Foro Global sobre Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutrición (Foro FSN)

1. Partnering for implementation

The implementation of the SSF Guidelines will require engagement and partnerships across different institutions, organizations and actors as the SSF Guidelines implementation does not only require the involvement by fishers but takes into consideration also the role and needs of those around them. Fishing communities, CSOs, academia, NGOs, governments, regional organizations, donors and international agencies and organizations all need to work together - but different actors may have different roles to play to address issues in relation to fisheries governance, gender, post-harvest, consumer interests, wider societal interests, etc. Please share any experiences, both good or bad as well as lessons learned related to partnerships in the implementation of international instruments

• How do you see the role of your organization and others in the implementation of the SSF Guidelines?

Regional organization( eg. SPC in the Pacific region) could play a key role in dissemination of information on the guidelines, communicating to counterparts working in Fisheries Departments in governments in countries and sharing experiences across countries to assist in the progress of SSF guidelines. SPC through its Human Development program work with Women NGOs, youth groups and many other non- government partners on the ground thus the organization through work in other sectors can facilitate process of introduction of  SSF guidelines to communities. The work need collaboration work at all levels and these include stakeholders working in the various areas of governance, tradition and cultures, gender, socio-economics, business and marketing, & post harvesting and building youth interest. Climate change and DRR and DRM work is being extensively done in countries in the Pacific and there is the opportunity to also work with other existing programs and projects where there is overlapping interests and concerns over SSF. These sort of partnership could be with other regional organizations involved in Climate change and DRR/DRM work  or could be at country level where there are major projects already being implemented.

• How can partnerships be fostered and strengthened to include the ‘voices of the marginalized?

To ensure the full and practical engagement of marginalized people,  community- based associations/ groups eg women’s groups, youth groups, leaders, fishers, sellers and the elderly should be specifically targeted. Most communities have institutions already in place and most of these existing institutions are based on traditional/customary linkages, faith based mechanisms that are practical and work for the people. People are familiar with them, are used to the norms expected from such mechanisms and institutions and these could include market networks, fisheries groups, provincial organisations/etc.  Networks that people already use should be starting points to maximize participation of the marginalized. The main point in this- is to work within already existing institutions, networks and mechanisms and build on strengths of these groupings and modify or change what is not working.

• What will be required at local, national, regional and global levels to ensure effective and efficient partnerships?

To ensure efficient and effective partnership there is need for :

1. Transparency at all levels of operation of the partnership- sometimes we take community people for granted and grassrooots organisations, assuming they cannot contribute meaningfully to partnership arrangements- unless they become part of the partnership in planning and development of how these partnership will work then it will not work.
2. Specific training and awareness work on what SSF is about and what are the expectations from partners. Training to include legal and traditional rights, access and ownership issues, markets and distribution, regulations and partnerships relating to the operations of the partnerships.
3. There need to be a concerted effort at ensuring gender equity in all these work. Gender inclusion in all aspects of the work and partnership will ensure that men and women and all sectors of the community and fisheries sector are addressed.
4. At the Regional level- there is need to forge partnership with other sectors- eg climate change, forestry, business sector, private sectors at regional level At national level all Line ministries and departments should work collaboratively on SSF as this is an area of overlap in Climate change, DRM and DRR and in Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture work.  Non- government organisations also operate at national and regional level and they should be partners in regional and national work.

1. Information and communication – promoting experience sharing and collaboration

Continuous learning and sharing of experiences will be of utmost importance for effective implementation. Available lessons learnt, best practices and tools should be used and reinventing the wheel avoided, but at the same time the local context may differ to such a degree that specific tools and solutions must be developed. Monitoring of progress will be important to keep track of what is working (and what is not) and participatory monitoring and evaluation systems and relevant statistics can help making information available and shared.

• What best practices with regard to communication would you recommend for SSF Guidelines implementation at local, national, regional and global level?

      At the regional level ( Pacific) effective dissemination and training tools for Regional and national purposes to be developed. At the national level tools and training materials should be in different languages- the main languages in countries.

Participatory monitoring and evaluation will be very important at the local and national level and this is to include the training of women, men, youths, leaders, elders and representatives of various sectors and groups in countries and communities. Having men and women both trained for monitoring and evaluation is important as there are various areas of expertise and knowledge where women and men can work better in. This will include training of a core set of trainers for Regional training and practices, who then train national representatives who disseminate the training at national and local level. The involvement of local people in monitoring can also help highlight best practices and lessons learnt.

Lessons learnt and best practices learnt at local and national level can be used to develop a wider set of indicators for monitoring regional benchmarks and identify best practices can be built up to serve as study areas and research sites- or models to be used in other countries- and used for Regional and global models when used or replicated more widely.

• What are your experiences from participatory monitoring and evaluation?

Participatory monitoring and evaluation is one of the best forms of evaluation as it allows the people to take stock of what they had done, how they had contributed, what additional value has been added to the project or resources. It also helped local monitors and evaluaters to understand and know the project better, understand resources, systems and institutions and to understand the whole purpose of work being done and they become more appreciative of such work and are able to take a look inside as opposed to looking at what did not work from the outside. It helps build confidence in local communities to take ownership and responsibility of resources.

• How can progress in implementing the SSF Guidelines be measured and reported in a useful way?

This can be done through existing networks of practitioners already in existence in the region and in countries. This means there is investment into training of the SSF guidelines and what it is trying to achieve so the people are familiar with what they are measuring. Use existing NGOs and non- government entities already working in countries to assist in monitoring. Reports and updates to be shared between countries and regionally so that best practices are shared and lessons learnt addressed.

1. Challenges and opportunities – needs for support and interventions

There will be implementation challenges (e.g. financial, political, institutional, cultural) to address but also opportunities to capitalize on. These may vary from one context to another and also differ between the global, regional, national and local levels. Understanding these challenges and opportunities will be important for identifying and designing support activities. The implementation of the SSF Guidelines will need a mix of different types of interventions, including – but not necessarily limited to – the strengthening of political commitment and awareness raising, changes in policies, revisions of legislation and/or regulations, development of capacity and empowerment, improving and sharing information, and strengthened research and communication.

• What do you think the main implementation challenges are, generally as well as in a specific country context, and how could they be overcome?

Finding the entry points and early engagement of possible partners before the work starts. This is for awareness raising, legislative revisions, information and communication work. ( sometimes we already have people or groups in mind that we want to work with  or are comfortable working with and do not work outside of the box to find out what else and who else is there? Looking outside and always taking into account smaller groups may also be useful.

For strengthening of political commitment, community awareness, capacity development/etc- challenge including finding the right partners to work with and what their interests are in the whole project. Partners should be transparent and should have similar commitments to the work on SSF.

Finding good and committed local partners who are culturally aware and at the same time inclusive in understanding of the various requirements of SSF.

Drawing the balance between subsistence and economic emphasis in the use of resources in the SSF and identifying the gaps from both viewpoints – that of the social cultural and economic and marketing viewpoint.

Understanding cultural values and norms related to SSF and working through that understanding to win people’s support and to maintain long- term sustainability.

Balancing and working with resource owners, managers and marketers and investors is a challenge. In most situations these two sets of stakeholders are at opposing ends of the discussion- thus finding a middle ground where both work together is necessary. The private sector, businesses and markets have to be part of any discussion on SSF.

For capacity development – ensuring gender equity in all these type of work remain a challenge. Cultural, social and other factors complicate already existing biases against women, young people, migrant populations, etc. Thus a systematic, concerted effort at making sure gender bias is addressed  from the start is important.

• What are your experiences of addressing these types of challenges and what have been successful or unsuccessful strategies and approaches?

Experiences in Fiji and other countries in the Pacific- is that all these takes and requires time- approaches and time frames cannot be pushed to meet the agenda of the external partners and expectations are to be that of the people – not of the development partners. People may not come out clearly with what their priorities are and how they do things but they have a wealth of knowledge that is crucial for the success of such ventures thus having their support is vital.

All approaches should be gender sensitive to ensure gender participation especially in countries where women are not necessarily part of decision making and are not expected to be vocal or seen.

Women are increasingly involved in projects and development ventures in countries, the measures of success and work have changed, women are more educated and vocal- there are more entry points now for women involvement than in the past.

• How would interventions vary, depending on the time frame (e.g. what can be done within the next 12 months, in the next 5 years, in the long term) and depending on the existing resources (e.g. small/medium investments or large/transformative investments)?
• In the next 12 months focus should be on identifying entry points, recruiting& strengthening  partners, training and awareness raising. This is to develop a pool of trainers- who can then take the work forward.
• The next 12 months should also have a focus on the marketing and investment market and identifying trends and patterns in distribution, post harvest and marketing.
• The following 12 months to focus on bringing the two together- ( above bullet points)
• Long- term interventions can be country tailored and region specific – however keeping in mind a regional perspective and regional monitoring mechanisms.

Dear Lena,

Good of you to moderate this discussion. I am happy the guidelines have come this far and we are at a stage to look into how to implement the guidelines. The way to go is to build partnerships between fishing communities, non-governmental organizations and governments. The guidelines to a large extent have to be implemented by fishing communities and this can effectively be done by a proper partnership between fishing communities, local NGOs and government.  Fishing communities in various countries can be selected to implement the guidelines based on their willingness to move forward to secure a better future for themselves and the resource on which they depend on. Local NGOs can take this up with local communities with the support of governments to move to develop workable local institutions for implementing the guidelines. A first step is  to identify small-scale fishing communities in a number of countries and begin the process of engaging the communities with the help of local NGOs. The local NGOs can develop models  on how to mobilize local communities to take up the guideline and develop mechanisms for implementing the guidelines. The government agencies in the locations can facilitate the process by helping the local NGOs by providing the  level of legitimacy required to get communities on board.  Since these guidelines are very much voluntary, developing dialog on many levels with communities, NGOs and government will be an important first step in realizing the implementation. Universities can play a key role in helping the process by working closely with NGOs and Government in  selecting fishing communities that they are currently working with on various research issues on the fisheries. I am sure based on my work over the last 25 years in the fisheries, building these smart partnerships and developing them over the long term will be a definite requirement to implement the guidelines. The guidelines will have to be community centered and community based management approaches will be central for the guidelines to be implemented successfully.

Wishing all best on the initiative and I am sure the future of small-scale fisheries will be much better with the implementation of these guidelines by the fishing communities.

Regards,

Kuperan.

On November 27, 2013 over 60 representatives for the Costa Rican small-scale fishing sector, along with assorted researchers, NGO representatives, and government officials met during the first “National small-scale artisanal fisheries forum: Challenges and opportunities, promotion and consolidation of Responsible Fishing Areas (RFAs)” to discuss local fisher and central government needs for successful implementation of the FAO’s Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries inside designated marine areas currently being established along the country’s coasts.  These areas are managed by the Costa Rican Fisheries and Aquaculture Institute (INCOPESCA – Costa Rica’s national fisheries governing entity), a centralized governmental agency that does not recognize community based co-management systems, but hopes to develop these strategies through the establishment of fishing areas that encompass designated coastal areas where artisanal fishing gear types are used.

Fishers compiled a list of 10 “needs” necessary for the effective development, implementation, and management of RFAs.  I hope these will add to this discussion on the development of SFF Guidelines.

1. Eliminate coastal IUU fishing and trawl net use
2. Certification (including chain of custody certification) strategies for products caught within responsibly fished areas that increase product value and traceability
3. Development of alternative employment opportunities for fishers
4. Development of strategies that promote active participation by local community members in the RFA management process (co-management strategies – something that does not currently exist in SFF in Costa Rica)
5. SFF representation within INCOPESCA’s board of managers
6. Improve mechanisms for education and awareness building among RFA users and their related coastal community members
7. Integration of governmental institutions for the protection, monitoring, and control of RFAs and their successful operation within established legal frameworks
8. RFAs should be established based on studies that guarantee their scientific, legal, and social viability – including integrated mechanisms that build awareness for their successful management – that promote ecosystem health for the benefit of all stakeholders  
9. Foment scientific research (ecosystem and social) with the objective of developing a fisheries management plan that promotes the sustainable use of the resource
10. Minimum size limit (for individual species) control at all post-harvest stages along the chain of custody especially at local landing sites where products are first exchanged between fishers and buyers

Dear Friends,

We are pleased to send the responses to the questionnaire you circulated among concern organizations.

Please find attached the response from our organization, National Fisheries Solidarity Movement, [NAFSO], Sri Lanka.

Hope this would incorporate to the final report.

Thanks,

Sincerely,

Herman Kumara

A marginalized group is one which is excluded from the decision making process, and since they represent a small proportion of the population, their needs for development and sustainability can be easily overlooked. The needs of marginalized groups such as Small Scale Fisheries (SSF) are easily side tracked or “fall through the cracks” as decisions for sustainability are made using the vast majority of the population as the priority. It is thus necessary to examine how important partnerships are for the SSF in order to strengthen their voices and ensure their sustainability.

The contribution of SSF to GDP may not be recognizable, since most of their catches are consumed by their families and villagers. As a result, SSF are marginalized and thus, their voices will not be heard unless supported by the Government, Private Sector or Civil Society. SSF usually require such support because they lack the necessary resources, such as; literacy, technical skills, share of market, mechanical equipment and many other factors that could contribute to their empowerment. However, partnership between one of the listed entities above and SSF can help to enhance their significance and ensure their sustainability; especially since their livelihoods are at stake.

As a result, the government can help small scale fishers by providing rights necessary for the fishery resource and land, in order to prevent bullying from larger scale fisheries, thus avoiding the depletion of vital resources in the area. The government can also provide loans and easy credit to the SSF in an attempt to stimulate their production scale and contribute to their sustainability. The civil society can initiate a SSF Cooperative Society; to facilitate educational seminars on fishery practices and handling, provide a place where added trade can take place and also to encourage and promote SSF. Finally, the private sector can contribute to strengthening the ‘voices’ of the SSF by sponsoring rental boats, providing rental storage, and facilitating transportation to larger markets.

Through assistance, co-operation and partnership, SSF can be empowered and thus categorized as a group actively involved in the decision making process for a country, as opposed to being marginalized.

Source: (2012) FAO/CRFM Caribbean Regional Consultation on the Development of International

Guidelines for Securing Sustainable Small - Scale Fisheries: Group Work Guidance Notes

 Aportes al FORO desde  CoopeSoliDar R.L:

¿Cómo ve el papel de su organización y de otros en la implementación de las Directrices PPE?

En un contexto de muchos actores e intereses como es el uso de los territorios marinos, debe  darse prioridad a los actores que se encuentran en los territorios de mayor interés para la pesca de pequeña escala. El debate de derechos humanos, la distribución justa y equitativa de beneficios y pesca deberá trascender los sectores pesqueros para considerar al menos en A.L. otros sectores como el turismo, y actores en  la conservación marina como la cooperación internacional, las  organizaciones que trabajan el tema de las adicciones, entre otros.

Estos otros sectores, deberán  estar informados y reconocer  la importancia de un enfoque basado en los derechos humanos para el desarrollo de los territorios marinos y costeros donde se desarrolla la pesca de pequeña escala y  de la importancia del sector de pesca artesanal para la seguridad alimentaria, resiliencia social y la conservación de la diversidad biológica y cultural.

Los países deben promover la elaboración de estadísticas veraces sobre las poblaciones que producen y dependen para su seguridad alimentaria de la pesca de pequeña escala y elaborar mapas de actores para socializar las directrices. En algunos países de AL el sector deberá de ser declarado en “emergencia o situación crítica” para que sea una prioridad que oriente el apoyo y fortalecimiento de capacidades para su recuperación.

Deberá promoverse la comunicación entre los diversos sectores pesqueros de menor y mayor impacto ambiental en la búsqueda de  soluciones hacia el respeto de los sectores más vulnerables ( pesca de pequeña escala) dentro del sector pesquero.  Desde nuestra experiencia hay claridad en los sectores de pesca semi-industrial e industrial de la necesidad de apoyo y valoración de la pesca de pequeña escala en Centroamérica, pero deberá potenciarse ese interés con procesos de resolución de conflictos y  buenas prácticas.

Solo con acciones basadas en valores  que respeten las diversidades y promuevan el fortalecimiento de capacidades de los actores de la pesca artesanal se darán los cambios necesarios para hacer realidad la implementación de las directrices.  Es fundamental dar a conocer a nivel de la cooperación internacional los principios y valores que sustentan esta visión de conservación y desarrollo basado en los derechos humanos y que las directrices nos recuerdan.

¿Cómo pueden fomentarse y reforzarse las asociaciones para incluir las “voces de los marginados”?

Es fundamental comunicar la experiencia del Consorcio IICAs  (www.iccaconsortium.org)   y la discusión a nivel de las comunidades de pesca artesanal de las experiencias de gobernanza comunitaria y de pueblos indígenas como una forma reconocida y positiva de retomar control sobre el poder y la toma de decisión sobre los territorios marinos y costeros indispensables para la realización de las actividades. Reforzando el sentido de lo colectivo, de lo comunitario, por encima del espíritu individualista y revalorando el papel de la organización como base para la solución de sus problemas.

Desde la diversidad y la equidad es muy importante visibilizar el papel de las mujeres en la pesca, así como su participación, su conocimiento tradicional, muchas veces no reconocidos y  valorizados, en toda la cadena productiva de la pesca responsable. 

¿Qué se requiere a nivel local, nacional, regional y mundial para asegurar asociaciones eficaces y eficientes?

Los diversos actores deberán de integrar valores para su trabajo y relacionamiento con el sector de la pesca de pequeña escala.  Respeto, consentimiento informado previo y los códigos éticos de trabajo deberán de ser prácticas comunes para la interacción entre sectores y actores con el sector de pequeña escala.

El fortalecimiento de capacidades  y acompañamiento de largo plazo a procesos más integrales para el desarrollo y conservación costero-marinos serán fundamentales,  acompañados de procesos de intercambio de experiencias.

A nivel local, favorecer acciones para revitalizar las, organizaciones de pescadores artesanales, mediante procesos participativos e inclusivos. 

El fortalecimiento de los aspectos subjetivos como la identidad cultural desde la costa y el mar, la  autoestima del sector pesquero, los  liderazgos inclusivos y proactivos, serán fundamentales para asociaciones más efectivas y eficientes.

En el plano nacional, regional y mundial favorecer y apoyar iniciativas de integración del sector, en espacios organizativos, que garanticen la representación y defensa de sus intereses.

¿Qué mejores prácticas en materia de comunicación recomendaría para la implementación de Directrices PPE a nivel local, nacional, regional y mundial?
 

En nuestra experiencia, la mejor forma de comunicación ha sido los intercambios pescador a pescador y manos en la acción.  Debe  generarse un esfuerzo global para compartir experiencias en donde “en la práctica” las organizaciones de pesca artesanal han ido ganando espacio perdido a otros sectores que ahora dominan la gobernanza de sus pequeñas pesquerías y/o territorios pesqueros.  Es fundamental hacer un llamado a los Gobiernos para identificar y declarar estas comunidades ( o al menos aquellas que todavía están presentes desarrollando su actividad productiva en las costas) prioritarias de manera que se pueda dar su acompañamiento y protección. 

La generación de conocimiento debe integrar tanto la ciencia tradicional occidental como la integración del conocimiento local y sus prioridades en términos de preguntas y valores. 

El texto de las directrices/ o una versión simplificada de la misma donde se presenten los ejes principales deberá traducirse no solo a los idiomas oficiales, sino a todos aquellas lenguas vernáculas de comunidades que se dedican a la pesca de pequeña escala.

(ej. Garifuna, Bribri….etc).

Desarrollo de una campaña de educación e información, que resalte la forma de vida de las comunidades de pesca artesanal, sus saberes y su aporte a la conservación marina y a la seguridad alimentaria, por medios alternativos de comunicación (redes sociales) y los sistemas formales de educación en los diversos países.

¿Cuáles son sus experiencias de seguimiento y evaluación participativos?
 

CoopeSoliDar R.L ha desarrollado un ejercicio de indicadores basados en la directrices y utilizados para la autoevaluación de experiencias que integran al sector de la pesca de pequeña escala en el seguimiento de su desarrollo y bienestar.  Este ejercicio ha resultado de gran valor para establecerr una línea de base que permita el seguimiento y verificación de avance o retroceso en todos los ejes prioritarios de las directrices. 

Es importante la identificación de indicadores tanto cualitativos como cuantitativos, con sistemas de monitoreo creativos desde una visión de proceso y de resultado, que sean concretos sobre la calidad de vida de los pescadores y de las condiciones socio-culturales-ambientales de su entorno.

¿Cuáles cree que son los principales problemas para la implementación, de forma general, así como en el contexto específico de cada país, y cómo pueden superarse?

Desde nuestra perspectiva debe hacerse un esfuerzo fundamental en promover y apoyar la organización del sector pesquero artesanal.  Una visión más cooperativa de organización ha sido sustituida en la mayoría de los países de AL y el Caribe por Asociaciones que tienen como objetivos aspiraciones concretas, normalmente materiales, como la obtención de licencias o la recepción de donaciones. Estas organizaciones no surgen para cumplir aspiraciones éticas o sociales, de bienestar humano y rescate de una forma de vida que todavía está arraigada al mar y las costas.  

Es difícil establecer alianzas sólidas entre sectores si algunos de ellos tienen la enorme desventaja de no estar organizados o contar con una organización poco sólida ni representativa.    Creemos que este elemento y el compartir buenas prácticas que promuevan la organización local de los pescadores y pescadoras artesanales es fundamental, así como elevar sus conocimientos y capacidades para gestionar sus organizaciones y sus proyectos empresariales y sociales.

La creación de redes de apoyo entre organizaciones del sector son fundamentales para la incidencia política y mejoras en la colocación del producto dándose énfasis a los mercados locales y nacionales. 

¿Cuáles son sus experiencias al abordar este tipo de problemas y qué estrategias y enfoques han tenido éxito o no?

Seguimiento y acompañamiento de largo plazo, establecimiento de relaciones de confianza y ética profesional para el respeto a las diversidades y visiones de desarrollo local.  Trabajo a través de las organizaciones de base existentes en los territorios costeros y visiones más allá de los aspectos económicos de las pesquerías para abordar una vision integral donde los aspectos ambientales, sociales, culturales y económicos se integren al desarrollo y la conservación.

-Puesta en práctica de consentimiento informado previo y códigos éticos

-Fortalecimiento de capacidades organizativas

-Gobernanza comunitaria y participativa

-Mapeo e investigación participativa, más allá del uso de la información de los pescadores para trabajar en la generación de nuevos conocimientos que integren el conocimiento tradicional y científico.

-Líneas de base participativas y medibles en el tiempo. 

¿Cómo deberían variar las intervenciones, en función del período de tiempo (por ej. qué se puede hacer durante los próximos 12 meses, en los próximos 5 años, a largo plazo) y en función de los recursos existentes (por ej. inversiones en pequeña/mediana escala o inversiones a gran escala/transformadoras)?

Corto plazo:

-Información y divulgación de los principios de las directrices a todo nivel.

-Selección de casos de estudio para definir líneas de base y seguimiento de forma conjunta entre los gobiernos y la sociedad civil incluida la visión de género. 

-Establecimiento de línea de avance en la implementación por regiones o países.

-Canalización de recursos para el fortalecimiento de capacidades del sector de la pesca de pequeña escala y su organización.

-Incentivos y apoyo para aquellos grupos de pesca de pequeña escala organizados en función de sus necesidades productivas más inmediatas y/o acciones orientadas al manejo y uso sostenible ( incluida la conservación) de sus recursos.

- Generación de foros a nivel nacional entre diferentes actores relacionados con el uso del recurso marino que aporten ideas y buenas prácticas para avanzar hacia un ordenamiento pesquero con justicia y equidad.

-En el plano nacional, regional y mundial favorecer y apoyar iniciativas de integración del sector, en espacios organizativos, que garanticen la representación y defensa de sus intereses.

Mediano Plazo:

-Reflexión sobre los avances en los casos de estudio seleccionados y su divulgación.

-Intercambio de experiencias por regiones que incluya la incorporación de nuevas políticas o leyes relacionadas al tema en los países miembros de la FAO

-Favorecer procesos de integración del sector de pesca artesanal en experiencias organizativas novedosas, agiles y eficientes, con capacidad de incidencia política y de defensa de sus intereses y aspiraciones.

Largo Plazo:

-Discusión sobre los impactos y avances de la iniciativa.

-Reportes y divulgación de aquellos países que han avanzado en la implementación de las directrices voluntarias.

-Reconocimiento de experiencias y buenas prácticas que puedan ser relevadas y extraer diversas lecciones aprendidas; multiplicando aprendizajes a diversas realidades nacionales, locales e internacionales.

1. Partnering for implementation

The implementation of the SSF Guidelines will require engagement and partnerships across different institutions, organizations and actors as the SSF Guidelines implementation does not only require the involvement by fishers but takes into consideration also the role and needs of those around them. Fishing communities, CSOs, academia, NGOs, governments, regional organizations, donors and international agencies and organizations all need to work together - but different actors may have different roles to play to address issues in relation to fisheries governance, gender, post-harvest, consumer interests, wider societal interests, etc. Please share any experiences, both good or bad as well as lessons learned related to partnerships in the implementation of international instruments

• How do you see the role of your organization and others in the implementation of the SSF Guidelines?
• Sri Vimukthi Fisherwomen Organization work with fisher women and fishers in Negombo area in Gampaha district. We work for strengthen the fisher women to win their rights and establish a sustainable fisheries in Sri Lanka.
• In Implementation of SSF guideline(SSF-G), Sri Vimukthi organization will collaborate with other community based (Fisheries sector and other sectors) in the District to bring guideline to bottom level in wider community.
• Fisher women will be strengthen with the education on the subject and make sure to their voice heard.
• We have identified the lack of space for the women in decision making level. We working towards strengthen the fisheries community giving priority to the Women. As an organization based on fisher women membership we were able to develop women leadership to take responsibility of change the traditional women’s role in the family in positive way for the women, as well as in the community.
• We will be able to voice out the requirement of implementation of sustainable small scale fisheries guideline with women as major partner of it.
• How can partnerships be fostered and strengthened to include the ‘voices of the marginalized
• To make proper connection with marginalized people in the society, partnerships must be properly educated.
• Educational materials on SSF-G, which can understand by people with lowest educational level/illiterate. (visuals/simple cartoons)
• What will be required at local, national, regional and global levels to ensure effective and efficient partnerships?
• For effective and efficient partnership, better build an organizational network working on the subject with partners of local, National and international level and provide proper guidance on SSF-G.
• Committed leadership to lead the community towards the gall of get establish the SSF-G.
•  Effective communication methodologies, which can be reached .
• Share of relevant information on the SSF-G and success stories of other countries.
•    Critical Analysis on the local, National and international partnerships and wider awareness on how SSF-G affect to the people. E.g. for food security etc.
• Need a team Devoted to work on SSF-G implementation and bring it to other sectors/groups/communities.  
• Improved media relations in local, national and international level.
• State and Non-state actors must work together with mutual understanding.

1. Information and communication – promoting experience sharing and collaboration

Continuous learning and sharing of experiences will be of utmost importance for effective implementation. Available lessons learnt, best practices and tools should be used and reinventing the wheel avoided, but at the same time the local context may differ to such a degree that specific tools and solutions must be developed. Monitoring of progress will be important to keep track of what is working (and what is not) and participatory monitoring and evaluation systems and relevant statistics can help making information available and shared.

• What best practices with regard to communication would you recommend for SSF Guidelines implementation at local, national, regional and global level?

• Case studies related to SSF-G.
• Documentation of successful co- management practices among people practiced for considerable time period
• Small video documentaries on success stories after implementation of SSF-G.
• Using of web and social media for publicize the SSF-G matters.

• Using of Comic arts to bring it to bottom level of the community. 
• What are your experiences from participatory monitoring and evaluation?

Inter organizational participatory monitoring and evaluation is very difficult while internal is possible.

• How can progress in implementing the SSF Guidelines be measured and reported in a useful way?

To mesure:

• If SSF-G implemented, SSF-G based regulation/ policies will adopt and activated by the relevant authorities.
• The level of investment, increased percentage of  welfare  in small scale fisheries will show prograss in implementation

Reporting:

• A Governmental report as well as counter report from civil society should be considered.

1. Challenges and opportunities – needs for support and interventions

There will be implementation challenges (e.g. financial, political, institutional, cultural) to address but also opportunities to capitalize on. These may vary from one context to another and also differ between the global, regional, national and local levels. Understanding these challenges and opportunities will be important for identifying and designing support activities. The implementation of the SSF Guidelines will need a mix of different types of interventions, including – but not necessarily limited to – the strengthening of political commitment and awareness raising, changes in policies, revisions of legislation and/or regulations, development of capacity and empowerment, improving and sharing information, and strengthened research and communication.

• What do you think the main implementation challenges are, generally as well as in a specific country context, and how could they be overcome?
• Political will is major challenge for Sri Lanka. State strategy is to develop mega scale fisheries while giving less importance to the small scale fisheries sector development or continuation.   
• Political leaders Working with Profit motive Instead of food considering sovereignty, development of marginalized people or environmental protection.  
• Government considering Civil society organizations as who work against the government

To Overcome:

• Campaigning together with community,mass media, researches, Civil society networks and academia etc. to pressurize the government
• What are your experiences of addressing these types of challenges and what have been successful or unsuccessful strategies and approaches?
• We have experience of preparation of sustainable fisheries policy with the bottom up approach and submitted to the government authorities with the half million signatures of the community. Conducted a series of discussion with the government policy makers to get establish the policy while lobby work with the people to pressurize the government.
• With the community power, building of Sea plane landing site in  Negombo lagoon(15 Km North to Colombo) was stopped even after starting of project work. Awareness and strong leadership was behind the success in the campaign.
• With the fisher people pressure, government had to grant fuel subsidiary for the fishing people after increase of fuel price in 2012 February.
• In some cases we identified that, it is difficult to unifying people .e.g. fight against aqusition of lands for development of tourism in Kalpitiya islands and resettlement in Mullikulam (Mannar district ~250Km North to Colombo) .    
• How would interventions vary, depending on the time frame (e.g. what can be done within the next 12 months, in the next 5 years, in the long term) and depending on the existing resources (e.g. small/medium investments or large/transformative investments)?
• Educate people in one year and develop agreeable policies together with the people in five years. In long term, work for include the developed policy matters to government policies together with people and policy makers in the government. 077

The Civil Society Fisheries Platform

The CSO platform comprises the International Planning Committee for Food Sovereignty (IPC), Centro Internazionale Crocevia (CIC), the International Collective in Support of Fishworkers (ICSF), the World Forum of Fisher People (WFFP) and the World Forum of Fish Harvesters and Fishworkers (WFF). These organizations have come together to participate as partners in the development of the International Guidelines for Securing Sustainable Small-scale Fisheries being led by the FAO.

They have been involved with the process since its inception in 2008 at the Global Conference on Small-Scale Fisheries – Securing Sustainable Small-Scale Fisheries: Bringing together responsible fisheries and social development.

Their joint submission is attached, and below.

Partnering for implementation

The Civil Society fisheries platform established by the World Forum of Fish Harvesters and Fishworkers (WFF), the World Forum of Fisher People (WFFP), the International Collective in Support of Fishworkers (ICSF) and the International CSO Planning Committee on Food Sovereignty is committed to engaging in the implementation of the guidelines, both as a platform and through the individual organizations and their members.

We see ourselves as a vital partner in the process of implementing the ssf guidelines.

This will require considerable planning, cooperation and coordination, including obtaining the necessary financial support, capacity building of our respective organizations and recruitment of staff.

We see our role as complimentary to and in support of the work of statal organisations and of intergovernmental organizations, to be undertaken both at the policy decision taking level and at the grass roots community level.

A critical aspect is ensuring the incorporation of a human rights based approach into fisheries policies, and achieving coherence between social, economic, trade, agriculture, industrial and other policies with fisheries, where our CSOs have an important monitoring and advocacy role to play.

How do you see the role of your organization and others in the implementation of the SSF Guidelines?

Regarding the role of our organizations

• We will work to create awareness about small-scale fisheries and the enormous actual and potential social, economic, environmental, cultural, nutritional and other contributions of this sector, and its importance as a way of life.
•  
• Our organizations will actively summarise, translate and disseminate simplified and condensed versions of the SSF Guidelines. With fishing communities we will work to create awareness about the Guidelines at different levels, including by preparing training modules, organizing workshops and facilitating training and capacity building, particularly for leaders of fisheries organizations and at the community level, on how to use the Guidelines to secure sustainable small-scale fisheries.  We will draw attention to how the Guidelines can be used to support ongoing struggles of fishing communities (to access water bodies, to prevent grabbing of their resources, etc.).
•  
• We will work to create awareness of the Guidelines amongst policy makers, international and intergovernmental organizations and the research community.
•  
• We will work with the FAO to promote implementation of the SSF Guidelines at regional and national levels.
•  
• We will seek the active implementation of the Guidelines at the national and local levels, and their adoption in policy and legislation.

In terms of others with key roles:

• The most critical role is that of the local and national governments. They must demonstrate the political will and take the initiative of aligning policy, legislation and practice with the SSF Guidelines, in close consultation with small-scale fisheries groups.
•  
• Intergovernmental organizations, particularly the FAO (and its member States), have a vital role in raising awareness about the Guidelines, seeking resources for their implementation, fostering partnerships for implementation, putting in place transparent and accountable systems to monitor their implementation, ensuring that small-scale fisheries organizations are part of decision making and implementation arrangements etc.
•  
• All UN bodies (including for example the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights and the Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food) have an important role in supporting and monitoring the implementation of the SSF Guidelines. The Committee on World Food Security (CFS) has a special role given the importance of small-scale fisheries for food security. Organizations like IFAD have an important role in supporting the development of capacity of small-scale fisheries organizations. 
•  
• Research groups have a role in ensuring that research undertaken helps highlight the importance of supporting SSF, and suggest appropriate and practical steps needed to support the sector etc. It is important that the research community partners with small-scale fisheries groups in an ethical manner, with an emphasis on participatory research that also meets the needs of local communities.
•  
• Media organizations have an important role in creating awareness about issues facing small-scale fisheries and the need to implement the SSF Guidelines.

How can partnerships be fostered and strengthened to include the ‘voices of the marginalized?

• Given that the SSF Guidelines seek to address issues of poverty alleviation and food security in the context of small-scale fisheries, the active participation of men and women of small-scale fishing communities, particularly marginalized and vulnerable groups among them, in all aspects of decision making and their implementation, is vital. Fishing community organizations must prepare for this role, including by strengthening their own organizations and their capacity to engage and seek change, and by partnering with other social movements and organizations representing food producer groups, possibly through such channels as the mechanism provided by by the International CSO Planning Committee (IPC) for food sovereignty. Full support needs to be extended by all (including policy makers and intergovernmental organizations) to enable this process of strengthening of small-scale fisheries organizations (including women's organizations). If the voices of the marginalized are to be effectively reflected (and not just in a token manner) this is essential.
•  
• Partnerships are critical to the implementation of the SSF Guidelines. Small-scale fisheries groups must be an integral part of such partnerships, including with national and local governments. On their part, national and local governments and other organizations partnering for implementation, must actively seek to consult with small-scale fisheries groups and ensure their active role in decision making.
•  
• All efforts at monitoring implementation of the Guidelines must specifically seek information from all those in the partnership about the participation of small-scale fisheries groups (men and women) in implementation and decision making.
•  
• A group which is particularly and vulnerable, and whose voice is not being heard clearly in the policy decision processes is youth. Appropriate platforms and communications need to be developed that enable young people from fishing communities to engage in the implementation of the ssf guidelines. They are the future, and are crucial in the struggle to secure sustainable livelihoods from fisheries and sustaining the culture, traditions and presence of fishing communities.

What will be required at local, national, regional and global levels to ensure effective and efficient partnerships?

• At the international level, a coordination mechanism will need to be established, with participation of intergovernmental organization such as the FAO and IFAD, donor organizations, social movements and other CSOs, research bodies, supporting governments, etc. FAO could play an anchoring role in any such mechanism. It should be ensured that this mechanism is accountable and transparent, and that it retains flexibility in its functioning (is not unduly bureaucratic).  The effective representation of small-scale fisheries organizations in this body must be ensured, including by making available resources.
•  
• Similar co-ordination mechanisms at the regional levels will be useful, to ensure better regional implementation of Guidelines.
• Partnerships are vital at the national level if the Guidelines are to be implemented. It is essential to set up a coordination body for implementation of the Guidelines, in which national and local governments, policy makers, small-scale fisheries organizations as well as NGOs, researchers and the media are represented. The effective representation of small-scale fisheries organizations in this body must be ensured, including by making available resources and enhancing the capacity of such organizations to participate in this body. The political will to support such processes is vital.  
•  
• Monitoring the implementation of the Guidelines must be inbuilt into the roles of the coordination mechanisms set up, whether at international, regional or national levels.
•  
• Resources need to be made available to facilitate interactions between different partners (at various levels) to identify the role that each partner can best play in implementing the Guidelines, and in monitoring and evaluation.
•  
• Information and communication – promoting experience sharing and collaboration

What best practices with regard to communication would you recommend for SSF Guidelines implementation at local, national, regional and global level?

• Many countries already have legislation or policy measures in place to support small-scale fisheries. Such examples need to be documented and widely shared. The experience of fishing communities in managing resources, getting recognition of their rights to resources, being part of organizations that have protected their economic or socio-cultural interests, also need to be documented and shared. Also to be shared are examples (including methodologies) of participatory research that has effectively supported small-scale fisheries etc. It is also important to share positive experiences of implementation of the Guidelines, and the impact this has had on the wellbeing of fishing communities.
•  
• It is essential that such examples be communicated in effective and innovative ways, keeping in mind the need for dissemination to small-scale fisheries organizations and communities. Direct sharing of experiences (exchange programmes), preparation of videos in local languages, use of social media etc, apart from written documents/ pamphlets/reports, should be considered. Availability of material in local languages is vital. A dedicated website to share positive examples of national and local level implementation may be considered. Exposure visits between communities as a tool to share positive experiences is very effective and such visits must be facilitated.

What are your experiences from participatory monitoring and evaluation?

• So far there are few such experiences that we are aware of for participatory monitoring and evaluation of fisheries policies, legislation and initiatives. However, if the Guidelines are to be effectively implemented, participatory monitoring and evaluations systems are vital.  It is extremely vital that small-scale fisheries organizations and other CSOs are part of such systems. It is equally important to provide mandated space for small-scale fisheries organizations and other CSOs to take up independent processes for monitoring and evaluation on implementation initiatives at national and local levels, and to submit reports on their observations.  

How can progress in implementing the SSF Guidelines be measured and reported in a useful way?

Measuring progress

• To gauge progress it is important that key, selected baseline data is compiled before implementation is initiated. This could include data on the socio-economic status of fishing communities, the extent and manner in which they are organized, representation of women in organizations, conditions of work etc. It will then be possible to measure what has been achieved during implementation. (In many countries such data may not be available and the production of such data in the course of implementation should be a basic requirement and indicator of progress).
•  
• It would be important to undertake a gap analysis (comparing policies and legislation in the country, with the guidance provided in the Guidelines).
•  
• Which gaps need to be addressed and how should be decided through a collective participatory process. This should be the framework against which implementation of the Guidelines is measured. Indicators to gauge progress will need to be accordingly prepared.

Reporting

• In terms of reporting, it is important that a systematic and periodic process of reporting is put in place at the national, regional and international levels. It is important that such reporting is also made mandatory by the FAO committee on Fisheries (COFI) and the FAO regional conferences (given how important implementation of these Guidelines are to achieving the objectives of the FAO related to food security, sustainable livelihoods and poverty alleviation). It is important that such reporting is also required by the CFS.  Reports submitted by national governments must be made freely available. National governments should make all efforts to make reports available in local languages. COFI should also seek reports on implementation from CSOs engaged with, or following, the implementation process (parallel reports).  
• Meaningful forums (at regional and national levels) to discuss reports on implementation should be organized, to share good experiences and to discuss ways to improve implementation. FAO regional offices may be tasked with organizing such forums.  Small-scale fisheries organizations and other CSOs must necessarily be part of such forums, and their porposals on how implementation must be improved, must be actively sought and respected.

1. Challenges and opportunities – needs for support and interventions

What do you think the main implementation challenges are, generally as well as in a specific country context, and how could they be overcome?

• In many countries there is a lack of political will to address issues related to small-scale fisheries (or even to address fisheries issues in general). This also stems from a lack of understanding about the important contributions of SSF and the myriad problems facing the sector. There is need for good research on SSF as well as of media coverage on the contributions of SSF.
• Policy attention (including financial support) is often on industrial fisheries and aquaculture. Policies that support large-scale fisheries (including trawling) and export-oriented industrial aquaculture need to be reversed, given also the impacts they have on the livelihoods and wellbeing of small-scale fishers and fishworkers and their communities.
•  
• A basic problem is that SSF organizations in many countries are not well organized and are unable to seek actions from policy makers on their proposals. It is imperative that systematic efforts are made to strengthen the organizational base of SSF organizations, with a particular focus on women, including the adoption of specific measures to address gender inequity and discrimination,  to enable them to be equal partners in the implementation process.
•  
• Implementing the Guidelines requires a multi-sectoral approach, and partnerships with other departments, such as environment, rural development, social welfare, women, etc. However, fisheries departments are often weak, and unable to moot and anchor such partnerships, or to defend the interests of SSF. There is need, in such a context, to raise the profile of the fisheries sector as such (and of SSF), and to create wider awareness about the problems facing communities in SSF.  This is also important in a context where the uses of coastal and other aquatic spaces is on the rise, and there are  powerful interests staking a claim to such spaces and resources, including mining, tourism, energy, shipping, ports etc. 
•  
• There is lack of policy coherence in many countries. Even as one set of policies promote food security, SSF etc., another set promote activities that negatively impact on SSF (like large-scale tourism, industrial aquaculture, SEZs, large ports, thermal and nuclear energy etc) and even lead to their displacement (through grabbing of their land and resources).  Processes to promote policy harmonization and inter-departmental coordination, with active participation of SSF organizations, are a must. Related to this is the need to develop increased coherence and synergy between national level ssf policies and international instruments such as CEDAW, some of the ILO and other human rights instruments. There are already well developed sets of indicators and Monitoring and Evaluating tools for these legal instruments, and common indicators for M and E could be usefully developed.
•  
• In many countries planning and implementation within fisheries are typically top-down process. It is important to facilitate participatory process with full and effective representation of small-scale fisheries organizations and other CSOs in designing and implementing fisheries policies and legislation.

What are your experiences of addressing these types of challenges and what have been successful or unsuccessful strategies and approaches?

• In our experience where small-scale fisheries organizations are strong, they have been able to challenge and seek reversal of unfavourable policies and developments. The most important strategy is to actively support and strengthen small-scale fisheries organizations, including of women.
• Small-scale fisheries organizations need to make stronger links with other small-scale food producer organizations and networks at local, national, regional and international levels. This has provided a useful platform to seek positive policies in several countries. In some situations environmental groups have allied with small-scale fisheries organizations to challenge industrial fisheries, unsustainable aquaculture, and other large-scale projects with negative implications for livelihoods and the environment.
•  
• Small-scale fisheries groups, through their networks, have also succeeded in establishing effective global linkages with UN institutions. These linkages have been useful in some cases in challenging developments that negatively affect their lives and livelihoods.
•  
• In some countries the collaboration with progressive researchers and media persons has proved effective.

How would interventions vary, depending on the time frame (e.g. what can be done within the next 12 months, in the next 5 years, in the long term) and depending on the existing resources (e.g. small/medium investments or large/transformative investments)?

Next 12 months

• Put in place a mechanism at the international level, with participation of FAO, IFAD, supporting governments, CSOs, researchers etc. to oversee implementation of the Guidelines, raise resources for implementation, develop concrete plans (with indicators) and so on.
•  
• Identify key partners committed to implementation and create opportunities to meet, discuss and plan
•  
• Create awareness about Guidelines at local, national, regional and international levels (develop material in local languages, training modules etc.)
•  
• Identify selected countries for implementation of Guidelines
•  
• Develop plan to support/ develop capacity of small-scale fisheries organizations to implement the Guidelines in collaboration with governments etc.
•  
• Develop plan for monitoring and evaluation, and for systematic reporting

Next five years

• Facilitate the formation of national-level platforms (with CSO participation) for implementation of the Guidelines
•  
• Undertake participatory gap analysis in countries that take the lead in implementation, and based on this, develop and implement plans to support SSF with participation of SSF organizations
•  
• Undertake systematic efforts (locally, nationally and regionally) to strengthen SSF organizations (including women's organizations) to implement the Guidelines
•  
• Organize capacity-building programmes for national and local governments, to implement the Guidelines.
•  
• Organize periodic consultations among those partnering for implementation of the Guidelines as a means of sharing experiences, and planning for the next period
•  
• Undertake ongoing monitoring and reporting of programmes being implemented.
•  
• Develop communication material to share good examples of implementation of SSF Guidelines
•  
• At the end of this period, systematically evaluate the impact of initiaitves that have been undertaken, identify areas for course correction, and based on this, develop plans for the next period to strengthen implementation of the Guidelines.

Long-term

• Monitoring and evaluation, course corrections;
•  
• Incorporate the SSF guiding principles into national policies;
•  
• Learning good practices, capturing and sharing the same.

ENDS

As stated by my colleagues before, small sale fisheries are very important since they have the potential to contribute significantly to food security and nutrition, economic growth, poverty eradication, rural development, sustainable resource utilization, equitable development and to provide valuable employment opportunities.  Implementing the SSF guidelines set out by the FAO will ensure that these potentials of the SSF be achieved.  It is important that the implementation progress takes place through:

·         Partnership with fishing communities (not simply fishermen), civil society organizations (CSOs), governments, NGOs, regional organizations, donors and international agencies in order to make the program successful.  Through partnership, data and information is more readily collected during the implementation process in order to make informed decisions about what is taking place.  This leads to the strengthening of SSF associations and all interested stakeholders could bring their opinions and ideas forward which can perhaps be polished for application.

·         Information and communication where experience sharing and collaboration is continuously promoted.  Progress should be monitored and evaluated continuously in order to see if the guidelines are working or not and to have relevant statistics to make information available and shared so as to make informed decisions.

·         It is also important to identify the challenges that the guidelines will face and identify how they can be overcome.  Some problems are over-exploitation of resources which leads to higher prices and competing demands and access to resources which has a serious effect on food sustainability.  In order to curb these problems, there should be policy responses to overuse of open-access resources include imposing licenses or quotas, moving from an open access system to a more community rights base management and small-scale fishers’ access rights can be protected through exclusion zones where the industrial fleet is banned from fishing in certain zones.   

On information and communication:

We agree that dialogue or the sharing of experiences is the best way to understand how to help fighting industries and communities better manage their resources, improve their techniques, monitor overfishing and exploitation, educate actors at all levels, and finally out of this process, implement the SFF guidelines effectively as best suited to the conditions that characterize different fishing regions.

Too often, mechanisms such as the SFF Guidelines are top-down approaches fashioned at the global level then passed down to governments of countries who, having been cut of out process from the beginning, are expected to implement the measures against their own constituents. And, gov’ts that fail to promote effective management of fishing within fishing communities AMONG fishermen will inevitably scramble for bearings when the Guidelines are passed to them. When the dangers of overfishing- ¼ of the total fish stock caught is overfished- coupled with water pollution and climate change are imminent, and the deep levels of poverty associated with so many fishing communities are glaring, this approach dangerously marginalizes important actors, rendering the SFF guidelines implementation ineffective.

Fishermen within communities usually work within groups that form their own rule of law, rules for division of catch, penalties and so on. Because these fishermen are the breadwinners of these communities, this gives them the legitimacy to make these decisions on the communities’ behalf. CSOs also play a large role in communities by representing the marginalized and making them part of this process so for this reason, among others, all community-level actors should be consulted.