and whether further fisheries conservation measures are necessary. The group in Tiku has already begun to do a simple version of this.
Dissemination of results from monitoring and proactive co-management measures.
Once the state of the resource is known, fishers themselves can be involved in a management process using their own data. If stocks are healthy and
further expansion is possible then physical assets fishing gear, outboards, vessels can be given to increase fishing effort. If stocks are already declining then these
data can be used to show fishers themselves that further expansion of effort is counterproductive, that conservation measures such as MPAs or gear mesh
restrictions are necessary and that government aid needs to be targeted away from increasing fishing effort. Whether data indicating the health of the stocks is
collated by the fishermen or through independent surveys it is crucial to have a better understanding of the health of the stocks. Many of the communities
interviewed as part of this research are highly dependent on fisheries and stock declines may force these communities down a blind alley.
8.1.3 Human capital The problems:
Low skills, few alternative opportunities and few plans for the future Table 5.2 ‘occupational multiplicity’, ‘wives working’, section 6.3.1 and 6.3.2
‘financial field’. The majority of the labourers interviewed as part of this research
ended up in fishing because they had few other skills, lacked the financial capacity to start their own business and were faced with few alternatives to a
career in fishing. Character and behaviour
section 5.3.1 , Table 5.2 ‘attitude to hard work’,
Table 5.5 ‘community cohesion and trust’, section 6.3.1 ‘human capital’. Amongst the poor fishers interviewed there were aspects of character and personal
skills that were limiting factors. These included: An inability to manage money, save for the future and curtail consumption in the ‘good times’. An aversion to
risk or to try new things sometimes borne out of low self-esteem or confidence. A low motivation to try and change things for a better future coupled with short-term
planning and a sense of ‘what will be, will be’ pasrah. Dishonesty, distrust and
not taking responsibility, for example with loan repayments. A subculture which cultivates inertia can also limit personal initiative. As one person becomes
successful, friends and neighbours may become jealous, they may request some of the profits to be shared, they may borrow from that person but never pay off the
loan or even steal some of the harvest for themselves. Perhaps in some contexts it is easier to do what everyone else is doing rather than trying to get ahead.
The solutions:
Positive examples. It was insightful comparing and contrasting
respondents who essentially started from a similar financial and physical asset background but who now had different livelihood profiles. Many crew members
lived day to day as they had done for many years and found it impossible to save and strengthen their livelihoods. Others however had the principle to save for the
future, no matter how small, were always on the lookout for supplementary livelihood opportunities and kept excessive consumption to a minimum. Some
crew members were especially diligent at rod and line fishing while at sea on the bagan and this provided an additional boost to their income. The majority of these
‘proactive’ crew members reported that these values had been passed down from their parents. In families or communities where those values are not the norm,
positive examples are needed that demonstrate a better way to live. Extension officers and change agents with a long term commitment can be
these positive examples. Tremendous effort is required for behavioural change.
Forming new habitats and norms requires a long term commitment. It is much less glamorous and photo worthy than giving out physical aid. Several members of
successful fishing groups talked about how the leader had boosted their confidence and enabled them to do things that they could not do on their own.
Because the group leader or change agent journeyed with them and demonstrated how to repay the loans in practice, they were able to copy his example. A key
element of this is persistence and encouraging fishers to overcome barriers rather than give up at the first failure.
Window of opportunity . For bachelors and married couples with non-
school age children there is a real opportunity to save while household
expenditure is minimal e.g family who saved for 7 years section 6.3.3. This is especially the case when the new family lives with their extended family, although
in the West Sumatran context they would still be expected to contribute to the needs of the wider family. Once children reach school age and household
expenditure increases, the potential to save is greatly reduced and this can be when crew members find themselves locked into being a crew member. Extension
officers need to encourage development of supplementary livelihoods during this ‘window of opportunity’.
Education. Both formal and informal education needs to be prioritized
particularly for the younger generation. There is an existing university scholarship program for children of poor fishers but there are few spaces and many children
have dropped out of school before that. In Sungai Nipah seeing that the lack of kindergarten was disadvantaging their children, the fishers group decided to build
their own one. Related to the ‘window of opportunity’ above, young unmarried men who have dropped out of school to go fishing typically live with their family
and have few outgoings. Developing supplementary livelihood skills at this stage may be extremely strategic.
Pro-poor pilot projects. One of the strengths of programs like G-PEMP is
the emphasis, in theory, on non-fishing livelihoods. The weakness has been that this aid has been a small proportion of the help that has been received and there
has not been the ongoing commitment to ‘journey’ with the poor. In one fishing village a fisher was given 150 ducks and food by a political party to provide him
with a supplementary income as he sold the ducks eggs. Initially they met with him and explained what he needed to do. Six months later and without a follow up
visit none of the ducks had produced an egg and the fisher was having to use his income from fishing to buy the duck food. This was unsustainable so eventually
he sold the ducks and plans to buy a cow. This is such a waste of time and effort and demonstrates that although his physical capital was strengthened, without the
knowledge and experience of how to get ducks to produce eggs, there was no change in his livelihood resilience. If however he had someone who visited him
regularly, his duck rearing project could have become an example for other fishers
to follow. Practical, hands-on examples are much more important for fishers than a theoretical business plan in a classroom.
8.1.4 Financial capital The problems:
