myanmar to the west.
Ranong has four districts (Muang, Kra Buri, La-un and Kapoe) and one sub-district (Suk Samran). It has 28 tambons, 147 villages and the total population was 137,544 in 1995. The people engage in agriculture, fishery, commerce, services and tourism. According to a 1994 village survey, there were 28,549 households in the non-municipal area, 21 percent of which earned less than B10000, another 21 percent earned between B10 000 and B19,999, 16 percent earned between B20,000 and B29,999, 17 percent earned between B30 000 and B49,999 and 16 percent earned B50,000 and higher per year (NSO, 1996a, p. 101).
Regarding capture fishery, one of the two problems identified by the Office of Environment Policy and Planning is the depletion of fishery resources caused by the declining quality of the seawater, greater use of more effective fishing gear, and illegal fishing (OEPP, 1997b). The second problem is decreased fishing grounds, caused by the extension of the exclusive economic zone to 200 nautical miles and by Myanmar's decision to stop further concessions to Thai vessels to fish in its territorial waters.
The mangrove area is deteriorated and declining due to encroachment for residential purpose and aquaculture. Coral reefs are being further destroyed by dynamite fishing and other unsuitable fishing methods as well as by sediments from mining. Seagrass tends to decline in quantity due to unsuitable conditions for growth.
As for Phuket province, it is the only island province of Thailand. It is situated in the Andaman Sea, about 867 km south of Bangkok. The area covers about 534 sq km and has 224 km of coastline, which is suitable for both fishing activities and tourism. About 70 percent of the province is mountainous, the rest coastal plains. The eastern part of the province consists of mangrove forests, whereas the western part has beautiful beaches.
The province has three districts (Muang, Thalang and Katu), 17 tambons and 107 villages and its population numbered 196 625 in 1993. The main economic activity and source of income is tourism. The other economic activities are marine capture fishery and coastal aquaculture, fishery-related processing industries, and mining. According to the latest NSO survey, there were 30,793 rural households in 1994. Of these, 12 percent earned less than B10,000, 12 percent earned between B10,000 and B19,999, 19 percent earned between B20,000 and B29,999, 21.7 percent earned between B30,000 and B49,999, and 19 percent earned B50,000 or more per year (NSO, 1996b, p. 99).
The two main problems in marine capture fishery are depleting fishery resources and declining catches. The depletion of fishery resources is caused by overfishing and by unsuitable use of fishing gear. The decrease in catches is caused by higher benzene and diesel costs, depleting fishery resources and lack of local labour (OEPP, 1997b). Coastal aquaculture faces the problem of declining production and profitability due to the higher cost of land, incorrect methods of culture, high prices of feed and chemicals and lack of group efforts. The mangrove area is declining due to encroachment for residence and aquaculture purposes. The coral reefs are deteriorating because of destructive fishing activities, mining and such an apparently innocuous tourist activity as sea walking.
Figure 1.1 Location of Sai Dang village in Ranong province
Figure 1.2 Location of Koh Maphrao village in Phuket province
Figure 1.3 Map of Sai Dang village
The survey of Sai Dang and Koh Maphrao villages was based on two sets of questionnaires, one for the heads of household and the other for the women aged 15–44 in the households. The household questionnaire consists of questions pertaining to the social and demographic characteristics of household members, of the head of the household and of the household itself. The questionnaire for women of fertile age consists of questions regarding fertility and family planning practice. This chapter is divided into the following sections: general characteristics, age and sex structure, social and demographic characteristics of household members; heads of household; household income and debts; and fertility and family planning.
General household characteristics
In terms of source of drinking water, 65 percent of the 79 households in Sai Dang village depend on private wells, as more households than in Koh Maphrao village depend on mixed farming. About 20 percent of the households, all of them located on the eastern side of the village, depend on water that runs down from the small hill bordering the village to the east. Half of the households in Koh Maphrao use water from private wells and the other half water from public wells. Sai Dang and Koh Maphrao cannot be compared in terms of electricity because the latter village does not have public electricity and has to depend on electricity generators (Table 2.1).
Regarding the treatment of drinking water, there is a significant difference between the two villages. Only 10 percent of the households in Sai Dang boil water for drinking, but 20 percent of the households in Koh Maphrao do so. This is due to the salinity of the water in the latter village, which is located on an island. The percentage of Sai Dang households that never boil water for drinking is more than twice that of Koh Maphrao households that don't either, also because of the availability of pipe water and water from the hill. A smaller percentage of the households in Sai Dang than in Koh Maphrao boil or filter their drinking water only some of the time for the same reasons (Table 2.2).
The availability of toilets is higher in Sai Dang than in Koh Maphrao. About 92 percent of the Sai Dang households have toilets, compared to about 83 percent in Koh Maphrao. This is due to the fact that in several cases in Koh Maphrao, recently married young people who are still having their houses built temporarily share the toilet in the home of their parents or use dug toilets. The toilets in Sai Dang, however, are not as sanitary as those in Koh Maphrao. About seven percent of toilets in Sai Dang and about two percent in Koh Maphrao are unsanitary toilets (Table 2.3).
Being in the mainland with better access to public utilities and consumer goods, Sai Dang has more varied sources of fuel for cooking. About 40 percent of the households use gas for cooking, 30 percent use both gas and electricity and about 20 percent use charcoal. In Koh Maphrao, about 80 percent of the households use gas for cooking and the rest use charcoal (Table 2.4).
In terms of rubbish disposal, households in Sai Dang are less aware of the need to keep the seawater unpolluted then are the households in Koh Maphrao. Almost 76 percent of the households in Sai Dang burn their rubbish, compared to about 90 percent in Koh Maphrao. What is alarming is that 17 percent of Sai Dang households dispose of their rubbish into the sea, whereas only one percent of those in Koh Maphrao do so (Table 2.5). The interview of two pairs of individuals of two generations in each of the villages will later confirm the lack of awareness in Sai Dang fishery households of the need to keep the coastal seawater unpolluted.
Age and sex structure
Families are smaller in Sai Dang than in Koh Maphrao. In Sai Dang village, almost 40 percent of the 79 surveyed households have four members. In Koh Maphrao, household size varies greatly, ranging from households with one member to one household with 12 members (Table 2.6). There are 320 household members in the 79 households sampled in Sai Dang, with an average of 4.1 persons per household. There are 414 members in the 94 households surveyed in Koh Maphrao, with an average of 4.7 persons per household. If the outlying value of the one household with 12 members is disregarded, the average declines to 4.3 persons per household (Table 2.7). Yet, the same table also indicates a wider variation in Koh Maphrao than in Sai Dang. That is, 59 percent of the 320 persons surveyed in Sai Dang are in households of four or five members, but only 41 percent in the case of the 414 persons sampled in Koh Maphrao.
Table 2.8 and Figures 2.1 and 2.2 show the age and sex structure of each fishing community. The Sai Dang demographic structure is much more irregular than that of Koh Maphrao, indicating that there may be quite a bit of migration in and out of Sai Dang. The age and sex distribution in Koh Maphrao indicates no such trend, but shows clearly that the birth rates are declining, resulting in a lower proportion of the population under 10 years of age.
Social and demographic characteristics of household members
In terms of marital status, there is a higher percentage of married household members in Sai Dang than in Koh Maphrao, and a lower percentage of single members. There is also a lower percentage of widowed or divorced persons. These different marital patterns are characteristic of the less developed and younger population of Sai Dang compared to that of Koh Maphrao. An indicator of this is the different age and sex structure already presented; another is the higher proportion of married members in the 20–29 age group in Sai Dang (Tables 2.9 and 2.10).
The level of education completed by the members of both communities is not high. Excluding those too young or studying, 71 percent and 76 percent of household members in each community completed only elementary education (Tables 2.11 and 2.12). Over 10 percent of the members in both communities did not receive any schooling.
Regarding the main occupation, household members in Sai Dang engage in more various activities than their counterparts in Koh Maphrao. They are also less involved in fishing activities, either as self-employed or as employees. Table 2.13 shows that in Sai Dang, ‘other occupations’ accounts for the highest proportion, followed by ‘housewife’, ‘agriculture’ and ‘fishery’, in that order. Table 2.14 shows that, in Koh Maphrao, the majority are engaged in fishing activities and that the other important occupation is agriculture (exclusively rubber orchards).
The majority of members of both communities (roughly 70 percent) have no minor occupation. Those in Sai Dang who do are engaged in agriculture, ‘other occupations’ and fishery, respectively (Table 2.15); in Koh Maphrao, they are engaged in ‘other occupations’, fishery or agriculture, in that order (Table 2.16).
Heads of household
About 90 percent of Sai Dang households and 93 percent of Koh Maphrao households are headed by men (Table 2.17). Regardless of gender, there is an equal proportion (24 percent) of households in Sai Dang headed by persons in the 30–39 and in the 40–49 age groups. In Koh Maphrao, 35 percent are in the 30–39 age group and 27 percent in the 40–49 age group. The average age of heads of household in Sai Dang is 43.5 years and 42.5 years in Koh Maphrao. This is due to the facts that a greater number of Sai Dang families are of the nuclear type and that there is a higher proportion of long established farming households. Those in Koh Maphrao are usually extended families, where relatives are taken as household members as well.
Without classifying the households into fishery or non-fishery households, the highest proportion of household heads in both communities report that, in terms of main occupation and employment status, they are fishermen or fishery employees (Table 2.18). In Sai Dang, both groups account for 29 percent of all the heads of household, while in Koh Maphrao, they account for 46 percent.
Only about one third of the heads of household in Koh Maphrao have a secondary occupation, but the proportion is higher in Sai Dang, mainly because of the greater variety of jobs available due to the proximity of the town of Ranong. Table 2.19 shows that about 63 percent of heads of household in Sai Dang and 67 percent in Koh Maphrao had no secondary occupation in 1997. Among those who did, the second jobs taken in Sai Dang were, by order of importance, agriculture, fishing activities and general labour, while in Koh Maphrao, they were fishing activities, agriculture and general labour.
The average annual income of the heads of household in Sai Dang is higher than that of their counterparts in Koh Maphrao, because the non-fishery occupations in Sai Dang are more varied and earn more regular income than in Koh Maphrao. Table 2.20 shows that, in 1997, heads of household in Sai Dang earned about B75,000 a year, compared to about B62,200 in Koh Maphrao. However, the heads of fishery households in Sai Dang earned about B60,000, i.e. roughly B13,000 less than their counterparts in Koh Maphrao. On the contrary, Sai Dang heads of non-fishery households earned about B84,000, almost double what their counterparts earned in Koh Maphrao. This is because almost all of the non-fishery households in Koh Maphrao depend on rubber orchards, whose production period lasts only three to four months per year.
Household incomes and debts
The actual gross annual household income in 1997 was higher in Sai Dang than in Koh Maphrao, for the same reasons given regarding the income of heads of household (Table 2.21). In Sai Dang, the total gross annual household income then was roughly B87,000; in Koh Maphrao, it averaged B74,500. Considering that the gross annual household income in the rural areas of the Southern Region was B84,528 in 1994, the inflation rates of 5.8 percent, 5.9 percent and 5.6 percent of the next three years (Bangkok Bank, 1998, p. 14) would have increased the average to around B 100,000 in 1997, a figure noticeably higher than the average income in the two villages under survey.
Nonetheless, the fishery households in Sai Dang earned less than their counterparts in Koh Maphrao, whereas the non-fishery households earned more. Fishery households in Sai Dang earned about B79,700, while their counterparts in Koh Maphrao earned B83,500. For the non-fishery households, the gross annual household income was B91,800 in Sai Dang and B63,900 in Koh Maphrao. Compared to the regional average, fishing households in both communities earned less, and much less in the case of Sai Dang fishing households.
Despite the actually higher household income in Sai Dang, a higher proportion of the households of both types in that village must have spent more of their gross income than was the case for those in Koh Maphrao. Table 2.22 shows interviewee opinions in both villages regarding household income sufficiency. In Sai Dang, almost 50 percent of the fishery households report that their household income is sufficient, but only 44 percent of the non-fishery households do so. In Koh Maphrao, 73 percent of the fisherfolk interviewed feel that their income is sufficient, but only 54 percent of the non-fishery interviewees report likewise. Examining all households that report income sufficiency, one finds that less than half of the interviewees in Sai Dang feel that their income was sufficient, compared to about 64 percent in Koh Maphrao.
It is only to be expected then that the proportion of households able to save is lower in Sai Dang than in Koh Maphrao. Table 2.23 shows that as a whole, 33 percent of the households in Sai Dang are able to save some of their income, while 47 percent of those in Koh Maphrao are able to do so. Examining the households by type, it becomes clear that roughly 30 percent of the households of both types in Sai Dang are able to save some income, but the rest are not. In Koh Maphrao as a whole, 47 percent of the households are able to save, while about 50 percent are unable to do so. However, if examined by household type, it is very notable that while more than 60 percent of the fishery households are able to save, less than 30 percent of the non-fishery households are able to do likewise. Because Koh Maphrao was not affected by the Zeta monsoon in 1997 but Sai Dang was, the comparison indicates as in the previous table that fishery households in Koh Maphrao are better off economically than the non-fishery households.
Despite the information from the two previous tables, it is surprising that a high percentage of the households in both Sai Dang and Koh Maphrao did not borrow. Table 2.24 shows that about 60 percent of the households in Sai Dang and about 70 percent in Koh Maphrao did not borrow in 1997 and that only about 35 percent in Sai Dang and 29 percent in Koh Maphrao did borrow. This finding supports the census finding that small-scale fishermen are less likely than medium- to large-scale fishermen to borrow (Table 3.9 in Part I).
Among those households that borrowed, Sai Dang households borrowed mainly from BAAC or other banks (43 percent) and from friends and relatives (35 percent). In Koh Maphrao, the majority of the households that borrowed did so from a local co-operative called Savings Group for Occupational Purposes (Table 2.25).
The amounts borrowed were not high in either communities, but they were higher in Sai Dang than in Koh Maphrao. In Sai Dang, about 43 percent of the households borrowed less than B10,000, compared to about 48 percent in Koh Maphrao. The average amount borrowed was about B21,000 in Sai Dang and B13,400 in Koh Maphrao (Table 2.26). In both communities, fishery households borrowed less than non-fishery households on average, most probably due to the fact that the former need to spend less on food. In Sai Dang, fishery households borrowed about B19,500, while the non-fishery households borrowed about B22,000 on average. In Koh Maphrao, the respective amounts were B10,400 and B16,750.
Table 2.27 shows the purpose of borrowing. The information about the purpose of borrowing among the fishery households was found to be not entirely reliable in the Sai Dang community. By later probing, it was found that a number of the interviewees who had borrowed from BAAC for the stated purpose of occupational investment used the loans for household consumption and payment of goods by instalment. In Koh Maphrao, 50 percent of the fishery households borrowed for occupational investment, but still quite a high percentage (42 percent) borrowed for household use. In terms of current debts, Table 2.28 shows that in Sai Dang as a whole, about 36 percent of households owe B20,000 or more, while in Koh Maphrao the percentage is eight percent. In both communities, however, about 40 percent of all households have no more debts.
Nonetheless, for both Sai Dang and Koh Maphrao, the data on the number of households borrowing money and subsequent related topics should be treated with extreme caution, as the cases are small. It is also likely that interviewees are unwilling to respond truthfully to these sensitive questions.
Fertility and family planning
To reiterate, the field study sampled 79 households in Sai Dang and 94 households in Koh Maphrao. Two sets of questionnaires were used, one for the households and the other for the women of fertile age within each household. Women of fertile age are defined as of 15 to 44 years of age. Because of the small number of households studied in each village and the necessity to classify women by age group, the distinction between fishing and non-fishing households was discarded. The decision is also based on the observation by a number of public health officials that there is hardly any difference any longer between the two types of households regarding fertility and family planning.
There are 68 women of fertile age in the Sai Dang community and the same number in Koh Maphrao. All but one woman in Sai Dang are Thai Buddhists, the one exception being a Burmese Buddhist. In Koh Maphrao all are Thai Muslims (Table 2.29). Almost 90 percent of the women in both communities speak the Southern Thai dialect at home (Table 2.30). However, more women in Sai Dang than in Koh Maphrao speak standard Thai fluently (Table 2.31).
The age distribution of fertile women in each community indicates a younger age structure in Sai Dang compared to Koh Maphrao. The majority of Sai Dang women are in the 20–29 age group, whereas the majority of the Koh Maphrao women are in the 30–39 age group. The proportion of Sai Dang women in the 15–19 age group is almost six times as high as that of Koh Maphrao women.
Table 2.32 shows the number of live births per woman by age group. Discounting age considerations, the majority of women in Sai Dang have either one child (31 percent) or two children (27 percent). In Koh Maphrao, there are variations and no clear majority: 28 percent have one child, 21 percent have two children and 25 percent have three. This finding is not surprising, given the younger age structure of fertile women in Sai Dang compared to Koh Maphrao. The average number of live births in Sai Dang is 1.78 per woman, while that of Koh Maphrao is 2.40 per woman.
Desired family size
The women interviewed were asked how many children they would like to have if they could start their married life again. Table 2.33 shows that, in Sai Dang, the majority of them (66 percent) would want two children and 19 percent would prefer three. In Koh Maphrao, the comparable percentages were 38 percent and 25 percent. In other words, 85 percent of the Sai Dang women would like two or three children, while only 63 percent of Koh Maphrao women expressed the same wish.
While there is no relationship between age and desired family size among the under 40 years old in Sai Dang (over 60 percent wishing for two children), there is a positive relationship between the two variables and women in the 20–29 and 30–39 age groups in Koh Maphrao. That is, those in the younger age group wish for two children while those in the older age group wish for two or three.
To gauge the sex preference for one's children, women stating that they wished for three children were selected and then classified by sex preference. Though their number was small, they did indicate a preference for male children, more strongly among Sai Dang women than among Koh Maphrao women. Almost 70 percent of the Sai Dang women would like two boys and one girl, but only 53 percent of the women in Koh Maphrao made the same choice.
The women interviewed were asked about their knowledge of various methods of family planning. Table 2.34 shows the responses in each village. The methods listed are the pill, injections, sterilization, IUD, condom, Norplant, safety period and external ejaculation. They were first asked without any prompting and then with prompting, i.e. a method was mentioned and they were asked for a brief description to check if they really knew about it. It was found that for the women of both communities, the two best-known methods were the pill and injections.
Without prompting, the pill and injections are the two methods known to most women in Sai Dang. The pill is known by 97 percent of the women interviewed and injections by 86 percent. Female sterilization is known by 63 percent of the women. Other methods that are known to more than 50 percent of the women are condom, IUD, Norplant and male sterilization, in that order. The method known to the lowest percentage of women in Sai Dang is the safety-period method, which is the least reliable method. After prompting, less than 20 percent of the women interviewed did not know about the most effective methods.
Table 2.34 also shows that the pill and injections are also the two methods known, without prompting, to most of the women interviewed in Koh Maphrao, 97 percent for the pill and 88 percent for injections. The other methods known to about 70 percent of the women are female sterilization, male sterilization and IUD. Some 60 percent knew about Norplant. Again, the least known method was the safety-period method; only about 12 percent of the women knew about it.
Regarding the attitude to family planning, Table 2.35 shows that roughly 95 percent of the interviewed women of all ages in both communities have a positive attitude toward family planning. The examination by age group also results in the same conclusion that the overwhelming majority (more than 80 percent in each age group) have a positive attitude toward family planning.
In terms of practice of family planning, Table 2.36 shows the responses of the women in each community when asked whether they had ever used the contraceptive methods listed in the previous paragraphs. As expected, the two methods ever used by the majority of women in both communities were the pill and injections.
In terms of current practice, the women were asked which method they were currently using. Tables 2.37 and 2.38 show the response of the women in Sai Dang and in Koh Maphrao respectively. In Sai Dang, the pill, female sterilization and injections are used by the highest percentages of women, i.e. 36.7 percent, 24.5 percent and 18.4 percent, respectively. Nineteen respondents were not using any method of contraception at the time, mainly women in the 20–29 age group hoping to get pregnant. In Koh Maphrao, the majority of women (62.5 percent) were taking the pill. Twenty respondents were not using any method of contraception at the time, mainly women in the 20–39 age group wishing for a child. The other reasons were allergy to contraceptives, being in the post-natal period, being infertile or, in a few cases, being past menopause.
Table 2.39 illustrates the sources of contraceptives. About 66 percent and 84 percent of the women in Sai Dang and in Koh Maphrao respectively obtain their contraceptives from the village public health centre. The higher percentage of women in Koh Maphrao using the family planning services provided by the centre is due to its proximity as well as to constant surveillance by the two public health officers there.
Summary and discussion
The households in Sai Dang have access to public electricity, piped water and relatively clean water from the hills. They are thus more likely to have many sources of drinking water and less likely to have to boil water to drink. Being on the mainland with better access to public utilities and consumer goods, Sai Dang households also have more varied sources of fuel for cooking. Though more households in Sai Dang than in Koh Maphrao have toilets, the proportion of households in Sai Dang having unsanitary dug toilets is higher than in Koh Maphrao. Sai Dang households are not as aware as those in Koh Maphrao of the need to keep the sea clean; a higher proportion of them dispose of their rubbish by throwing it into the sea. This relative lack of environmental awareness seems to be due to the fact that many fishing households in Sai Dang were established recently and their members still have to be granted full Thai citizenship. Field observation confirms that many households have just been set up and are of Burmese immigrants from the other side of the Kra Buri estuary.
The average household size is smaller in Sai Dang than in Koh Maphrao - 4.1 persons per household compared to 4.3. Sai Dang households are more likely to be of the nuclear type and Koh Maphrao households of the extended type comprised of members of three generations. The education attainment in both communities is not high; the majority completed only elementary education. The household members in Sai Dang engage in more varied occupations than those in Koh Maphrao and a lower proportion of them are involved in fishing activities, either as fishermen or as fishery employees.
The heads of household in both communities are almost exclusively male. In Sai Dang, their average age is 43.5 years, whereas in Koh Maphrao it is 42.5 years. This one-year difference is due to two facts: the higher proportion of long-established farming households in Sai Dang and the presence of more ageing relatives in Koh Maphrao households. About 29 percent of the heads of households in Sai Dang and about 46 percent in Koh Maphrao are fishermen or fishery employees. The heads of household in Sai Dang earn higher annual income on average than those in Koh Maphrao, because the non-fishery occupations in Sai Dang are more varied and provide more regular income. However, considering only fishery households, their heads in Sai Dang earn less than their counterparts in Koh Maphrao.
The actual gross annual household income in Sai Dang is higher than in Koh Maphrao for the reason already given regarding the differential income of the heads of household. Nevertheless, Sai Dang households seem to spend more of their gross income than those in Koh Maphrao, because the majority of them report that their household income is barely sufficient or insufficient, whereas the majority of Koh Maphrao households find their income sufficient. It follows that a smaller proportion of Sai Dang households are able to save on their income and a larger proportion have to borrow. The main sources of loan for Sai Dang households are BAAC, and friends and relatives. The majority of Koh Maphrao households that borrow do so from the locally established savings co-operative. In both communities, the loans are small, mostly under B10,000, but the average loan in Sai Dang is higher than it is in Koh Maphrao, no matter whether the borrowers are fishery or non-fishery households.
Considering only the fishery households, we found that one third of them in Sai Dang borrowed, but only one quarter in Koh Maphrao. This finding supports the census data that a small proportion of the small-scale marine capture fishery households were in debt, compared to medium- to large-scale households. However, the field data regarding the source of loan are not very consistent with those from the marine fishery censuses, which show that the main source of loan for small-scale fishermen is not BAAC but the middlemen. In the case of Sai Dang, it was found that BAAC was the main source but in the case of Koh Maphrao, the locally established savings co-operative was. The discrepancy may be due to data variability because the number of fishery households that borrowed was very small. In any case, this shows that Koh Maphrao households have been able to set up and successfully maintain an occupation-oriented organization. The implication of this ability in relation to an integrated coastal zone management programme is that such a programme would have a higher chance of success in Koh Maphrao than in Sai Dang.
The age structure in Sai Dang is younger than in Koh Maphrao and this reflected in the case of women of fertile age. The majority of Sai Dang women are in the 20–29 age group, while the majority of Koh Maphrao women are in the 30–39 age group. Being in the midst of their childbearing years, Sai Dang women have on average 1.78 children each. Being in the later part of their childbearing period, Koh Maphrao women have on average 2.4 children. The women in both communities have a very good knowledge of family planning methods, the most widely known of which are the pill and injections. They also display positive attitude toward family planning and use contraceptives to regulate the size of their families. As the desired family size of the women in both communities is of either two or three children, the future trend is that actual family size will stay the same as, or will be lower than, the desired family size, which is also the national trend. The implication of the trend toward lower fertility is that the population pressure on food, including fish and fishery products, will lessen over time. Future demand for seafood will arise more from the national and global trend toward health food, in which fish is the main source of white meat, and from rising export demand for fish and fishery products.
The findings about the two communities provide an indication that fishing communities in Thailand are in transition. Koh Maphrao village is a traditional fishing village where the majority of the households engage in fishery as their main occupation and derive sufficient income therefrom. The villagers are homogeneous in terms of occupation and related by kinship ties. They tend to live in extended households and are more or less self-sufficient in terms of food. Given the process of modernization and continuous exploitation of natural resources, there is a trend that Koh Maphrao will become similar to Sai Dang. The latter village is characterized by occupational diversification in which fishing households do not comprise the majority and are less self-sufficient. The members of the community tend to live in nuclear households and, due to migration, they are not related by kinship ties. Because of lower returns from primary occupations such as agriculture and fishery compared to those from industrial and service-related occupations, the fishing community is transforming itself into a primarily non-fishing community. In short, there is an indication that small fishing communities will gradually diversify economically because fishery as an occupation will be less sustainable. This trend could be reversed only if coastal fishery resources are more abundant and their exploitation is better managed and regulated.
Figure 2.1 Age and sex structure of Sai Dang, 1998
Source: Table 2.8
Figure 2.2 Age and sex structure of Koh Maphrao, 1998
Source: Table 2.8
Table 2.1 Source of household drinking water, Sai Dang village, Ranong province, and Koh Maphrao village, Phuket province, 1998
|Source of Drinking Water||Sai Dang Village||Koh Maphrao Village|
|Private pipe water||-||0.0||-||0.0|
|Public pipe water||9||11.4||-||0.0|
Table 2.2 Treatment of household drinking water, Sai Dang village, Ranong province, and Koh Maphrao village, Phuket province, 1998
|Treatment of Drinking Water||Sai Dang Village||Koh Maphrao Village|
Table 2.3 Availability of toilets, Sai Dang village, Ranong province, and Koh Maphrao village, Phuket province, 1998
|Availability of Toilet||Sai Dang Village||Koh Maphrao Village|
|No. of Households||%||No. of Households||%|
Table 2.4 Source of cooking fuel, Sai Dang village, Ranong province, and Koh Maphrao village, Phuket province, 1998
|Source of Cooking Fuel||Sai Dang Village||Koh Maphrao Village|
|No. of Households||%||No. of Households||%|
|Electricity & Gas||24||30.4||-||0.0|
Table 2.5 Methods of rubbish disposal of the households, Sai Dang village, Ranong province, and Koh Maphrao village, Phuket province, 1998
|Rubbish Disposal Methods||Sai Dang Village||Koh Maphrao Village|
|No. of Households||%||No. of Households||%|
|Throwing into the Sea||13||17.1||1||1.1|
|Burying + Burning||1||1.3||1||1.1|
Table 2.6 Household size in Sai Dang village and Koh Maphrao village, 1998
|Household Size||Sai Dang Village||Koh Maphrao Village|
Table 2.7 Household size and number of household members in Sai Dang village and Koh Maphrao village, 1998
|Household Size||Sai Dang Village||Koh Maphrao Village|
|Household Members||%||Household Members||%|
Table 2.8 Age and sex structure of Sai Dang village, Ranong province, and Koh Maphrao village, Phuket province, 1998
|Sex||Sai Dang Village||Koh Maphrao Village|
|60 & over||9||2.8||9||2.8||18||5.6||18||4.4||20||4.8||38||9.2|
Table 2.9 Age by marital status, Sai Dang village, 1998
|60 & over||-||0.0||10||5.9||7||58.3||1||100.0||19||5.9|
Table 2.10 Age by marital status, Koh Maphrao village, 1998
|60 & over||-||0.0||18||9.9||18||75.0||2||20.0||38||9.2|