Chapter 3 Research Methodology
A research methodology is presented in this chapter. It explains the research framework and the consideration of selecting five small islands for this
study, followed by the data collection methods employed. Finally, analytical methods are described.
3.1 Research Framework
This study uses an institutional approach. This approach assumes that individuals trying to solve problems as effectively as they can. Resource users,
i.e. fishers, in many settings are strongly motivated to find better solutions to their problems if they can. Their economic livelihood depends on their creativity in
solving individual and joint problems Ostrom 1990. A comparative case study presents the best method for an institutional
approach, especially for the study of common-pool resources Agrawal 2001: 1663. By using this method, the study can identify the important causal
mechanisms and focus the range of relevant theoretical variables and their interactions. The comparison is based on successful and unsuccessful cases,
and the study tries to identify the internal and external factors that can impede or enhance the capabilities of individuals to use and govern coral reef resource use
Figure 9.
Figure 9 Factors affecting common-pool resource use.
Source: Dolšak and Ostrom 2003.
Resource characteristics
Economic environment
Political environment
Legal environment
Technology Characteristics
of resource users
Institutions governing
resource use Resource
use
The boundary of research is limited to the island fisher communities selected. This is intended to elicit the social capital of these communities with
regard to coral reef resource use. Consequently, the resource boundary is restricted to those resources or fishing grounds where the studied fisher
communities are used.
3.2 Selection of Study Sites
The case studies must be carefully selected, so that comparisons of the range of relevant theoretical variables and their interactions can be carried out.
The criteria of selection are as follows: 1. The island fisher communities are situated in coral reef resources and
dependent upon reef fishery. 2. The communities had experienced investment in social capital. They had
been receiving externally-input assistance from NGOs, universities andor a national program for around a decade. The activities included promoting
community’s awareness on coastal and marine conservation and environmentally friendly resource use, convening community and fisher
meetings, training of fishers and local leaders, promoting credit union, introducing mariculture and other income generating activities, establishing
marine sanctuary, and initiating community monitoring. These activities are regarded as building or investment of social capital. As clarified in Chapter 2,
investment in social capital can be promoted in three different methods, namely promoting network or stakeholders’ interactions, encouraging
capacity building for fishers, and supporting for fishing organizations Berkes 2006; Folke et al. 2005; Grafton 2005; Isham 2001; Rudd 2001; Pomeroy and
Berkes 1997. The activities of the externally-input assistance were disseminating particular norms, as well as promoting interactions among
fishers and between fishers and other stakeholders. Regular engagements can build norms of reciprocity and trust.
3. The communities located in similar socio-cultural background and formal institutions.
The next criterion of selection is based on a comparison of a couple of indicators of the success of coral reef resource use carried out by the island
community, that is 1 protection of the community marine sanctuary, 2 non- existent destructive-fishing practices i.e. using explosives and poisons to catch
fish. These success indicators are considered to represent a good institutional arrangement of fisher communities that enable individuals to achieve productive
outcome in situations where temptations to free-ride and shirk are ever present Ostrom 1990: 15.
Based on the above criteria and the preliminary information from the key- person interviews carried out during first data collection in 2004 on the
characteristics and two success indicators of many candidate islands, the study determined successful and unsuccessful cases of fisher communities that have
experienced investment in social capital Table 7; Figure 10.
Table 7 Case studies
Criteria Spermonde
archipelago Taka Bonerate
MNP Successful
Kapoposang Rajuni Besar,
Rajuni Kecil
Community sanctuary
N.A. Protected Destructive
fishing Not present or very
small Mostly non-
destructive Unsuccessful
Barrang Caddi Tarupa
Community sanctuary
Protected Not protected
Destructive fishing
Half fishers practice destructive fishing
Destructive fishing was proliferated
Some characteristics of the study sites are presented in Table 8. These islands cannot meet the third parameter of selection mentioned above. They are
differing in the formal institutional arrangements. Nevertheless, this difference can even generate better results. The study can show whether the different
formal institutional arrangements influence fisher collective action and rules.
Table 8 Characteristics of study sites
Islands Characteristics
Tarupa, Rajuni Kecil, Rajuni Besar
Barrang Caddi Kapoposang
Formal institutional
arrangements Taka Bonerate Marine
National Park –
Kapoposang Tourism Marine Park
Externally-input assistance
COREMAP LP3M 1999-2004
EMDI LP3M 1993- 1999
FKB UNHAS 2003-present
LP3M 1989-2000 YKL, LEMSA
2000-2002 Yasindo 1995-?
LP3M 1995-1998 Geographical
location and resource
characteristic Remote, 6-8 hours
from the district capital.
Wealthy in fishery and coral reef
resources. Rare visit by tourists.
Only 1 hour from the provincial
capital. Poor in fishery and
coral reef resources.
Remote, 6-8 hours from the provincial
capital. Wealthy in fishery
and coral reef resources.
Regular visit by tourists.
Figure 10 Location of study sites.
Spermonde Archipelago
Taka Bonerate
Marine National
Park
Jakarta Kapoposang
Barrang Caddi
Tarupa Rajuni Kecil
Rajuni Besar
Spermonde
Park
Jakarta
3.3 Data Collection