Several speakers who gave messages welcoming the participants graced the opening programme. This was followed by a presentation from the UPV, which hosted the workshop, about its present and future role in coastal resource management in the Philippines.
To set the tone and focus of the workshop, presentations were given by experts from FAO Rome on the need for fisheries management planning and demographic changes in coastal fishing communities and their implications for the coastal environment.
Presentations of several papers from the Philippines touching on policies, guidelines for monitoring socio-economic and demographic changes in fishing communities and case studies were made. This was followed by presentations from Viet Nam, Thailand, Myanmar and Sri Lanka on their respective fisheries and coastal management and development policies, and on the consideration of socio-economic and demographic data in their countries.
Three working groups were later formed to formulate country-specific recommendations on the use of socio-economic and demographic information on coastal fisherfolk in coastal and fisheries development and management.
A field visit to the Banate Bay Resource Management Council in Banate, Iloilo was made on the fourth day.
In her brief opening remarks, Dr Jane Geduspan, Vice-Chancellor for Academic Affairs of UPV, warmly welcomed the participants. On behalf of the UPV, she said it was the university’s pleasure to host the workshop and wished the participants success in discussing areas of common goals and in initiating collaborative activities.
Dr Uwe Tietze, Fishery Industry Officer of FAO, extended a warm welcome to all the participants of the workshop. He cited the involvement of FAO in previous national and regional projects in the island of Panay, including the project involving women in fishing communities in the province of Capiz and the recently completed regional project on strengthening of research and training in population and development dynamics of rural fishing communities. He reported that, based on the findings of that regional study, a methodology was developed on how to extract secondary and compile primary information on vital social and demographic characteristics of fishing communities. He explained that the objective of the workshop was to review and discuss this methodology and make recommendations on how it can be implemented and adopted, given human and budgetary resources available at the country level. In concluding, he wished the workshop participants success and a pleasant stay in Iloilo.
Following Dr Tietze’s message, Dr Sang Mu Lee, FAO Representative in Manila, also welcomed the participants on behalf of FAO. He expressed FAO’s sincere appreciation for the support and assistance of the UPV in organizing the workshop. He stressed the need for a multifaceted approach to coastal resource management and for simultaneously undertaking within a single management framework the careful planning and management of all sectoral activities. He noted that given demographic and social changes such as those triggered by urbanization and industrialization, dependence on coastal resources is likely to remain strong. There is, therefore, a need for sound policies that in turn require sound information to especially address negative resource externalities arising from resource loss and ecosystem degradation. He wished workshop participants success and hoped that lessons and insights gained by participants from the workshop will contribute to better analysis and use of demographic data in fisheries.
For the final opening message, Dr Ida Siason, Chancellor of the UPV, echoed the warm welcome to the participants. She commended Dr Tietze in particular for organizing the workshop and FAO in general for the continued support it has provided UPV. She emphasized that the workshop provided a timely reality check on whether the human dimension is truly incorporated in fisheries management. In this regard, she highlighted women and gender issues as important considerations. She hoped that the workshop could set directions in better understanding the human resources in fisheries management in the effort to improve the wellbeing of fisherfolk.
After the introduction of participants, Dr Leonor Santos, chairperson of the organizing committee, extended her thanks to all and wished everybody a successful completion of the workshop.
The first paper of the technical session was a review of the present and future role of the College of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences (CFOS) in fisheries and coastal resource management, presented by Dr Glenn Aguilar, Vice-Chancellor for Planning and Management of the UPV. Dr Aguilar first described the current situation of Philippine fisheries, of critical habitats and of coastal resource management. The operations and nature of the CFOS, including its expertise and research activities, were then discussed and an effort was made to match the plans of the College with perceived challenges.
Following Dr Aguilar’s presentation, concerns and suggestions were raised regarding the translation of academic research findings into more operational and understandable forms that would benefit the end users of such research. Apart from the need for a more relevant analysis of research results that are contextualised in local settings, the need to disseminate and promote the utilization of research results was strongly endorsed. In this regard, the following were suggested: that donors include a budget for this purpose or that research institutions raise the funds themselves; that donors insist that research objectives explicitly state how research results are to be utilized; that linkages with local government units be activated (e.g. by tapping the Information, Education and Communication programmes of such units) thus creating an atmosphere of sharing with end users.
Dr Purwito Martosubroto of the Fisheries Resources Division in Rome presented two papers. Setting the tone for the workshop with his first presentation, Dr Martosubroto reviewed the status of coastal fisheries management in South and Southeast Asia and the need for management planning in the light of the problems and issues facing the sector. The presentation started with a review of the status of marine fisheries catch and exports, then proceeded to discuss the status of fisheries management in the region. Dr Martosubroto identified a number of issues confronting fisheries management. These include: overexploitation, the open access regime, inadequate law enforcement, the large number of fishers, the lack of job alternatives, inadequate management-oriented research, lack of participation of the stakeholders and inadequate database management. In this regard, he informed the workshop participants of the several guidelines produced by FAO that can provide guidance in strengthening the implementation of responsible fisheries as well as those that promote the participation of the different stakeholders in fisheries management planning.
In conclusion, Dr Martosubroto emphasized that a good demographic profile of fishing communities, information on the resources being exploited, a well established legal and institutional framework and the presence of strong fishers’ associations constitute important bases and elements for the development of an effective fisheries management plan.
In the discussion following Dr Martosubroto’s presentation, attention was drawn to the inclusion of monitoring and evaluation as an important component in a fishery management plan, and to the involvement of stakeholders, particularly the local leadership, in the planning process itself. He also stressed the vital role strong organizations play in the implementation of fisheries management plans. In the Philippines, the Fisheries and Aquatic Resource Management Councils (FARMCs) can serve as a model of organizations at the local levels that institutionalise the role of local fisherfolk in coastal resource management.
In the presentation of his second paper, Dr Martosubroto summarized the relevant FAO guidelines on integrating fisheries into coastal area management in the following areas: institutional framework, policy measures, regional cooperation and implementation mechanisms. The guidelines served as explanatory material to Article 10 in the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. They addressed the issue of how the fisheries sector can be integrated into coastal management planning so that interactions between the fisheries sector and other sectors can be taken into account in the establishment of management policy and practice with regard to coastal resources.
In the ensuing discussion, the importance of adopting multidisciplinary and holistic approaches and mechanisms in the planning and management of coastal resources were underscored. There is a need for an integrated agency to manage all aspects of coastal area management. An example in the Philippines was mentioned regarding the issue of jurisdiction arising from conflicts between two sectoral agencies, i.e. the fisheries department and the environment department. In this regard, a participant proposed the creation of a more integrated Department of Fisheries and Oceans in view of the fact that “fisheries cannot be separated or divorced from their habitats”.
Dr Martosubroto clarified that regionalization of the Code to better respond to local situations and contexts is encouraged as long as the objectives are maintained. Research institutions have taken the lead in Southeast Asia to better integrate research results into the fisheries planning and management process.
Dr Uwe Tietze, FAO Fishery Industry Officer, presented a summary of findings carried out under the UNFPA/FAO regional project Strengthening of Research and Training on Population and Development Dynamics of Rural Fishing Communities involving six countries - Philippines, Malaysia, Bangladesh, India, Tanzania and Senegal. Dr Tietze reported that while the global trend in the number of coastal fishers is still increasing; it has started to decline in four of the six countries studied. In India and Bangladesh, the number of coastal fishers is still on the increase but at a slower rate. These changes could not be primarily explained by demographic factors, but could be partly attributable to growing economies in these countries as well as rising education levels and the presence of alternative livelihood opportunities outside the fisheries sector.
Regarding intergenerational occupational mobility, Dr Tietze said that the findings of the study suggested that artisanal fishing is no longer seen as a “last resort employment” and that there is movement out of fishing into other occupations in the service sector or into unemployment. He also discussed the relevant demographic changes and characteristics such as fertility and mortality in the studied communities. An important point brought out by Dr Tietze was that in addition to demographic factors, changes in the main and secondary livelihoods of rural households and the successful implementation of livelihood diversification strategies would impact on the number of coastal fishers.
Dr Tietze ended his lecture with some policy options relating to an overall approach that would integrate population, health and welfare programmes with fisheries development and management actions. He stressed that the formulation of both fisheries and population policies requires reliable statistics on fisherfolk. He also presented the recommendations of an earlier workshop on population characteristics and change in coastal fishing communities, held in India on 10-14 March 1997, as a basis for coming up with related and more specific follow-up recommendations and project proposals for the workshop groups to deliberate on.
In the ensuing discussion, a question was raised as to whether the findings of the regional research project involving the Philippines could be representative of a country trend. Dr Tietze clarified that the findings covered only the sampled communities in one municipality in the province. It was also suggested that along with integrating population and development concerns, multisectoral planning involving different agencies in the planning process be promoted. Dr Tietze agreed and added that a sharing and exchange of experiences and information with other parts of the world could be an area for possible follow-up activities.
2.5.1 Philippines
Fisheries and coastal management in the Philippines
Ms Jessica Muñoz of the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources reviewed the fisheries and coastal resource management policies and programmes in the Philippines. She described the state of the coastal habitat and fisheries resources of the country and underscored how increasing population greatly contributed to resource depletion. National policies and directives embodied in various laws as well as international treaties relevant to coastal resource management were highlighted as the bases for the pursuance of goals and strategies for the conservation and management of the country’s fishery resources, poverty alleviation and food security.
The evolution of various coastal resource management programmes were indicated as interventions designed to address issues on resource depletion and poverty. The roles played by major stakeholders such as Local Government Units (LGUs), Non-Government Organizations (NGOs), People’s Organizations (POs) and FARMC’s were emphasized. The Asian Development Bank-funded Fishery Resource Management Project was briefly discussed, with particular focus on its three major components of fishery resource management, income diversification, and capacity building.
In the discussion, questions were raised regarding the reliability and accuracy of the fishery statistics that Ms Muñoz presented in particular, and the quality of fisheries statistical information in the country in general. The questions referred to statistics on number of fishers, definitions of part-time and full-time fishers, and the undercounting and double counting of the same. In response, Ms Muñoz admitted that much still needed to be done towards improving the generation and collection of fishery statistics and further clarifying the definitions used. The lack of staff and capabilities to collect fishery information are major constraints. One suggestion was to intensify the efforts of the National FARMC Secretariat based in Manila to complete the nationwide registry of municipal fishers.
A point was made that carefully delineated the scope of fisheries management plans (covering 15 kilometres from the coast of municipal waters and beyond) against the scope of coastal resource management plans (only covering less than 15 kilometres from the coast of municipal waters).
Current approaches in fishery and coastal resource appraisal and the need for inclusion of demographic data
Professor Nygiel Armada of the CFOS presented some current approaches in fishery resource assessment appraisal in the Philippines and the need for inclusion of demographic information. He noted that demographic data was limited to the assessment of income levels, earning capacity from the fisheries, or capacity and preparedness to carry out supplemental livelihood activities. In the context of resource assessment appraisal, he posed a hypothetical question on whether fishery resource management strategies would have been different had demographic information been integrated at the appraisal stage. Additionally, would management options offered be greatly influenced by changes in demographic structure? He conceded that there were no clear-cut answers to these questions.
In the discussion, some clarifications were made on the scope of demographic information, which is mainly equated with population trends. Demographic information should more specifically refer to demographic processes pertaining to fertility, mortality and migration, which lead to population outcomes such as population size, age-sex structure and spatial distribution. As regards the relevance of demographic information at the resource assessment appraisal stage, a suggestion that could be further taken up as a follow-up recommendation was made to include this dimension in bioeconomic modelling.
Monitoring socio-economic and demographic change in coastal fishing communities in the Philippines
Ms Lolita Villareal, FAO Consultant, presented a summary of the paper she wrote for FAO titled Monitoring socio-economic and demographic change in coastal fishing communities in the Philippines. She began her presentation by underscoring the need to have a sound knowledge of the socio-demographic characteristics of fishing communities for effective fisheries planning and management. The guidelines contained in her paper, she explained, are intended to provide a general framework that can be used to identify and monitor those social and demographic characteristics which affect the status of fisheries and aquatic resources and the coastal environment, and/or which are negatively or positively affected by management decisions. The guidelines focused on monitoring socio-economic and demographic indicators using available secondary information as well as resorting to primary data collection in the absence of information at the desired level (i.e. at community level which is critical for community-based coastal resource management).
Ms Villareal then briefly described the population-development framework being institutionalised at the local levels in the Philippines. The framework underscored the interrelationships between and among population and development variables - i.e. demographic processes affecting socio-economic outcomes and socio-economic processes affecting demographic outcomes, at the macro and micro levels. Applying this framework, socio-economic and demographic indicators were identified. A recommended list of 109 core indicators were identified by the national and sectoral government agencies. From this list, around 28 process and outcome indicators that may be relevant for coastal resource management were selected. Ms Villareal clarified that the indicators were meant to serve as some sort of ‘shopping list’ of available secondary data that planners can choose from, depending on their requirements and circumstances. Guidelines, by way of sample household and individual schedules, to elicit the required information at the community level were briefly explained. Finally, data processing and maintenance can be carried out using an appropriate and user-friendly computer software.
In the discussion, a question was raised on whether census data listed fishing as an occupation and on the possibility of extracting other information pertaining to those who listed it as such. Fishing as an occupation is lumped under agriculture, with no further disaggregation as to specific subcategories such as aquaculture, municipal fisheries and commercial fisheries. With regard to extracting other information, it was not certain if this is at all possible given that this would constitute referring back to raw data/information which the census office might not be inclined or be in a position to immediately provide. A question on the existence of an identification system for fishers in the country was also raised. The response was that, as a national policy, there is no existing identification system for the Philippines; however, a marine registry is being implemented at the FARMC level. When completed, the marine registry would provide a more accurate picture of the actual number of fishers in the country.
Case study from three coastal communities in Central Visayas, Philippines
Dr Filipina Sotto, a biologist from the University of San Carlos in Cebu City, Philippines, presented a case study on the use of demographic data in three coastal communities in Central Visayas in the Philippines. The objective of her presentation was to highlight the importance of collecting demographic and socio-economic data and their use in designing interventions for coastal resource management. She stressed the need for the collaborative efforts of practitioners from the different sectors in this regard.
A spirited discussion followed Dr Sotto’s presentation and brought out several issues critical to coastal resource management. First was the need to be sensitive to, conscious of and respectful of indigenous practices in the communities being assisted. Second was the importance of providing information on family planning and reproductive health as a complementary effort to ease population pressure on fishery resources. Pertinent legislations on population-development concerns are, however, still pending in the Philippine Congress. A third issue concerned migration in multiple island systems. In order to manage coastal resources, there has to be a mechanism in place to manage migration as well. Unfortunately, in the Philippine context, there is free movement of people between and within the islands. Quite apart from the practical difficulties of regulating migration, new legislation may need to be passed.
Visayan Sea Coastal and Fisheries Resources Management Project (VisSea)
Dr Rudolf Hermes, Senior Research Fellow of CIM/GTZ/PCAMRD, presented the VisSea project. This project, which is still in the pre-implementation stage, intends to bring together different stakeholders to work for the effective management of the renewable resources of the Visayan Sea. To be funded by GTZ and implemented by LGUs of 22 municipalities/cities in four provinces located in three regions of the country, the project hopes to achieve the following results: a joint management plan, provision of alternative income-generating opportunities, implementation of improved coastal resource management practices, and setting up of an information database for a resource management and networking system among the various stakeholders. As regards the setting up of an information database, Dr Hermes informed the body of the timeliness of his participation in the workshop, as he would ensure the inclusion of the socio-economic and demographic indicators discussed in Ms Villareal’s paper in the preparation of baseline data and in the monitoring of project impact.
Following Dr Hermes’ presentation, the discussion focused on a number of issues, providing valuable inputs to be taken into consideration at this stage of the project. First is the setting up of a mechanism that would enable and ensure the participation of all the stakeholders, including commercial and industrial fisheries, the academe, the business sector, NGOs and people’s organizations. Second was the caution needed in organizing a management council that would oversee the implementation of the project. Past experience has not proven the setting up of management councils as being effective and efficient. Dr Hermes responded that it was not intended that a parallel management structure be formed. One will be constituted only when the stakeholders see the need for it. Finally, the sustainability issue was again emphasized, with the recommendation that the LGUs be made the lead implementors of the proposed project.
2.5.2 Viet Nam
Dr Thai Thanh Duong, Director of the Fisheries Information Centre (FICen) of Viet Nam, presented the management policies and programmes on fisheries development that aimed to enhance socioeconomic conditions and improve people’s livelihood in Viet Nam’s coastal areas. He began his presentation with an overview of the development of the fisheries sector in terms of production and its increasing contribution to the economy, particularly through job creation and export earnings. Such contributions were a result of the successful implementation of a strategy of sustainable fisheries development along with socio-economic policies and programmes. He cited the most important ones as the policy on the development of offshore fishing and stabilization of inshore fishing, the programme on the development of aquaculture and the programme on the development of fisheries exports.
Dr Duong highlighted the importance of demographic data in designing socio-economic programmes and fisheries planning and management: The human resource is not merely the target but also the decisive factor in the successful implementation of such programmes.
In the discussion, a question on the structure of fisheries management in Viet Nam, particularly on how local bodies related to the national government, was raised. Dr Duong responded that policy-making is undertaken at the national level and that systems are still being strengthened for local communities to relate more directly to the national government. In terms of statistics, the Viet Namese General Statistics Office has offices and units in every province down to the community level. A census in agriculture that includes fisheries will be published by end of 2002.
Dr Duong elaborated on the role of women in aquaculture. He explained that women’s role in Viet Nam’s social and economic life was enhanced by their involvement in aquaculture activities. He informed the group of the recent establishment of the Mekong River Network of Women in Fisheries that could further support and improve women’s involvement in fisheries.
Dr Duong was asked about the status of the development of offshore fishing in Viet Nam, particularly the success of government investments in the sector. He pointed out that the government provided credit assistance to fishers for building larger fishing boats. Presently, however, there are concerns about repayment of those loans.
2.5.3 Thailand
Dr Somying Piumsombum, Senior Fisheries Economics Expert, Department of Fisheries in Bangkok, presented the state of fisheries and demographic data in Thailand. She reported that Thailand was one of the top fish producing nations in the world. Over 70 percent of this production came from marine capture fisheries. However, overfishing and the consequent resource deterioration are pressing concerns. Thailand has also ranked as the top exporter of edible fisheries products in the world since 1993. Dr Piumsombum elaborated on Thailand’s National Fisheries Development Policy covering five policy areas, namely: the development of fisheries organizations; the management of fisheries resources and the environment; aquaculture development; overseas fisheries development; and fisheries industry development.
Regarding demographic and socio-economic data, Dr Piumsombum presented a summary of the results of the marine fisheries census and of the intercensal survey on marine fisheries covering the period 1985-2000, that were conducted jointly by the National Statistics Office and the Department of Fisheries. Selected statistics from the household survey of small-scale marine capture fishery for the period 1990-2000 were also presented.
In the discussion, a question was asked whether there was further disaggregation by sex in the household survey and where women’s participation was highest. Dr Piumsombum responded that the household survey data was disaggregated by sex and that women’s participation was highest in fish processing with a small number in aquaculture. It was suggested that, in future, fish caught outside Thai waters be separated from total catch of marine capture fishery as this would have implications on stock assessment.
2.5.4 Myanmar
The participant from Myanmar, Mr Ohn Maung, Assistant Director, Department of Fisheries of Myanmar, presented the status of marine fisheries in his country. Marine fisheries, which include both inshore and offshore fisheries, contribute over 60 percent to total fish production. Mr Maung reported that the rapid progress and developments in fisheries have resulted in the emergence of the sector as a significant contributor to nutritional and food security, employment, foreign exchange and overall socioeconomic development. The good growth potential and the high demand for fish have also made the sector attract investments. The fisheries sector is Myanmar’s fourth largest foreign exchange earner after timber, minerals and rice. Shrimp is its most important fisheries export.
Mr Maung enumerated the different fisheries management measures being implemented by the Department of Fisheries (DOF). The overall policy is to encourage the expansion of marine fisheries and freshwater aquaculture with the goal of improving the socio-economic status of fishing communities. The government also plans to go into joint ventures with foreign companies and strongly encourages private sector initiatives in the development of the sector.
The Myanmar DOF has not undertaken a nationwide collection of socio-economic and demographic data on coastal fishing communities. Mr Maung attributed this to the lack of trained human resources and limited financial resources. He welcomed close coordination and collaboration with regional and international organizations on this effort.
After Mr Maung’s presentation, a question was raised on the reported total number of fishers of 2.6 million that are directly involved in fishing, given that there were only around 25 000 fishing boats in inshore areas. It was suggested that there be further qualifications on this information to more accurately reflect the reality of the situation. Mr Maung was also asked about Myanmar’s experience in fishery law enforcement, particularly with reference to violations and apprehensions. Mr Maung responded that regular checks are conducted along this line.
2.5.5 Sri Lanka
Mr Ginigaddarage Piyasena, Director-General of the Department of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources of Sri Lanka, provided an overview of the current fisheries and coastal management and development policies in his country. Embodied in the Coastal Zone Management Plan of 2000, the current fisheriesand ocean resources policies and strategies placed strong emphasis on fisheries management and development, poverty alleviation, coastal conservation and environmental protection. Mr Piyasena reported that the ultimate goal of the policies and strategies was to provide Sri Lankans with nutrition, food security and income-earning opportunities. The open-access nature of fisheries, however, remained as the major constraint to sound resource management practices in the coastal areas, resulting in resource depletion, habitat destruction, declining bio-diversity and environmental pollution.
As regards socio-economic and demographic information, Mr Piyasena noted the limited availability of data in his country. The reliability of the methods of data collection was also at question. He therefore recommended developing a reliable database and socio-economic profiles as essential elements in the formulation of sound resource management policies.
In the discussion, Mr Piyasena was asked what was the reason for the reported big decrease in the number of fishing boats. He explained that the reduction in the number of fishing boats was the result of the recent introduction of multiday fishing boats that replaced the day fishing boats. The shift from day fishing to multiday fishing involved the outfitting of boats with either an outboard or inboard engine and the introduction of more modern navigational, communication and fish landing equipment. As regards coastal erosion problems in Sri Lanka, Mr Piyasena reported that the government has embarked on coastal nourishment programmes to address this concern.
On behalf of multilateral and bilateral agencies that attended the workshop, Dr Boris Fabres, Officer-in-Charge of the ICLARM Philippine Office, presented some observations on the focus and content of the workshop and recommended specific challenges for action. He first recognized the importance of managing data as being equal to the importance of the data content. As the information exchange and data consolidation for fisheries and coastal zone management are still inadequate, he endorsed the design of simple, realistic but informative databases and information systems. This with the caveat that duplication is avoided and that the sustainability of these systems is carefully looked into. In this regard, a national workshop or meeting of institutions that maintain databases and information systems for coastal resource management is being planned by UPV to precisely discuss the state of the art and explore collaborative, coordinative and complementary mechanisms. Finally, Dr Fabres challenged the group, particularly the academe, to eventually venture into modelling and consequently go into a model-driven data collection of the effects and impacts of fisheries management interventions.
