APPENDIX C
Case Study Synthesis

INVESTIGATING THE LINKAGES
BETWEEN FISHERIES, POVERTY
AND GROWTH:
A SUMMARY AND SYNTHESIS OF
EIGHT NATIONAL CASE-STUDIES
INCLUDING MOROCCO, INDIA,
BANGLADESH, THAILAND,
MALAWI, PACIFIC ISLANDS,
MAURITANIA AND CANADA
A report prepared for the
Department for International Development (DFID)
Project: ‘The Role of Fisheries in Poverty Alleviation
and Growth: Past, Present and Future’
DFID/PASS Contract: AG0213
June 2005

STUDY TEAM
Dr. Stephen Cunningham
Dr. Arthur E. Neiland
IDDRA Ltd
Portsmouth Technopole
Kingston Crescent
Portsmouth
Hants PO2 8FA
Tel: +44 (0)2392 658232
Fax: +44 (0)2392 658201
E-mail: cunningham@iddra.org, neiland@iddra.org

CONTENTS
Page
no.
1. INTRODUCTION 4
2. KEY FINDINGS – A SUMMARY OF NATIONAL CASE-STUDIES
2.1. Introduction 5
2.2. Bangladesh 5
2.3. Canada 7
2.4. India 9
2.5. Malawi 11
2.6. Mauritania 13
2.7. Morocco 15
2.8. Pacific Islands (FFA) 17
2.9. Thailand 19
3. DISCUSSION OF KEY FINDINGS 21

1. INTRODUCTION
This report is an output of the DFID/PASS Project ‘The Role of Fisheries in Poverty
Alleviation and Growth: Past, Present and Future’ Phase III.
The conceptual framework and methodology which were developed for the project
overall are given in an earlier report (Cunningham and Neiland, 2005), which is
included as Appendix D of the Final Project Report. This report should be read
within the context and approach developed in the methodology report.
In addition to the conceptual and methodological report, this report is based upon and
underpinned by eight national case-studies which looked at the role of fisheries in
poverty alleviation and growth in the following countries:
• Bangladesh (Appendix E)
• Canada (Appendix F)
• India (Appendix G)
• Malawi (Appendix H)
• Mauritania (Appendix I)
• Morocco (Appendix J)
• Pacific Islands (FFA) (Appendix K)
• Thailand (Appendix L)
The study methodology included a template for the national case-studies, based on a
review of relevant key issues from the international literature, and in consultation
with national experts and authors, and other experts from DFID and various
international organisations.
The subsequent development and work on each national case-study by local author-
experts, using the template for guidance, led to the production of eight very detailed
reports, including appendices of primary and secondary data, and supporting
bibliographic references. These are included in the Final Project Report (Appendices
E-L).
The current report has two primary objectives:
- to summarise the key findings of each of the national case-studies;
- to synthesise the key findings of the national case-studies within the overall
context of the objectives of the project.
In order to achieve these objectives, the framework provided by the case-study
template has been used to structure the information which was generated by the work
undertaken at national level.
C-4

2. KEY FINDINGS – A SUMMARY OF NATIONAL CASE-STUDIES
2.1. Introduction
In this section, the findings of the detailed national case-studies are summarised in
order to highlight specific and particular issues which contribute to the overall
objectives of the project. The basic framework provided by the case-study template
(cf. Appendix D) has been used to structure the summary for each country.
2.2. BANGLADESH
A profile for Bangladesh (fisheries and poverty) based on the findings of the national
case-study (Appendix E) is given in Box 1 below.
Box 1: BANGLADESH Case-study (F. Alam, 2005)
Overview and background
- a country of 148,000 sq.km, with a pop. of 135.2 million; Independent in 1971;
- agriculture employs 69% labour force (23% GDP); 77% pop. in rural areas;
- Low GDP and GNI per capita (US$421 and US$444);
- Service sector contributes 49% GDP; Overall ranked 138th HDI (value of 0.509);
Poverty
- poverty is a major problem (measured using Direct Caloric Intake, DCI; & Cost of Basic
Needs, CBN methods); DCI (44% pop. absolute poverty); CBN (33.7%); although poverty is
recorded as showing a marked decline over past 10 years;
- Poverty highest in households involved in agriculture, forestry and fisheries;
- Poverty reduction is major policy goal, and there is strong commitment to MDGs;
Economic growth
- at least phases of policy can be identified since 1971: 1971-1978: intensive intervention; 1978-
1990: economic liberalisation and series of 2-5 year plans; 1990-2002: democratic/economic
reform;
- GDP fluctuated in 1980/1990s; since then 5% growth rate maintained;
- Fisheries contributed 5.15% GDP in 2003-2004; and continues to grow;
- Fish exports are important (2nd after garments); aquaculture (e.g. shrimp) increasing in
importance;
Fisheries development and management
- fisheries resources are owned and managed by State (Department of Fisheries);
- 2 million tonnes production (35% inland; 43% inland culture; 22% marine fisheries);
- Total value of production: up to TK147 million (2003-04); 5.2 million people involved;
- Main policy goal is maximisation of production through enhancement and management; using
four sets of laws and regulations (mainly access control); low level of enforcement for major
open-water fisheries; more effective in smaller water bodies; fisheries statistics and information
are very limited; Policy for marine fisheries not well developed;
- Various schemes to utilise community-based approaches to management (trials);
Policy
- 1985 New Fisheries Management Policy (NFMP) was adopted, with aim of conserving fish
stocks and reducing exploitation of fishers by powerful landowners (inland areas); DoF still to
collect lease money; but Ministry of Land owns/controls inland water bodies;
- various other policy changes have occurred since changing the way in which inland fisheries
are leased and controlled, but dominance of powerful fishery owners remains; other waters are
largely open-access in nature, and vital to underpin livelihoods of poor;
- Fisheries policy implementation is limited by lack of real government investment (not
allocations); complicated institutional arrangements between government departments; fisheries
programmes targeted at or operated by poor often not effectively supported;
- Fisheries sector now included in PRSP: goals include increasing productivity in fisheries and
aquaculture; raising income of poor; promoting rice and fish culture; strengthening research and
extension; (a new policy and institutional framework is prioritised, plus legal framework and
wider stakeholder participation);
C-5

Overall, then, what are the major issues concerning the relationship between fisheries
and poverty in Bangladesh as revealed by the case-study. There are at least five
issues which can be identified, as follows:
First, Bangladesh has a large and growing population, with the majority of people
living in rural areas and mainly dependent upon agriculture for their livelihoods.
Inland fisheries are an important sub-component of this sector, and help to underpin
the livelihoods of millions of people providing employment and income, and a
source of fish protein. Farming and fishing are often integrating within households
and communities.
Second, although Bangladesh has experienced economic growth in past 10 years,
poverty remains a very serious problem (30-40% population are impoverished
depending on measurement methods used). Inland fisheries (especially during flood
periods) which operate under open and free access arrangements are regarded as an
important safety-net for the poor. Other fisheries (discrete lakes and river channels)
are subject to ownership and control, and the collection of use rights fees (the
government – Department of Fisheries - sells use rights to owners and collects fees).
However, the ownership of fisheries is known to favour more powerful stakeholders,
and the revenues collected by the DoF are retained by government, and it is difficult
to establish a link with re-investment in the sector or poverty alleviation targeted at
the fisheries sector itself.
Third, fisheries policy in Bangladesh in recent years has focused on increasing
fisheries production each year, particularly from inland areas, and also the
development of an export trade, mainly in shrimps. While both of these objectives
have been achieved to some degree, there has been a lack of success in establishing
appropriate fisheries management systems in either the inland or marine sub-sectors.
This raises the issue of whether the increased fisheries production or export trades
are sustainable into the future. Another issue for concern is the actual use of the
benefits generated by the fisheries sector. In the absence of appropriate management
systems, the benefits from these valuable fisheries are often retained by the more
powerful stakeholders involved, which helps to re-enforce poverty particularly at the
local level (poor fishers do not have access to sufficient benefits to reduce
vulnerability to poverty).
Fourth, the possibilities for developing and implementing appropriate fisheries
management systems have been limited by a number of constraints – the lack of a
clear and stable fisheries policy; the lack of inclusion of policy objectives other than
production maximisation and export development; a lack of coherence between the
many government organisations involved in fisheries; a lack of real funding to
support policy development and implementation; the lack of an effective
underpinning legal framework to clearly identify and defend use-rights; and the
limited involvement of a full range of stakeholders in the policy and management
process (contrary to the established dominance of a few powerful individuals and
groups who have long benefited from fisheries).
C-6

Fifth, more recently, policy-makers in Bangladesh have recognised that open water
(and open access) capture fisheries have declined substantially and have affected the
livelihoods of rural people, especially the poor. The need to improve the situation has
also been recognised, and as a starting point, the role of fisheries and the necessary
policy reforms have been recognised in plans such as the national Poverty Reduction
Strategy Paper for Bangladesh including – the need to amend the national fisheries
policy and create an enabling framework, to re-define and strengthen the Department
of Fisheries, to establish an appropriate legal framework, to promote greater
participation of a wide range of stakeholders in the policy and management process,
and to develop and implement new methods of fisheries enhancement and
aquaculture. Only time will tell whether these new proposals will have a positive
impact on the flow and distribution of benefits from fisheries and aquaculture to
society in Bangladesh.
2.3. CANADA
A profile for Canada (Newfoundland) (fisheries and poverty) based on the findings
of the national case-study (Appendix F) is given in Box 2 below.
Box 2: CANADA Case-study (Schrank, 2005)
Overview and background
- Large island in north Atlantic, Newfoundland drawn into Union with Canada in 1949, before that
Crown Colony of London;
- Region economically impoverished and politically distant from Ottawa;
- Heavily dependent upon subsidies from Ottawa;
- Predominantly rural with heavy dependence (historically) on cod.
Poverty
- History of poverty in the region (and this a key reason to join Union of Canada for receipt of
financial transfers);
- At Union had highest birth rate in Canada and lowest education levels;
- In 1990s less than half of Newfoundland adults had completed high school, unemployment
double Canadian average.
Economic growth
- Historically, cod most important export until improved transportation allowed development of
interior (timber and mining);
- Oil and gas reserves now important;
- Growth has been slow and sporadic and largely dependent upon capital transfers (subsidies) from
Ottawa;
- Oil contributes 16% of GDP and large nickel mine due to open shortly.
Fisheries development and management
- At union in 1949 cod employed 1/3 of the economically active pop and contributed 20% of GDP
this contribution has slowly dropped and now stands at 3.7%;
- Cod fishery regarded as the root of Newfoundland culture which has complicated efforts to reduce
catch and effort in the sector;
- Fishery closed in 1992 to all commercial fishing, stocks have not recovered since;
- Snow crab and shrimp fishery now very important;
- Industry as a whole heavily dependent upon subsidies.
Policy
- Policy heavily influenced by the perception that Newfoundland is dependent upon cod and that
efforts need to be made to secure income for the population;
- Opportunities to expand other sectors whilst fishery were closed in the 1970s were passed by in
favour of allowing inshore fishery to expand further;
- 1992: Northern Cod Adjustment and Recovery Programme (NCRP) set up to ease 1992
moratorium by realigning sector but failed to take the drastic steps needed, opting instead for a
compromise position;
- 1994: Atlantic Groundfish Strategy (TAGS) recognizes that problems with low catches extend to
other stocks but bulk of this plan made up of income maintenance measures.
C-7

Overall, then, what are the major issues concerning the relationship between fisheries
and poverty in Canada (Newfoundland) as revealed by the case-study. There are at
least five issues which can be identified, as follows:
First, ever since its union with Canada in 1949, Newfoundland has been heavily
dependent upon financial support from the centre (Ottawa). This degree of
subsidisation – much of it in the form of income support for the fisheries sector has
prevented any real programme of effort reduction in the fishery to be carried out
successfully.
Second, the vision that Newfoundland was culturally dependent upon the cod fishery
has also severely hampered any efforts to diversify the economy or rationalise the
fishing industry. As a result, opportunities to radically cut the number of fishermen
(up to 50% in some instances) were lost to the perceived socio-economic need to
maintain a ‘way of life’. Compared to the rest of Canada, Newfoundland was clearly
underdeveloped – at the time of union it had a higher birth rate and mortality rate
than the rest of the country, it had a greater percentage of the population unemployed
and a greater percentage lacking basic high school education. Many of these factors
have improved since Union but largely on the back of welfare payments rather than
any link between economic growth and poverty reduction.
Third, whilst cod was clearly an important part of the economy of Newfoundland at
the turn of the century, a series of economic crisis (global wars, global economic
recession) has slowly eroded the importance of the resource for the island’s
population. Whereas the cod fishery accounted for 20% of the GDP at the time of
Union, oil and gas are now the most important exports (making up 16% of the GDP)
and shortly the new nickel mine will also make a significant contribution to GDP.
What little domestic industry was in evidence in Newfoundland was quickly
dissipated on Union with Canada as Newfoundland goods were unable to compete
against cheaper Canadian imports.
Fourth, the collapse of the cod fishery in 1992 highlighted the many mistakes that
had been made, over time, regarding the management of fishery. It became clear that
efforts to maintain the fishery as a way of life had resulted in over capitalisation in
the sector when the management should have concentrated on building a viable
industry in anticipation of stocks recovering. Little effort had been made to exploit
the resources further off shore (at the peak of the cod fishery, Canada was only
taking 1/8 of the total catch). However, other fisheries have since emerged. The
shrimp and crab fisheries are currently producing revenue beyond the levels ever
seen during the time of the cod fishery.
Fifth, various policy initiatives to revitalise the fishery have been put in place but all
have been based on a principle of subsidisation and income support. In the 1970s a
large programme of resettlement from isolated coves to population centres (in a bid
to reduce the cost of providing basic services to outlying districts) relied heavily
upon subsidies being paid to displaced fishermen. Subsequent policies aimed at
improving the income base of the fishermen (who earned very low wages) only
C-8

served to keep the fishermen (receiving significant welfare payments) in the industry
during subsequent downturns, frustrating any attempts to reduce effort.
2.4. INDIA
A profile for India (fisheries and poverty) based on the findings of the national case-
study (Appendix G) is given in Box 3 below.
Box 3: INDIA Case-study (V. Salagrama, 2005)
Overview and background
- 7th largest country by land area (3.3 million sq.km); 2nd largest by population (over 1 billion);
- 72% pop. in rural areas; rapid urbanisation (20 cities >1 million people);
- 360 million people on coast; fishing has traditionally been regarded as lowly and risky;
- Mixed economy of developing country: Agric (25%GDP); Service Sector (50% GDP) and Industry
(25% GDP); Agric provides livelihoods for 70% total population;
Poverty
- Indian policy-making and politics ‘dominated’ by poverty (and measurements applied);
- In general, poverty reduction has been recorded over past 30 years (e.g. 55% pop. (1973) to 26%
pop. (2000) based on head count ratio); but 260 million people still in poverty;
- HDI improved significantly 1980 - 2001; wide variation in poverty incidence across states;
- Relatively few studies on poverty in fisheries; fishers assumed to be poor by policy-makers; other
important factors and inter-linkages – access to resources; technology and capacity; debt; markets
and trade – still overlooked/not understood in government decision-making;
Economic growth
- GDP US$510 billion; GDP/capita (PPP) has increased from US$430 (1975) to US$2,670 (2002);
- Service sector is increasing; Agric declining and Industry is stable;
- Fisheries contribute 1.3% GDP (4.6% Agric GDP); High export earnings (FOREX); increase in
fisheries employment; significant gap between rich and poor fishers (benefit distribution?);
Fisheries development and management
- Between 1951-2001 fisheries production increased by eight-fold (0.75 to 5.6 Mmt); 4th largest
producer; shrimp is most valuable species; 65% craft are small-scale and non-motorised;
- 6.7 million people depend on fisheries for livelihoods; lack of precise data on occupations/incomes;
but indications are that fishing is still a better livelihood option than others; 70% fish sold locally
and important for food security;
- Many government agencies have some responsibility for fisheries – makes management difficult &
complex; inhibits coherent organisation of sector; fisheries remain free & open-access under law;
Policy
- Fisheries policy has developed with few linkages between sectors, out-dated legislation; and with a
focus on production increases; national policy has favoured exports (FOREX); state policy has
focused on fishers welfare; policy and management has been reactive (to crisis) rather than
objective-driven;
- Poverty reduction through 5-year development plans (and PRSP-approach) , but weak performance
overall (serious implementation problems); benefits of expanded fisheries sector have not impacted
on poverty; ‘safety-net role’ of fisheries;
- Important future issues for fisheries and poverty: How to address weak management and open-
access in fisheries? How to achieve a clear vision for the sector? How to cope with lack of policy
coherence between ministries? How to balance winners and losers in fisheries development? How
to cope with change? How to gain recognition and support of role/value of fisheries?
Overall, then, what are the major issues concerning the relationship between fisheries
and poverty in India as revealed by this case-study? At least five issues can be
identified as follows:
C-9

First, a majority of India’s huge population lives in rural areas, and fisheries, as a
sub-sector of agriculture, makes an important contribution to rural livelihoods, and
makes up 4% of agricultural GDP. Fisher populations are still regarded as vulnerable
to poverty, but the sector also includes a wide diversity of other stakeholders
including those involved in capital-intensive industrial fisheries and in the supply of
equipment and services.
Second, India’s economy is one of the largest in the world, and has grown
significantly in the past 20 years, with an overall reduction in poverty. Within this
context, fisheries policy has focused on the expansion of fisheries and maximisation
of production through technological modernisation. Catches have increased
significantly (India is 4th largest producer globally) and there is a large export trade
particularly in shrimp.
Third, although the fisheries sector has expanded in India, the development and
implementation of appropriate fisheries management systems has not occurred at the
same pace. Many of India’s fisheries operate under free- and open-access conditions,
and there is concern that the current fisheries exploitation patterns are not sustainable
into the future.
Fourth, there is also concern about the nature of benefit flows from fisheries, and the
likely impact of future changes on different sectors of society. Although government
policy has encouraged fisheries expansion, export trade and the generation of
FOREX, serious doubts have been raised about the contribution to economic growth
and poverty reduction – given the large number of small-scale fishers who have not
participated in this activity, who do not receive direct or indirect benefits, and who
are increasingly marginalised by the activities of the more powerful players in the
fisheries sector. Fisheries currently underpin millions of small-scale rural livelihoods,
but it is doubtful whether this situation is sustainable given the increasing fishing
pressure on resources and other exogenous factors such as pollution and
environmental changes.
Fifth, India clearly has significant fisheries resources, and the potential to develop a
fisheries sector which could make an important contribution to economic growth and
poverty alleviation. However, the existing policy framework is weak and does not
offer many opportunities to capitalise on this potential. Policy reform and
development is needed to provide a clear vision for fisheries development in India
and to provide a basis for the design and implementation of appropriate management
systems. However, the sector continues to be characterised by a lack of policy
coherence, prioritisation of fisheries production, technological expansion, weak
management institutions and a ‘reactive’ and limited government response to
fisheries management issues and problems. This situation is unlikely to change
without the necessary political will to take ‘hard decisions’ to change the current
situation.
C-10

2.5. MALAWI
A profile for Malawi (fisheries and poverty) based on the findings of the national
case-study (Appendix H) is given in Box 4 below.
Box 4: MALAWI Case-study (Donda, 2005)
Overview and background
- Landlocked country with 20% of area taken up by lakes;
- Population of 9.9 million (1998), 14% in urban areas, 10% by major water bodies;
- Independent in 1964, multiparty democracy since 1994;
- Fish makes up 70% of animal protein needs and 40% of all protein in-take of the poor.
Poverty
- 28.2% of population in dire poverty (living on less than $1 a day);
- just under a quarter HH are female-headed and make up 27% of the poorest households;
- poverty caused by lack of economic productivity and lack of land, population growth and weak
institutional structure;
- no study into poverty in the fisheries sector, although plenty of poverty studies carried out.
Economic growth
- Predominantly rural and agriculturally-based economy with a small mining sector;
- Agriculture makes up 38% of GDP and 90% of exports;
- Key exports are tobacco, tea, coffee, sugar;
- A series of SAP introduced 81-94 but have had little impact on poverty and long-term growth still
elusive;
- Economic growth for 04-08 estimated at 7% and will be driven by agriculture sector;
- Fisheries sector second largest employer after agriculture;
- Malawi Economic Growth Strategy established to drive forward PRSP but fails to acknowledge
potential role of fishing – seeing mining as having more potential.
Fisheries development and management
- Fisheries account for 4% of GDP and declining;
- 350,000 employed in the sector which has multiplier effect of 1:5;
- annual catch is between 40-80,000 MT, Lake Malawi most significant producer;
- artisanal sector contributes 85-90% of total landings, rest from commercial sector;
- OA fishery and highly complex management structure (traditional and modern);
- Fishery currently operating at below recommended effort levels and sector considered to have
unrecognized potential;
- Management heavily bio-economic based and aims at conserving resource;
- Fisheries have never been considered viable source of revenue beyond sale of licenses;
- No calculation of resource rent has ever been conducted.
Policy
- 1997 Fisheries Management and Conservation Act refers to the role of the community in the
management of fisheries indicating slow shift to social/community aspect of fisheries.
- 2001 Fish and Aquaculture policy takes it’s lead from the FAO CCRF;
- Participatory Fisheries Management established in 1993 following collapse of stocks in Shire
River
- This required establishment of Fisheries Management Units which has seen advent of fishing
licenses and effort limits for commercial fleet;
- Malawi PRSP requires that economy grows at 6% per annum and much of this growth needed
from the agricultural sector.
Overall, then, what are the major issues concerning the relationship between fisheries
and poverty in Malawi as revealed by the case-study. There are at least five issues
which can be identified, as follows:
C-11

First, Malawi is a largely rural and agriculturally based, land-locked nation which
has experienced severe and prolonged economic hardship for many years. Despite a
series of SAP measures introduced between 1981-1997 little impact has been made
on poverty levels and little long-term sustainable growth has been realised. Much of
the blame for the failure of repeated policy interventions to make a difference in
Malawi are put down to a weak institutional structure, lack of access to land, labour
and capital and low economic productivity levels.
Second, poverty is a significant problem in Malawi – and a notably genderised
problem as well. Just over one quarter of all households are headed by females and
these households in turn account of 27% of the poorest households in the country.
Over one quarter of the population is in dire poverty defined as “a state of continuous
deprivation or a lack of the basics of life”. Because agriculture forms the basis of
the Malawi economy it is this sector alone that will be able to lift the population out
of poverty and this sector that has received most attention from policy makers.
Third, Malawi is heavily dependent upon the export of primary materials –
accounting for just over 90% of all exports. In the Economic Growth Strategy which
was written in order that the PRSP would be able to attain its goals (these could only
be achieved by boosting growth rates) it is mining, rather than the fishing sector (the
second largest employer in the country) which is seen as the key to boosting growth
rates. Fishing is rarely seen as a means of addressing poverty and indeed there have
been no studies conducted on the level of poverty in the fisheries sector.
Fourth, although the fishing sector accounts for only 4% of GDP (and declining) has
a relatively low profile in the government strategy, fish is a critically important
aspect of the diet in Malawi – particularly for the poor. Fish makes up 70% of
animal protein needs and accounts for 40% of the poor’s protein needs. In
recognition of this fact, government policy towards the sector is slowly starting to
regulate catch and effort in the fishery as a means of sustaining the industry. Semi-
commercial fishers now require a licence to fish and a pilot scheme to limit fishing
units on all but the main lake (Lake Malawi) are now in place. A quota system is
also under discussion although potential problems with enforcing such a system are
recognised.
Fifth, the role of communities in the management of fisheries is slowly being
acknowledged within government policy frameworks. The 2001 policy takes its lead
from the FAO CCRF and in doing so has adopted participatory fisheries management
(PFM) approaches. These aim to achieve the active participation of local fishing
communities in the management of fisheries, to promote legal instruments for
participation of local stakeholders and to develop national capacity to monitor
progress in fisheries. Fisheries Management Units have been established to facilitate
PFM and may succeed in encouraging more sustainable use of the resource and thus
contribute to poverty alleviation.
C-12

2.6. MAURITANIA
A profile for Mauritania (fisheries and poverty) based on the findings of the national
case-study (Appendix I) is given in Box 7 below.
Box 7: MAURITANIA Case-study (Cherif Ould Toueileb, 2005)
Overview and background
- Large country of 2 millions sq.km, 2/3 desert; small population (2.6 million)
- Constant decrease in nomad population (33% to 5% , from 1977 to 2000) , rising urban pop and nb
of towns and relative decrease in rural pop (49% in 2004)
- Economy mainly based on the primary sector, agriculture, mining and fisheries. Agriculture and
husbandry are main sources of employment and revenue
Poverty
- Poverty is a major issue: 50% of pop below poverty threshold and 33% below extreme poverty
threshold in 1996 (last study). Poverty rate has decreased since but remains important.
- Poverty is concentrated in rural areas (76%) and amplified by the permanent deficit in human and
animal food.
- Poverty policy focussed on education and food security;
- Very little data on fisheries and poverty. Fisheries is assumed to impact significantly on incomes
and livelihoods along the coast.
Economic growth
- GDP increased relatively steadily around 4 to 5% since 2000 (6,1 in 2004);
- Mining, agriculture, construction, telecommunications and administrative sectors are increasing;
- Trade balance relies heavily on exports of fish (mainly cephalopods) and mining products.
Situation is expected to change soon with oil production and export about to begin.
- Contribution of fisheries to the GDP is down from 20% in 1980 to 12% in 2004 but still represent
25% of government revenue and 40% of foreign exchange.
Fisheries development and management
- Production is about 65 000 t, slightly decreasing since 2000, main commercial stocks are
considered fully or overexploited
- Fisheries production is dominated by national and foreign industrial fleets that produce 90% of
volume, 80% of value; artisanal fishery catch, long thought to be negligible, has been recently re-
evaluated (from 30 000 to 80 000t.)
- Despite the situation of permanent food deficit, national fish consumption is modest. Fish is
however a complementary source of proteins, especially along the coast and the Senegal river.
Almost all industrial catch and a significant part of artisanal catch are exported.
- Fishery management is ensured by the government agency. A new management system is currently
being developed based on fishery management plans. Fisheries are evolving from free and open
access focussed on foreign markets, towards more controlled access to resources for multi fleets
(national/foreign, industrial/artisanal) with mixed objectives (export/poverty reduction/food
security...).
Policy
- Fishing a key economic sector for the last 20 years. 4 policies have been implemented since the
first in 1979. A key objective is the better integration of fisheries to the Mauritania economy
through sustainable exploitation of resources, increased added value and maximization of local
employment;
- Artisanal fisheries are expected to grow to the detriment of industrial fisheries because of their
additional value in terms of local development and poverty reduction. It is expected that oil exports
will decrease state reliance on fishing exports and fishing agreements and thus open new paths for
fisheries contribution to national economy, especially the poverty reduction objective.
C-13

Overall, then, what are the major issues concerning the relationship between fisheries
and poverty in Mauritania as revealed by the case-study. There are at least five issues
which can be identified, as follows:
First, Mauritania is in a phase of settlement and urbanisation, although rural areas
remain the main employment pool dominated by the agriculture and husbandry
sectors. Fisheries, as a sub-sector of agriculture, offers employment and livelihood
opportunities. Consumption of fishing product remains modest even if it constitutes a
substantial protein intake in localised areas.
Second, the Mauritania economy relies strongly on its exports of fish and mining
products. Within this context, fisheries expansion has been organised to compensate
trade balance and ensure government revenue, then to increase added value for the
country and maximise employment for a largely unqualified poor population.
Catches have increased and trade is significant, especially of cephalopods towards
the EU and Japan (representing 60% of total turnover of the sector).
Third, despite the four management systems since 1979, the implementation of an
appropriate management system has not developed as quickly as the exploitation.
Most commercial stocks are considered as fully or overexploited. The 1998 reform
introduced a new approach to management including fishery management plans and
control of resource access. It is recognised that the development and implementation
of such plans is a long term process.
Fourth, there is concern about the nature of benefit flows from fisheries, especially
considering the importance of industrial fleets (including foreign fleets). Artisanal
fleets targeting high value species for export are recognised to maximise employment
and direct socio-economic impacts on the coastal population. Fishing zones restricted
to artisanal fishing have recently been tripled and it is expected that artisanal
fisheries will expand and be the lever for poverty alleviation and food security
objectives. However, the current state of resources limits production growth and
mechanisms do not exist to ensure that artisanal fisheries contribute to government
revenue.
Fifth, Mauritania evaluates its potential fish resources at 1.5 millions tons (including
clams). The potential for production growth is however limited as main high-value
stocks are fully exploited. The way fisheries contribute to growth is being debated.
The government aims to improve the return of fishery resource rent to the domestic
economy, increasing added value and maximising local employment and
qualifications. With the trade balance and government revenue both being strongly
dependent on fisheries export, those objectives are difficult to achieve. As oil
production comes on stream and begins to be exported, new opportunities may arise
to support the current reform of the management system and the rethinking of fishery
contribution to growth and poverty alleviation.
C-14

2.7. MOROCCO
A profile for Morocco based on the findings of the national case-study (Appendix J)
is given in Box 6 below.
Box 6: MOROCCO Case-study (Ayoubi, 2005)
Overview and background
- Pop. of 29.8 million; fast growing population (14.6% over 10 years, 50% over 30 years);
- Rapid urbanization (29% of urban pop in 1960, 54% in 2004);
- Employment dominated by the primary sector (45%), services (37.5%), industry (17.5);
fisheries still considered an employer of last resort, in particular for vulnerable pops.
Poverty
- Poverty concerns 44% of the total pop: 19% below the poverty line and 25% considered as
‘economically vulnerable’;
- Poverty is mainly rural: 66% in rural areas;
- And concentrated in the primary sector (57% of the poor), services (26%), construction
(13%);
- Relatively little data on fisheries but it seems that low incomes are the norm (from 30% to
100% of the Moroccan minimum wage).
Economic growth
- Economic performance depends on agriculture, fisheries, mining, gas, tourism and transfers
from expatriate Moroccans;
- From 2001 to 2004, GDP increased by 3.8% per annum on average but fluctuates with
primary sector performance;
- Fishery exports are 50% of primary product exports and 13% of total exports, but share
decreasing due to resource overexploitation;
- Fisheries contribute 2.3 to 2.5% of GDP and the sector employs 400,000 people.
Fisheries development and management
- 2.5 million people depend in some way on fisheries for livelihoods;
- Production peaked in 2001 (1.1 million t), it is now declining (0.9 million t in 2004);
- Increase in number of Moroccan vessels by 50% in 20 years (2.954 units in 2004),
- Departure of European fishing fleet in 1999 after the end of the 4th EU-Moroccan Fishing
agreement,
- Management is ensured by the central government that implemented a set of new measures
in the 1990s. However most stocks are now fully or over exploited such as cephalopods,
certain sardines stocks and hake stocks. Since 2001, some movement towards TAC and
quotas management and the use of fishery management plans.
Policy
- A poverty and inequality reduction policy has been a central policy theme for the last 10
year. Integrated approach focussing on improving rural infrastructure, teaching reading and
writing skills, micro-credit systems, increasing school attendance.
- The fishery sector plays a marginal role in development and poverty alleviation
programmes. No poverty policy targets the poorest fishing communities;
- Some positive results, especially school participation rates in rural areas. But micro credit
has had little impact in rural areas, still less in fishing.
Overall, then, what are the major issues concerning the relationship between fisheries
and poverty in Morocco as revealed by the case-study. The following issues can be
identified:
C-15

First, the number of people whose livelihood depends on fishing in some way is
estimated to be around 2.5 million, which is some 8% of the total population. The
marine fisheries sector is still considered an employer of last resort. As a result,
labour supply greatly exceeds labour demand, in a context where most Moroccan fish
resources are fully- or over-exploited.
Second, the primary sector remains a central economic pillar despite rapid
urbanisation over the past 20 years. Fish resources contribute relatively little to direct
food security. They make a significant contribution to GDP and to the balance of
payments. The collapse of cephalopod exports due to overexploitation has had a
strong negative effect on a trade balance already weakened by fluctuations in
agricultural exports.
Third, despite fluctuations due to the instability of the stocks of small pelagic species
(such as sardine), production has risen over the past 20 years. But the development
and implementation of appropriate fisheries management systems has not occurred at
the same pace, leading to the full or over-exploitation of most commercially
important stocks.
Fourth, although the primary sector is central to the Moroccan economy, it is also
here that poverty is concentrated. Fishing is an activity that in general does not
generate large incomes, although there are variations depending on the type of
fishing (small-scale, coastal, offshore) and the type of employment (upstream,
downstream, fishers).
Fifth, faced with the full or over exploitation of most of its resources, Morocco has
begun to develop fishery management plans. Moroccan experience confirms the
gradual nature of the process. The first plan concerned cephalopods, especially
octopus. The use of an overall total allowable catch (TAC) led to a race for fish, and
a decision was made to move towards individual transferable quotas (ITQs). Other
plans are to be developed.
In the context of this management strategy, the country is also aggressively seeking
to position Moroccan products on the international market, whilst seeking to improve
social cohesion and the distribution of wealth. But relatively little debate appears to
have taken place concerning the role of the fisheries sector in the achievement of
these latter two goals.
C-16

2.8. PACIFIC ISLANDS (FORUM FISHERIES AGENCY AREA)
A profile for the FFA (fisheries and poverty) based on the findings of the national
case-study (Appendix K) is given in Box 7 below.
Box 7: Pacific Islands FFA (Tamate, 2005)
Overview and background
- Fisheries Forum Agency set up in 1979 after UNCLOS III in recognition of the need of island
states to work together on fisheries management;
- Population across the region of 8.6 million – largest proportion in PNG, Solomon Islands and
Vanuatu;
- Largely rural population (50%), very young age profile (average age is 17.8), rising fertility and
falling mortality rates;
- Traditional governance structures prevail.
Poverty
- Traditionally not been seen as a problem and as a result few studies but rise in political instability
and unrest has seen rise in homelessness and displaced populations;
- Those without land considered the poorest;
- Poverty not a priority issue in government policies;
- Pacific Region Poverty Programme now set up to build capacity in assessing poverty and working
towards MDGs;
- ADB and WB attempted to measure contribution of fisheries to poverty but task complicated by
poor data.
Economic growth
- Differing level of growth across the region: PNG, Solomon Islands have timber and mineral
resources, Kiribati and Tuvalu are solely dependent upon tuna stocks;
- Fiji and PNG are classed as ‘industrially developed’;
- GDP ranges from 6371 million (PNG) to just 15 million (Tuvalu);
- Tuna makes up significant part of export earnings (71% in Samoa, 94% in Federated States of
Micronesia (FSM)).
Fisheries development and management
- Tuna the key fisheries resource across the region and tuna fishery in Western Central Pacific is
largest in the world;
- Key nations fishing in the region are Japan, Taiwan, Korea and USA. Local fleets making an
increasingly large contribution to over all catch;
- Rate of return for access fees currently at 5% (6% in PNG) – these rates are very low;
- Previous attempts to raise access fees met with fierce resistance from foreign fleets;
- Fisheries are OA except Palau which has introduced limits on purse seiners; FSM attempted to
limit access to vessels that make sizeable local contribution but had no means of enforcing this;
Tonga and PNG both limit access to foreign vessels;
Policy
- No country specific poverty alleviation plans but countries are encouraged to include this as a
core outcome of national development strategies – this is the case in Fiji and PNG;
- National Tuna Management and Development Plans are in place in PNG and other state – but
such plans are criticized for not encouraging a rise in access fees;
- National development plans now looking at encouraging local investment in the sector, reducing
access to foreign fleets and balancing this against potential lost revenue from access fees.
Overall, then, what are the major issues concerning the relationship between fisheries
and poverty in The Pacific Islands as revealed by the case-study. There are at least
five issues which can be identified, as follows:
C-17

First, the nations of the Pacific over a vast area and contain a comparatively small
population. This population is, in turn, largely dependent upon the tuna fishery of
the Western Central Pacific (the largest in the world). In order to facilitate the co-
operative management of such a vast and potentially lucrative resource, the Forum
Fisheries Agency was established in 1979 in the light of UNCLOS III.
Second, traditional governance structures are still very much in evidence in the
region and family and community form the foundation of society. As such, poverty
has been rarely acknowledged or defined because it was assumed that family always
looked after its own. The classic signs of poverty: malnutrition and homelessness,
for example, were not in evidence and thus poverty was not considered to be an issue
for governments in the Pacific Islands to deal with. However, recent periods of
political instability and civil unrest (Fiji and the Solomons for example) have seen
problems with displaced and landless peoples emerge and thus a renewed interest in
the issue of poverty. As a consequence National Development Plans are now being
encouraged to see poverty alleviation as a potential output of their activities.
Third, the vast spread of island nations contains a wide disparity of economic
growth. The larger islands are the more developed (PNG, Solomons and Fiji for
example), are notably less dependent upon fisheries resources and have a degree of
industrial development linked to the other natural resources they are able to exploit.
Some of the smaller island groups, however, are heavily dependent upon fisheries for
their revenue and have no other resources available to them (Kiribati for example).
Fourth, despite the potential wealth to be generated from the tuna fisheries, the level
of access fees remains comparatively low (compared to other regions of the world)
and no attempt has ever been made to link revenue from the fishery to national
development directly. The island states have always had to find a compromise
position between charging more for access to their fisheries from the large fishing
nations (Japan, Taiwan, Korea and the US in particular) and the risk that those
nations will fish elsewhere. PNG recently increased its access fees to 6% (up from
5%) of rate of return and as a result no longer enjoys a bilateral agreement with
Japan, which refused to pay higher charges.
Five, linked to the access fee dilemma above is the drive for greater local
involvement in the fishery. Many of the island nations are now providing incentives
for locals to invest in the lucrative fisheries in an attempt to keep more of the revenue
from the tuna on the islands, they are also attempting to restrict the number of
foreigners allowed within the EEZ and to tie those vessels more tightly to the
processing plants which exist on a number of the larger islands (Samoa, for
example). One of the problems of such as policy path is that monies lost from
restricting foreign access to stocks may not be recouped through local fishing
activity.
C-18

2.9. THAILAND
A profile for Thailand (fisheries and poverty) based on the findings of the national
case-study (Appendix L) is given in Box 8 below.
Box 8: THAILAND Case-study (Tokrisna, 2005)
Overview and background
- A country with 2,600 km of coast line, population of 63.7 million, constitutional monarchy;
- well developed industrial base;
- large coastal fishery with well-developed inland culture fishery too; fish contributes 28% of
animal protein needs.
Poverty
- 7.5 million fall below nationally-defined line although this number falling year-on-year;
- Main reasons for poverty are lack of capital assets and landlessness ;
- 9% of total poor in Southern Region (focus of marine fishing sector);
- more poverty in rural agricultural sector than fisheries sector;
- resource degradation hitting small scale fishers much harder than commercial fishers within
fisheries sector.
Economic growth
- economic development built on industrialization which relies upon import of raw materials but
this process of development ignored rural areas;
- economic crisis of 1990s heavily impacted on growth rates;
- GDP is 151.3 billion US$, 90% of GDP generated from non-agricultural sector, growth rate
8.89% (2003).
Fisheries development and management
- fishing contributes 1.75% to GDP, sector is growing faster than agric and non-agric sectors after
negative growth turn of 21st century but overall share of GDP is falling;
- Marine sector makes up 31.7% of GDP from fishing;
- Of 97 billion US$ exports, fishing contributes 3.9 billion (2.1bn of this from processed seafood
sector);
- 50% of exports of primary product is frozen shrimp, 25% is processed fish and squid and final
25% is processed shrimp and canned tuna;
- fastest growth in fishing sector is in culture fisheries, then inland capture followed by coastal
capture fishery;
- value of fisheries rising at 12% per annum with the greatest contribution coming from coastal
culture fisheries – the bulk of this being shrimp;
- marine capture sector focuses on trash fish for feed (nearly 50% of total marine catch);
- 92.7% of fishers are small-scale working from small boats in inshore waters.
Policy
- major fisheries sector reform in 2002 (Prior to that the sector governed under 1947 legal
framework that focused on freshwater fisheries) ;
- Fisheries policy targets marine fisheries with the aim of increasing production and reducing catch
of trash fish for feed mill.;
- 8th National Economic and Social Development Plan ((7-01) aimed at reducing income disparities
(highest in the region) through decentralization and community capacity building;
Overall, then, what are the major issues concerning the relationship between fisheries
and poverty in Thailand as revealed by the case-study. There are at least five issues
which can be identified, as follows:
First, Thailand has achieved economic growth on the back of a thriving industrial
sector but also on a growing fisheries sector where culture fisheries are of increasing
importance. What is more, policy towards fisheries has tended to focus on increasing
C-19

production rather than rationalising how the resource was used. One consequence of
the failure to pay sufficient attention to the resource base is that overexploitation in
the Gulf of Thailand (in part due to the fact that 50% of the fish caught in the marine
sector was trash fish destined for the feed mill) has resulted in considerable marine
degradation. The group that suffers most from this degradation is the small-scale
fleet that operates in inshore waters: the largest marine sector and also the poorest.
Second, compared to neighbouring states, poverty in Thailand is distinguished by a
large and increasing gap between incomes. As a result, the main focus of poverty
alleviation programmes in the country is to reduce these income discrepancies.
Fisheries do not form an employer of last resort in Thailand; fishing households are
generally better off than landless rural households. However, there are discrepancies
within the fishing sector. Whilst just over 90% of coastal fishers are working from
small-scale boats in inshore waters, it is fishers operating in the commercial fleet
(generally larger boats and able to stay out at sea for several days) that are benefiting
from financial rewards. These more successful fishermen are investing in other
sectors (small scale aquaculture being a key target) thus providing themselves with a
more diversified income.
Third, from the perspective of economic growth, whilst fisheries overall share of
GDP has been falling in recent years, the sector it self has been experiencing rapid
growth – much more so than the agricultural and non-agricultural sectors The
majority of this growth has occurred within the cultured fish sector – particularly the
sub-sector that concentrates on shrimp production. Inland freshwater culture
production has experienced the second highest level of growth with coastal marine
fisheries experiencing lower growth rates than the other two sectors. There is little
evidence, however, that increased revenues from the culture sector are having any
direct impact on poverty levels.
Fourth, although fisheries play an important role in the export and domestic
economies, agricultural and the production of rice remain far greater employers in
the rural areas. As a result most policy attention on poverty reduction has been
focused on the agricultural sector which is the sector that has witnessed higher levels
of poverty and lower income levels than the fisheries sector.
Fifth, fisheries policy continues to be production driven despite the widespread
governance reforms of 2002 which saw the Ministry of Natural Resources and
Environment become involved in the management of fisheries (along with the
Department of fisheries). What is more, expert opinion considers the resources in the
Gulf of Thailand to be overexploited which belies the Thai Governments production
targets which exceed generally agreed MSY levels.
C-20

3. DISCUSSION OF KEY FINDINGS
The case studies presented in this report cover a wide range of geographical settings
(from small islands through land-locked countries), involve vastly different numbers
of peoples (from the population of India at over 1 billion to that of the Pacific which
in total amounts to just 8.6 million), demonstrate differing levels of poverty (from
Malawi where just under a third of the population live below the poverty line to the
Pacific where poverty has not, until recently, been acknowledged) and encompass
economies built of very different basis (from Thailand with its broad industrial base
to Malawi and Mauritania with their predominantly agricultural economy). Yet,
common themes have emerged from the studies that serve to tie together the range of
approaches that have been taken by government when faced with a need to manage
their fisheries. Based around the key headings from the case studies, the following is
a synthesis of the case-studies which draws out the commonalities and the
differences.
Regarding poverty as a broad theme, we find there are considerable differences in
how poverty is measured, how accurate those measurements are considered to be and
indeed whether the concept of ‘poverty’ is acknowledged at all. The case-study from
Newfoundland (Canada) amply highlights the relative nature of poverty. Whilst
living conditions in Newfoundland at the time of Union (1949) and indeed up to the
present day far exceed the levels of poverty to be found in the rest of the case studies,
compared to the living conditions experienced by the rest of Canada, there is little
doubt that over all Newfoundlanders were extremely poor. Levels of health care,
education and life expectancy were considerably lower than in mainland Canada –
and indeed it was this desire to address the disparity in income which drove much of
the subsidisation and welfare programmes which, arguably, were a barrier to efficient
fisheries management (more on this later). Due in part to the nature of society (still
based around small family groups) and to the lack of readily observable indications
of poverty (homelessness, malnutrition, for example) the Pacific Islands are only
now beginning to recognise the presence of poverty in their societies. The lack of a
perceived problem with poverty has meant that there has, to date, been no
comprehensive poverty studies carried out in the region. It is only since the upsurge
in violence in Fiji and the Solomon Islands that problems related to displacement,
landlessness and the factors that drive civil conflict that poverty has been recognised
by governments in the region and addressed.
In direct contrast to these two case studies we have the examples of India – where
poverty has played a key part in the formation of government policy and where some
260 million people are considered to live below the poverty line; Malawi – where
poverty afflicts just under one third of the population and is also a noticeably female
problem (27% of the poorest households are headed by women and these households
in turn make up just under a quarter of all households in poverty), Mauritania where
around one third of the population is below the poverty line and Bangladesh where
poverty affects between one third and one quarter of the population (depending on
how it is measured). Occupying the mid-ground between all these extremes we have
Morocco where 19% of the population is strictly under the poverty line with another
25% classified as ‘economically vulnerable’ and Thailand where around just 10% of
C-21

the population are considered to live in conditions of poverty. Interestingly, all the
countries noted that levels of poverty have been decreasing over time although the
reasons for these declines are not articulated and the link with fisheries as a possible
factor is rarely made. In this respect the one case that does stand out is that of
Newfoundland which has arguably experienced rapidly improved living conditions
for its rural populations over recent decades. However, this improvement is largely
the result of considerable welfare payments that have been received by the island
from Central Government and one needs to question whether such improvements in
living conditions would have been achieved otherwise.
Whether fisheries are an employer of last resort or not varies across countries. They
were identified as such in Canada and to an extent in Bangladesh. Yet in Thailand
and Malawi fishers are generally better off than the poorest in the agricultural
sectors. The Indian case study likewise notes that fisheries are, in general, not an
occupation of last resort and this is also the case in the Pacific.
The levels of economic growth experienced by the countries in this report vary
widely. Both India and Thailand have been able to demonstrate considerable growth
on the back of an expanding industrial base. Whilst Thailand was particularly badly
hit by the SE Asian currency crisis in the 1990s, it has since recovered and once
again is able to demonstrate positive growth. In both countries the share of
agricultural products in general and fisheries in particular as contributors to GDP are
in decline (although these sectors are experiencing growth in their own right) and
both countries have been able to diversify into the services sector (India) and
manufacturing (Thailand) as sources of foreign exchange. Whilst Bangladesh’s
economy is still predominantly rural, it has been able to expand its garment sector to
the extent that this now forms the greater part of its exports (closely followed by
frozen/processed shrimp). For the remaining countries, however, natural resources
continue to form the basis of the economy and export revenues (fish, timber and
minerals in the Pacific; tobacco, sugar and tea in Malawi; fish and mining products in
Mauritania; phosphates, agricultural products and fish in Morocco and oil in
Newfoundland). With the exceptions of India and Thailand, all the countries are
dependent upon export markets for the greater part of their economic growth
(Newfoundland exporting oil to mainland Canada). The role of fisheries in these
export strategies varies. Whilst Thailand, Bangladesh and India have all witnessed
rapidly expanding shrimp (culture) sectors Bangladesh is most reliant on this export.
Fish trade (especially cephalopods) impacts significantly on the Moroccan trade
balance and even more so on the Mauritanian trade balance and government revenue
(even if the rate fishery contribution has decreased over the past 10 years). In the
Pacific a number of islands rely on the export of fisheries (mostly tuna) for some
90% of their export revenues whilst others (notably those with larger populations and
greater internal markets) such as Papua New Guinea and Fiji are less reliant. With
the exception of the majority of the Pacific Islands and partly Mauritania, fisheries
are generally not considered as ‘engines for growth’. This is very apparent in
Malawi where the recent Economic Growth Strategy has chosen to favour the mining
sector over fisheries to meet the growth rates needed to reduce poverty significantly.
Thailand, India and Bangladesh certainly derive considerable growth from the
continued expansion of the shrimp industry but (certainly in Thailand and India) this
C-22

sector is still dwarfed by the manufacturing sector. In Mauritania, fisheries has been
considered the last 20 years as a main factor of growth above the mining sector ; the
situation is about to change as oil production comes on stream and begins to be
exported.
The scale of fishing operations represented by the case-studies varies from small,
lake-based artisanal fisheries in Malawi to long-range offshore tuna fisheries in the
Pacific. Within this theme we also find evidence of expanding culture fisheries in
Thailand, India and Bangladesh. In the case of Newfoundland (Canada) we find a
fishery that is now all but closed to commercial exploitation (the cod fishery) and yet
rapidly expanding shrimp and snow crab fisheries which have emerged to fill the
vacuum. A significant factor which ties all the case studies together – including the
case of Newfoundland – is the role of small-scale fishers in the prosecution of the
fisheries. This sector contains considerable heterogeneity. In India, more than half
the craft are non-motorised; in Bangladesh many millions are involved in subsistence
based floodplain fisheries (many working without craft); in Newfoundland, whilst
working from considerably more sophisticated boats than found in the other case
study countries, the bulk of the fishery is made up of small inshore vessels. The
same can be found in Thailand where over 90% of fishers are working from small
vessels in inshore waters and over 80% of the catch in Malawi is caught by artisanal
vessels. In Mauritania, even if the industrial fleet produces 90% of the volume, small
scale fishery catches have been recently considerably re-evaluated upwards. The role
of small scale vessels in the tuna fisheries in the Pacific has, until recently, been rare,
yet governments in the region are now trying to encourage local fishing ventures to
engage in the fishery. By attempting to limit the number of foreign vessels in the
fishery and providing financial and fiscal incentives to local entrepreneurs (or in
some cases those able to demonstrate sufficient local involvement) they hope to
allow indigenous populations to benefit from the resource rent generated by the
fishery. This drive to increase the involvement of local communities in their fisheries
is also evident elsewhere. In Malawi and Bangladesh programmes have been put in
place to encourage Community Based Fisheries Management Programmes. In both
cases they are still at the pilot stage – in Bangladesh working on a number of large
beels (permanent water bodies) whilst in Malawi the programme has been introduced
to all the lakes except Malawi (which has the greatest concentration of fishermen and
generates the largest catch). In Mauritania, the government aims to improve the
return of fishery resource rent to the domestic economy, increasing added value and
maximising local employment and qualifications. It is expected that artisanal
fisheries will expand and be a major lever to realise those objectives. Newfoundland
(Canada) on the other hand has always recognised the intimate link between the
community and the fishery and indeed has spent many billions of dollars on
supporting communities during times of crisis (such as the moratorium on fishing put
in place in the 1970s and the most recent moratorium begun in the 1990s). Whilst
such efforts have indeed maintained communities and allowed fishermen to continue
to fish it is arguable that these efforts have been some what counterproductive in so
far as any natural contraction of the fishing community has not taken place.
Option on how to manage fisheries – particularly from an economic perspective vary
across the studies. In the Pacific Islands it is acknowledged that access fees currently
C-23

charged (at around 5% of the rate of return) are comparatively low and could
conceivably be higher. Yet, such a decision entails consequences of foreign fleets
fishing elsewhere and the islands losing valuable revenue (example of Japan no
longer fishing the EEZ of PNG). The same dilemma is faced when deciding whether
or not to forego revenue from outside in a bid to generate income within the islands
by encouraging more local engagement with the fishery (the case of the Pacific
Islands).Morocco chose to end fishing agreements with the EU in 1999. The last
agreement provided 355 million euros over four years as ‘fishery rent’, plus 145
millions of euros for research and management. The government now faces
important difficulties to recover fishery rents from national operators partly because
adequate management mechanisms were not in place at the time of the change, and
partly because what the EU paid was a subsidy not rent. The author of the
Newfoundland study highlights the problems faced when government has to chose
between supporting the livelihoods of one of the poorest sectors of society and taking
some radical decisions in order to revitalise the industry in the long-run. In this case,
the option to drastically reduce the number of fishermen in order that the resource
rents generated were not dissipated across vast numbers (thereby lifting the most
efficient fishermen that remained in the fishery out of poverty without the use of
welfare payments) was an opportunity missed according to the author. The need to
maintain political favour is a key explanatory variable in the failure of many
governments to engage with the economic realities of their fisheries and this would
appear to have played a part in such decisions in both Newfoundland and the Pacific
Islands. This perhaps also explains why despite the dependence of the Malawian
population on fish for nutritional needs and the fact that the sector is, apparently,
underutilised, mining was chosen as the possible partner to agriculture in the drive to
improve long-term growth rates. Mining has a potentially greater return in the short
term and offers export opportunities which the fisheries sector does not. Bangladesh
has chosen to focus attention on the expansion of enhanced fisheries inland rather
than marine fisheries (which still form a tiny percentage of over all production).
Whilst it has engaged with the difficulties of capturing resource rent from valuable
inland fisheries it has consistently failed to do this without impoverishing millions –
wealth from fisheries remains in the hands of the few. Thailand has also focused
attention on the commercial sector whereas it is the small-scale marine sector that is
suffering most from marine degradation in the Gulf of Thailand yet policy still
focuses on increasing production rather than distributing the resources more evenly.
Similarly Indian decisions on where to focus policy efforts have been frustrated by
the lack of cross-sectoral links and policy coherence- increasing production
continues to the be predominant paradigm.
Despite the considerable contribution made to the fishing sector by small-scale
fishers and the likelihood that such fishers will be poorer than their larger
counterparts, evidence of direct linkages between poverty and fisheries are few and
far between. The Pacific Islands case study acknowledges that revenue from tuna
plants, tuna exports and access fees provide substantial budgetary support to most of
the islands in the region, yet, such monies have never been specifically targeted at
tackling poverty. It does, however, acknowledge that investment in infrastructure and
services is improving the livelihoods of those in the more remote islands and no
doubt supports welfare issues on the larger islands. This, of course, begs the question
C-24

of how much better off the islanders would be if they were able to capture more of
the resource rent through higher access fees. In Malawi fisheries was quite noticeably
ignored in the Economic Growth Strategy, yet efforts by the government to manage
and control the lake fisheries would appear to be working towards conserving the
resource for more efficient use by the local population.
A key problem in using fisheries to contribute towards poverty alleviation is the lack
of data to support or measure such moves. In all case studies (except that from
Newfoundland) the lack of good data was highlighted. In some cases basic data on
levels of resource rent are unknown (Malawi); discrepancies on how poverty might
be measured still abound (example of the Pacific Islands); lack of technical capacity
to use such data was highlighted in a number of countries also.
Institutional problems were highlighted across all the case studies. Bangladesh and
India both suffer from vast bureaucracies managing fisheries with little coordination
between departments. This problem is particularly acute in Bangladesh where the
management of water and fisheries are closely interlinked. In Malawi weak
institutions were cited for the persistence of poverty in the country despite numerous
programmes to try and alleviate the problem. Data collection problems in the Pacific
highlighted the lack of institutional capacity particularly where fisheries departments
on islands are often very small.
Finally it is worth noting the evidence from government policy that efforts are indeed
being made to address the problems of poverty in the fisheries sector. Fisheries are
slowly being incorporated in the national PRSPs and, although increasing production
remains the chief goal of many national fisheries policy plans, the gradual emergence
of social/community aspects of fisheries management would suggest that issues of
access, entitlement and retention of benefits will also be addressed across those
fisheries reviewed.
C-25