Household finances and trust are key determinants of benefits from small-scale fisheries co-management
Introduction
Fishing livelihoods in the Asia-Pacific contribute significantly to the income, nutrition and food security of coastal communities [1], generating economic opportunities and livelihoods including for vulnerable and marginalized peoples [2]. Many small-scale fisheries are also tied to local culture and traditional values and benefits, where social wellbeing and the maintenance of livelihoods play essential roles [3], [4]. Increasingly the socioeconomic attributes of small-scale fishing communities are being examined to understand how management of these systems may be achieving desirable outcomes that improve the lives of fishing communities [3]. There is also increasing recognition that the economic viability of small-scale fishing communities is highly dependent on their access to marine natural resources, the benefits they receive and their support and participation in management that promotes sustainable fishing practices [5], [6].
Small-scale fisheries households in low to middle income countries may often be characterized by low financial performance which can increase fishers’ vulnerability to external shocks and leave households at risk of poverty traps and inter-generational debt cycles [7]. Therefore, material resources as they pertain to wellbeing, including economic dependency through household income and savings derived from natural resources [7], [8], [9], may provide important insights into the economic viability of fishing communities [6]. Such factors can directly influence fisher perceptions of food, financial and employment security and their support for natural resource management rules, including compliance with fishing regulations [10], [11]. Where forms of human capital, for example where people have knowledge of local rules and support local management, and where social capital through self-determination and participation in decision-making is strong, community compliance with management rules is often durable [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17]. In particular, the trust of people in their fellow community members and leaders has been shown to be critically important for management success and livelihood outcomes [18].
Recently a simplified 3-dimensional wellbeing framework composed of material resources, social relations, and subjective dimensions has been proposed [12]. Material wellbeing encompasses the resources that people have to meet their needs [19], relational wellbeing draws on social relationships, through which people connect with and access other human needs and benefits in the society [20], while subjective wellbeing encompasses people’s perceptions of their life, often including access to food, financial and employment opportunities [21], [22], [23]. Others have examined how contextual, wellbeing and institutional conditions are conducive to performance of conservation management relative to unmanaged areas and over various timescales [24], [25], [26]. Studies of how various wellbeing attributes may impact socioeconomic livelihood and management outcomes are generally nascent in marine natural resource use settings [10], [27].
In rural fishing households in Indonesia, men and women have multiple roles related to their local fisheries including the capture, post-harvest processing and trade of fish and other marine products as well as in the supply of protein for the household [28]. Understanding how various wellbeing attributes of fishing communities, including material resources and their human, financial and social capital may influence socioeconomic and management outcomes is important for characterizing the long-term outlook for fishing communities (27), as differentiated policy and governance approaches may be required that acknowledge the roles of different sectors of fishing communities within different fishing activities [8]. Incorporating social and cultural norms and gender inclusion strategies into management and livelihood programs may also have positive implications for fishing household and community wellbeing [29], [30] and for equitable adaptations by fishing communities to economic changes and community recovery policies [31], [32].
Here we examine if expected socioeconomic outcomes (ie. perceived food, financial, job security, compliance with fishing closures) in villages adjacent to seven areas where small-scale fisheries management interventions were implemented, changed over time. We also examine if the expected outcomes were impacted by household material resources (ie. household savings, access to loans, household income from fisheries), proportion of households with fisher women, proportion of households with women processors, human capital (ie. knowledge of natural resource rules, fishing dependency) and social capital (ie. trust in community, local leaders). To examine these relationships, we conducted surveys of 1828 fishing households in 2019 and 2025 households in 2021 from 48 village communities adjacent to seven fisheries comanagement areas initiated in 2018 in Southeast Sulawesi, Indonesia [33]. These newly formed fisheries management areas are termed ‘other effective conservation measures’ [34]. The findings are being used to inform fishers and policy makers with data and knowledge to create sustainable, equitable and adaptive policies and governance.
Section snippets
Survey areas
Fishing for wild capture marine fisheries is a key primary livelihood of coastal communities of Southeast Sulawesi province, contributing 252,594 metric tons of fish in 2019, valued at IDR 5839 million (approximately USD 405 million) [35]. Approximately 94,000 or 80 % of all fishers are small-scale artisanal fishers [35]. Fishers use motorized boats less than 10 gross ton (GT) or fish by foot at low tide. All deploy non-mechanized methods and gears including gleaning by hand, handline, small
Results
Of all household respondents 99 % in 2019 and 92 % in 2021 stated that they were highly dependent on the fisheries sector for income and food. For reported household income, the fisheries sector contributed 79 % ± 7 SE to total household income in 2019 and 68 % ± 6 SE in 2021. The two primary income sources across the seven managed access areas were small-scale fishing and smallhold farming. Small-scale fishing contributed 71 % ± 9 SE to total household income in 2019 and 63 % ± 7 SE in 2021
Discussion
Understanding the economic and social dimensions of fishing communities can help identify the policy and institutional changes required to improve the outcomes for community livelihoods and economic wellbeing [6]. A key finding of our study was that households being able to save a portion of their income from fisheries positively influenced all expected socioeconomic outcomes measured, while access to loans led to greater food security, highlighting the fundamental nature of saving as a key
Conclusion
The novel findings from our study support the use of multiple measures to ensure different dimensions of wellbeing are assessed in relation to expected socioeconomic outcomes in coastal fisheries management settings. To achieve more socially inclusive as well as ecologically sustainable outcomes in the conservation and use of marine resources, it is vital to understand the multi-dimensional role of household wellbeing on these outcomes. The positive trends in household food, financial and job
Ethics statement
Verbal consent was obtained from all participants before conducting household interviews. Prior to consenting to interviews household respondents were informed about the survey, its purpose, and how the data would be used.
Credit authorship contribution statement
HK, RJ, WS, TS, AIA, LS, NA F, ER, AY, IP, YM, LFD, SB, CC and SJC: Conceptualization, Methodology, data analysis, data interpretation, writing, and revision. HK, CC, SB and SJC: data analysis, writing and review. HK, RJ, WS, TS, AIA, LS, NA, F, YM, LFD, SB, CC and SJC: data interpretation and review. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.
Conflict of interest
None of the authors have conflict of interest with this study research.
Acknowledgements
The activities for this study were conducted under permission with support by the Indonesian government. Logistical support was provided by staff of district and province government agencies in Southeast Sulawesi. We are extremely grateful to participants who willingly responded to household interview surveys. We gratefully acknowledge the support and funding by Margaret A. Cargill Philanthropies, Walton Family Foundation, Dutch Post Code Lottery and Bloomberg Philanthropies.
References (62)
- et al.
Access rights, capacities and benefits in small-scale fisheries: Insights from the Pacific Coast of Canada
Mar. Policy
(2021) - et al.
Current and future socio-ecological vulnerability and adaptation of artisanal fisheries communities in Peru, the case of the Huaura province
Mar. Policy
(2020) - et al.
Institutional fit and the sustainability of social – ecological systems
Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain.
(2015) - et al.
Marine ecosystem-based management in the southern cone of South America: stakeholder perceptions and lessons for implementation
Mar. Policy
(2009) - et al.
Factors affecting support for Puget Sound marine protected areas
Fish. Res.
(2013) - et al.
A framework for allocating fishing rights in small-scale fisheries
Ocean Coast. Manag.
(2019) - et al.
Poverty and protected areas: an evaluation of a marine integrated conservation and development project in Indonesia
Glob. Environ. Change
(2014) - et al.
Implementing a social-ecological systems framework for conservation monitoring: lessons from a multi-country coral reef program
Biol. Conserv.
(2019) - et al.
Exploring gender inclusion in small-scale fisheries management and development in Melanesia
Mar. Policy
(2021) - et al.
Pathways to establishing managed access and networks of reserves
Mar. Policy
(2021)