as supplementary livelihoods in the coming years, new economic openings need to be sought. Processing and value adding of the fish products that are caught
could be one opening. Lower input aquaculture such as seaweed farming or tilapia is suitable in some places with higher input grouper farming being a possibility in
others. Tourism is another obvious option in some parts of West Sumatra. Feasibility studies are needed to ensure that whatever is chosen, it needs to be
appropriate for the context and realistic for low income poor fishing families. Moreover, the ‘journeying’ alongside of people is important, firstly to identify
what businesses residents want to develop and secondly to source the financial capital for that.
Funds for non-fishing livelihood development. Most of the financial aid
currently targeted at improving livelihoods is spent on capitalizing the fishing industry Stanford et al., 2014. A higher proportion of this should be directed
away from fishing towards other alternatives. This takes fishers into new areas where they do not have the expertise and where they will need help, as for
example with the duck rearing example above. If fishers could be paired or mentored by a local businessman, then this void could be filled. If the government
was able to provide low interest loans in return for a guaranteed pro-poor business they may be able to provide an incentive for local businessmen to be amongst the
change agents who are building human capital.
8.1.5 Physical capital The problems:
Physical capital is given without building other capital section 7.3.1 ‘fruit
trees’, section 7.3.2 ‘Air Manis’, section 8.1.3 ‘duck rearing’. For fishers without previous experience, starting a new supplementary livelihood or changing
profession entirely is a big step. Having received aid, fishers find that they hit a problem e.g. their fruit trees will not produce fruit, their Tilapia are washed away
in a flood, their child’s school fees need paying so they sell the asset to pay for that and they do not have the capacity to overcome that problem.
Physical capital alone may not help labourers if it is not the right kind section 6.3.1
‘institutionally’, section 7.3.1. Several labourers had received nets
or machines but did not own their own sampan and did not have the time to go to sea even if they could borrow a sampan.
Physical capital given without consideration of other capital constraints section 7.3.1
. Nets and boat machines are given to fishermen without any appreciation of whether stocks are already overexploited or without equipping
fishers to manage their money and begin saving for the day when the machine they have just been given will need to be replaced.
The solutions:
Clearer definition of success and monitoring and evaluation of program success.
What is meant by a successful livelihood improvement program? If the fisheries agency has a budget of 100 million Rp for livelihoods and uses this to
buy 30 long-tail machines which they distribute to 30 fishers, then they have successfully spent that money on what it was intended. Yet there are a series of
questions that needed to be answered if we are to know whether that livelihood intervention genuinely improved livelihood resilience. These questions include:
Did those fishers need those machines or were there others who were more needy? If those machines need to be repaid, what percentage of fishers have paid off their
loan in full? Are those 30 fishers actively saving to replace their machines or waiting for the next grant? In the light of catches, are stocks over-exploited?
Would those 30 fishers have been better helped by using the 100 million Rp in a different way? If the 30 machines were given to a group of fishers, is the group
continuing to meet? It is possible to measure livelihood resilience through simple measures like
income yet we may miss the bigger picture. A fisher who has used a paddle for the last ten years will typically see an increase in income when they start using a
machine. That fisher needs to be held accountable to repay the machine in full and be encouraged to continue to make subsequent payments that can be used as a
savings scheme. The boat machine is much more effective and long lasting if it becomes an incentive to save and change behavior that will increase resilience in
the long-term.
Helping labourers with the right kind of capital . The MDS analysis
demonstrated a big gap in physical capital between owners and labourers. Labourers are more difficult to help than small boat owners but are the largest
group of the poor and normally the poorest. Establishing appropriate supplementary livelihoods needs to be a high priority for poverty alleviation.
8.1.6 Institutional capital The problems:
