2.4.2 Perception of Success
Differences in perception of success between project implementers and stakeholders was an important issue identified by Pomeroy et al. 1997. While
project implementers typically viewed success as the sustainability of material interventions such as the formation of a cooperative or a marine protected area,
for beneficiaries just being involved in the decision making process contributed towards a successful outcome. This may partly be because involvement from the
beginning gave them a better understanding of the difficulties of implementation. Furthermore, Pomeroy et al. 1997 found that a positive attitude towards
cooperation was linked with perceptions of a successful project. In contrast to this they found that a person with a negative attitude towards cooperation was less
likely to be involved in the project and more likely to have a source of income outside of fishing. One positive outcome of the project was that there was no
significant difference in perceptions of success between fisher families involved in the project and those who were not. Hence the project had not divided the
community into the haves and have-nots.
2.4.3 Future Priorities for Coastal Management Initiatives
In their review of the factors influencing Integrated Coastal Management ICM in the Philippines and Indonesia, Christie et al. 2005 call for a greater
commitment by national and international entities to persevere with ICM despite the challenges. Although they emphasise that complex causal webs underlie each
of the ICM failures, they summarise the themes that need to be developed if ICM is to prove sustainable as follows:
Managing the outcomes of ICM – insuring that there are strong institutions to
equitably distribute the benefits and resolve conflicts. Reaffirming participatory management
– although it is time consuming and costly Christie et al. 2005 argue that the most pragmatic way to achieve the
ICM aims is through participation rather than command and control management.
Integration in difficult contexts – institutional and legal frameworks are
limiting the sustainability of ICM. In Indonesia and the Philippines there are still conflicts between national and regional authorities.
Long term commitment crucial to sustainability – commitment at the
institutional, project and individual level. Investment in staff capacity is an investment well made.
Continuing the evaluative and adaptive process – a need for more research
firstly to evaluate the processprojects and secondly looking at the philosophy behind new ways of doing things.
Fundamentally, Christie et al. 2005 are concerned that the institutions needed for successful ICM are lagging behind the rapid growth and
implementation of ICM programs and projects in both Indonesia and the Philippines.
Over the last 30 years, because of the shift in policy towards community based management, there have been many projects targeted at poverty relief,
alternative livelihoods and increasing the standard of living. Many of the studies reviewed above come from a resource conservation perspective, emphasising the
need for MPAs and other measures to rehabilitate natural resources. However, resource conservation and poverty alleviation are closely interrelated and
according to Christie et al . 2005 “ICM represents an appropriate middle ground
between those advocating mainly for social and economic justice and those advocating mainly for environmental preservation.”
It is noteworthy that there are more published papers reviewing ICM projects in the Philippines Pomeroy et al., 1997; Pomeroy and Carlos, 1997 than
in Indonesia and there has not been a comprehensive review conducted in Indonesia R. Pomeroy, pers. comm., 2009.. Although research is conducted
throughout the nation, many of the peer-reviewed papers published from Indonesia relate to conservation initiatives, such as those from Bunaken National
Park and there is a lack of international published research on the livelihood aspects of CBRM. This corresponds with Christie et al.
’s 2005 observations that ICM in Indonesia lags behind the Philippines and that there are “limited numbers
of village-level ICM efforts and few examples of municipal level government ICM planning efforts and limited joint planning by key national-level sectoral
offices.”
3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This section outlines the place and time of the research, where and how the data was collected and how the data was analysed.
3.1 Overview of Proposed Research
Kategori