Reviews of Coastal CBRM Programs and Projects

2.2.4 Reviews of Coastal CBRM Programs and Projects

CBRM became popular in the Philippines in the 1980s and 1990s Pomeroy and Carlos, 1997 and as a result there are more peer reviewed papers in international journals from the Philippines than for Indonesia. Pomeroy and Carlos 1997 review 43 CBRM programs and projects in the Philippines, analysing project objectives, the type of institution involved in the project, the type of intervention and the success rate. Alternative livelihood opportunities and poverty alleviation was the fourth most common objective of those CBRM projects. Many projects were funded from overseas in collaboration with the Philippines Government. The four main interventions starting with the most frequent were: community organising, educationtraining and skills development, technology for increased fish production and alternative livelihoods developmentcredit support. If success is defined as the sustainability of the material interventions i.e. artificial reef, community cooperative only 19 of projects were a success. Three reasons were identified for the failure, a early problems in developing a process for implementation, b lack of local government support and c misun derstandings about objectives from the beneficiaries’ perspective. Pomeroy and Carlos 1997 also identify a range of factors that contribute to successful implementation. It is noteworthy that Robert Pomeroy pers. comm. 2009 is not aware of this type of project review having been conducted in Indonesia. Crawford et al. 1998 review experiences and lessons learned from the first 18 months of Proyek Pesisir in North Sulawesi, a project aiming to establish effective models of participatory and community-based coastal resources management. They found that the community based extension officers were crucial for the success of the project but that they needed training. They also found that integration between agencies and cross visits of stakeholders to the Philippines helped the take-up of recommendations for a marine protected area. In West Sumatra there have been community based initiatives in several locations although few of these have been reviewed in the public domain. Kunzmann 2002 reviews wider efforts in West Sumatra to protect further degradation of coral and he identifies community awareness and education as key components to the successful establishment of a marine protected area. A further study of CBRM is from Sungai Pisang, Kota Padang Agussalam, 2008. This seemed to be a textbook implementation of some of the principles of participatory rural appraisal. The twin problems of resource degradation and the lack of community institutions were identified through facilitated meetings. Local institutions were strengthened and five needs were identified; 1 Building capacity and increasing income, 2 Protected areas, 3 coral rehabilitation, 4 sanitation provision and 5 an Information booth. Of the three income generating opportunities that were selected for development tilapia, coral farming and mangrove crab mariculture, tilapia was already successfully being farmed and the additional financial capital enabled other people to be involved. The other two initiatives have failed to be sustainable because of the absence of a market coral farming and poor design mangrove crab. Although published studies in peer reviewed journals from West Sumatra are scarce there are various research reports available and several postgraduate theses from the local universities Bung Hatta and Andalas University. One of these is of particular relevance to this literature review and is also based in Sungai Pisang. Deswandi 2008 uses in depth interviews and participant observation to outline the five livelihood strategies employed by the community. These are as follows: 1 Utilising the kindness of nature – fishing, collecting wood. 2 Alternative productive activities – rice, tourists, net making, ship maker. 3 Forecasting for unexpected future events - saving fish, processing fish drying, cash-saving group julo –julo and raising livestock. 4 Maintaining or enhancing social relationships - sharing abundant catches. 5 Risk spreading mechanisms and productivity enhancement –different fishing gear. Deswandi 2008 identified social relationships social capital as the most dynamic of these strategies. Keeping harmonious relationships was an important factor in the resilience of households against shocks such as tropical storms.

2.3 Livelihoods and Diversification