29 The involvement of multiple actors should ensure that FIP activities are appropriate for the social-
political context of the fishery WWF, date unknown-a. Two chain actors and one external actor on the international and national scale are involved in the BSC FIP, but chain actors on regional or local
scale are not involved as BSC FIP participants. Since the FIP is initiated on an internationally oriented scale the question arises whether the FIP has been able to adjust to the local circumstances and
needs of the fishery and of actors within the crab value chain. It appears that the BSC FIP is based on global demands and standards while improvement should take place within the Indonesian BSC crab
value chain which starts at the local scale of fishers. However, the content of the FIP is not defined by the globally set guidelines, but is dependent on the BSC FIP participants’ interpretation of
improvement. Therefore, it could be possible that the adaptation to the local scale of the fishery can be found in the perception on improvement of the BSC FIP participants.
4.3 The definition of improvement in the BSC FIP
The way actors perceive improvement influences the objectives they set. This section will explore how the BSC FIP participants define improvement by analysing the elements of CI that are shown in
Figure 2.5. I will show that even though the BSC FIP participants have differing information environments they can work together towards the same goal, since they have a shared perception on
improvement. That perception is translated in the system objective of the BSC FIP, sustainability. Operational objectives are indicated which require involvement of external actors. Indicators for
improvement were not set explicitly in the BSC FIP, but could include satisfaction of local chain actors and stock status.
4.3.1 BSC FIP participants’ perception on improvement
An actor’s perception is defined as ‘successive evaluation, interpretation and appreciation of all information captured’. In this section the BSC FIP participants’ perception on improvement will be
introduced. The BSC FIP participants formulated improvement as being sustainable. As described in chapter 2, a movement towards sustainability is common ground in FIPs, but the definition can vary
depending on who is defining it. The definition comes forward from the differing perceptions of actors. Improvement is considered by APRI interviewees as having a sustainable supply in terms of
volume, quality and fishing costs. The latter should be sustained in a way the fishermen and mini- plants will get their profit as well as the processing companies themselves. On top of that,
improvement is considered by the APRI-members as doing better than before. The interviewee of the Crab Council considered improvement as having a management structure in place that is looking
after a resource in the long run; that “instead of trying to maximize your production and getting everything you can all at once […] you have some kind of foresight of what you are doing so that the
industry will still be viable, from now and in the future”. The SFP interviewee describes sustainability as being sustainable for the natural resource, which includes the species itself but also the
ecosystem. He sees sustainability as being able to “utilize the resource as long as possible”. He realizes that, since SFP is partnering with the business they should try to combine the ecological
target of the SFP with the target of the business. I see that the general interpretation of sustainability of the interviewees is similar, although there is a
difference in emphasis between the perception of the businessmen and of the NGO due to their differing interests. The businessmen are interested in the survival of the business for now and in the
future and want to achieve that by ensuring the resource is sustained, while the SFP starts its
30 argumentation from the ecological point of view. However, the SFP realises that they do not have the
direct means to change practices in the fishery themselves, because they lack a value chain and that is the reason why they collaborate with the business. They realize the FIP does not only include
ecological sustainability, but that it should also lead to benefits for the private sector and communities in order to be effective and therefore they start trying to change the situation from the
business level. For both different actor groups sustainability means that they are looking for a way the fishery can survive and the resource is still healthy, but their respective information
environments are different. This means that even though their motivation to work in a FIP is slightly different due to their differing initial interests – survival of the business versus survival of the natural
resource – they can still work together towards the same goal and within the same project since their perception on improvement is similar.
4.3.2 Continuous Improvement in the BSC FIP
