56 Together, these three aspects underline the global trade network the BSC FIP participants act in
towards achieving improvement. Therefore, it can be concluded that the BSC FIP objectives were based on information from international fisheries and on global demands and standards. Why this
specific information was used, will be elaborated on in the next section. From the case study in Betahwalang, I concluded that the practices of actors in the fishing village
have not changed due to the BSC FIP. The trade relations, especially the existence of economic incentives, hampered a change of practices. The berried female measure was not effective, because
fishers were motivated to catch them due to their positive effect on the yield. The minimum size measure was already in force in Betahwalang before the start of the BSC FIP and therefore the
minimum size measure could not change the fishers’ practices. It can be concluded that the BSC FIP had no effect on the practices of actors in the crab value chain in Betahwalang. The information that
was used to base the measure on was the lowest size that processors want to purchase. Therefore, putting back undersized crabs was already common practices. The role of the information flow and
perception in this process of change will be elaborated on now.
6.3 Extending the link to the conceptual framework
How can the above mentioned conclusions be explained with the conceptual framework, answering the analytical parts of the sub-questions? The analysis of the data collected in this study was done
using the concepts of value chains, continuous improvement and the information environment that is shaping actors’ perceptions. The information environment, adapted from Verweij et al. 2010,
could link the other concepts of the framework. It showed how perceptions of actors influence choices of management measures and goals towards achieving improvement on the one hand and
how these perceptions are dependent on the trade relations between actors on the other hand. The relations influenced the information flow and the perception of different actors. Linking the
previously summarized findings of chapter 4 and 5 to the conceptual framework allows concluding that trade relations within the value chain have influenced the progress towards improvement within
the BSC FIP.
6.3.1 The role of information in defining the BSC FIP objectives
The BSC FIP participants used international information to base their operational objectives on, because no sufficient information on their own resource was available. The BSC FIP participants had
to look for other information in order to set objectives for reaching improvement. Due to their position in the global trade network, the BSC FIP participants had access to information about other
cases. Much information was available on the Maine lobster fishery. In an environment where no information is available on the own resource, the BSC FIP participants used information from this
international case they had access to. It was not a random choice, because the achievement of the Maine lobster fishery was in line with the BSC FIP participants’ perception on improvement. On top
of that, the BSC FIP participants could bring in economic arguments for not purchasing berried females. Taking this measure was in the interest of the BSC FIP participants, because it would result
in both economic benefits and in a positive effect on the resource; taking this measure was in line with the BSC FIP participants’ perception on improvement. However, actors lower in the value chain
did not share this perception on improvement section 6.3.3.
57 The minimum size measure was also based on practices in other international fisheries. However,
this international information had to be complemented with information about the BSC, because the limit should be based on the size at maturity of the resource. Collecting data in Jakarta Bay was a
guided choice, since the crab business was very active there. In the end, the size limit was set at eight centimetres, because it was in the interest of the BSC FIP participants not to boycott the fishing
practices in Jakarta Bay. On top of that, there was another economic incentive to choose this limit, because processing crabs smaller than eight centimetres would not be profitable. Setting the size
limit at eight centimetres turned out being in line with maintaining the crab business on the short term without suffering a financial loss. The local trade relations forced the BSC FIP participants to
choose this size. Improvement would take place once the minimum size limit was increased.
6.3.2 The information flow through the value chain
