I started this column this month with the message that personal behavior change involves decision making. Now for the last Sunday issue, I would end this topic about how an individual has the capacity for behavior change in anticipation of resource change with particular reference to the fishers in southern Negros.
Behavior change in fishing may take various forms, such as using specific fishing methods, modifying fishing efforts, or moving toward non-fishing livelihoods.
The government and non-government organizations concerned about fisheries conservation and are serious about reducing fishing pressure will find this information useful for policies and intervention designs.
For example, the aspiration of parents for children to be in school to learn vocational and technical skills or earn college degrees have to be supported.
But this aspiration demands parents to have enough financial resources to support the school needs of their children to encourage them to remain in school.
If well-planned and thoughtfully-coordinated, with enough resources, between government agencies and non-government conservation organizations, two things could be achieved to reduce fishing pressure.
However, this cannot be fully realized without substantial mitigations to address climate change impacts. Fishing pressure due to the increasing number of fishers and climate change impacts are two of the significant factors commonly cited as reasons for the deteriorating fisheries in southern Negros.
The first fishing reduction at present may come from the percentage increase of households that may go voluntarily into non-fishing livelihoods.
The second will be in the future when their children who have successfully finished school would realize non-fishing livelihoods as better alternatives.
Other households who observed the success of initial livelihood shifters may soon follow the same occupational path.
And when things go well, economically speaking, a good number of households would eventually venture outside of fishing, thus, reducing pressure.
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
But shifting livelihoods must be first demonstrated if they work. Some fishers have the “wait and see” attitude, which rural sociologists consider critical in introducing technological changes.
This attitude is typical among skeptics who would venture into similar business but only when they find successful the early investors or adopters.
When many would go with the bandwagon, however, this creates competition, and those with limited capital have to stop when they no longer significantly profit. This situation demands diversifying enterprise development in the community to avoid competition.
Meanwhile, all other things being equal, an estimated 50 percent of fishing households that would voluntarily shift livelihoods may be already sufficient to allow the fisheries and marine environment to regenerate within a given period.
And I would presume that the fishing parents at present may be inspired to exit from fishing if they find or are provided with better and more stable sources of income.
These new livelihoods must offer them net revenues more than what they got from fishing so they will not be tempted to go back to it, particularly those who are highly dependent upon the sea.
The actor-based model in human ecology developed by anthropologist Benjamin Orlove argues that individuals make decisions by weighing the cost and benefit of any change in their strategy to generate food.
Individual actors would adopt interventions that are available and would provide them better return of investment relative to the calculated risk and the capital they can afford to invest or lose.
And as already mentioned, successful adopters may consequently convince others to practice particular technology, turning it as the norm in the community because of the benefits it could offer, and if found to be sustainable.
So what do municipal and commercial fishers aspired for as non-fishing livelihoods and why they did not realize these yet? Are these going to draw them away from fishing, or would these contribute more to the current fishing pressure?
Our survey in 2019 showed that 63 percent and 40 percent of the municipal and commercial fishers, respectively, wanted to shift to non-fishing livelihoods due to what they perceived as declining fisheries in southern Negros.
Again, the pattern of having a relatively higher percentage of municipal fishers aspiring for other livelihoods is consistent with those wanting that their children will not stay in fishing when they have their own families. The former is in more deplorable condition than the latter at present.
But when asked why they did not pursue what they aspired for as non-fishing livelihoods, all types of fishers cited the lack of capital for starting a business as a significant reason.
This reason was mainly raised in the case of having variety stores where they would sell essential consumer goods, cooked food, fishing paraphernalia, and so on.
There were also those who aspired to engage in farming and livestock raising as well as go for skilled and office works. The aforementioned livelihoods will help reduce fishing pressure unless these are considered as additional sources of income.
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
Meanwhile, as an unintended consequence, the reduction in fishing pressure would mean a reduction also in protein food from captured fisheries but this may be compensated by inland or upland aquaculture.
Some upland barangays in Bayawan which were recipients of the small water impounding project of the city government for their irrigation had demonstrated the success of integrating rice and fish farming which we documented four years ago.
Expectedly, those who did not opt for non-fishing livelihoods would remain in fishing, and some even aspire to own a particular type of fishing outfits or to have bigger boats.
Given that background, they are potential sources of problems for the fisheries in southern Negros.
Thus, they should be considered as the critical mass or partners of programs about sustainable fisheries management that promote right fishing behaviors through appropriate technologies, institutional structures, and regulatory mechanisms.
_____________________________________
Author’s email: [email protected]
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});