Addressing Human Factors

Living Resources

Addressing Human Factors in Fisheries Developmentand Regulatory Processes in Fiji: The Mositi VanuasoExperienceJoeli Veitayaki, Alifereti Tawake, Alifereti Bogiva, Semisi Meo,Nacanieli Ravula, Ron Vave, Pio Radikedike and PatrickSakiusa FongFiji Locally Managed Marine Areas Network and Marine StudiesProgramme, University of the South Pacific, Suva, Fiji

INTRODUCTION

The Mositi Vanuaso Project is part of the network of community-basedresource management initiatives being undertaken in Fiji. The project inVanuaso Tikina (district) on Gau Island demonstrates the importance ofhuman factors in fishery development and regulatory processes in Fiji.Mositi Vanuaso advocates the articulation of sustainable development in arural setting. Collaborating with their partners, the people in six villages inVanuaso Tikina are embracing changes in how they utilize environmentalresources and work to improve their lives and ensure the protection of theirenvironmental resources into the future.

The experience in this Fiji Locally Managed Marine Areas Network(FLMMA) site offers useful lessons to the quest for effective community-based resource management. The people of Vanuaso Tikina have workedwith partners from the University of the South Pacific and the InternationalOcean Institute-Pacific Islands to declare a network of locally managedmarine areas that they hope will protect marine resources and supportbetter lives into the future. This was a major achievement given the natureof life in the area and people’s aspirations. However, after about two tothree years of observing the resource management arrangements in themarine environment, the people were beginning to ask when thesearrangements would be relaxed. In an attempt to engage the people overthe long term, it was decided to work on convincing the people of the valueof environmental resources and their interrelationships. To test this idea, it

Ocean Yearbook 21: 289–306.

289

290 Living Resources

was decided to work with the people of Vanuaso Tikina to see if they couldincorporate resource management into their rural development activities.

To incorporate good environmental management practices into thecommunities’ activities, human factors such as needs and aspirations,challenges and development potentials needed to be addressed. This is whythe lessons from this experience in Vanuaso Tikina in Gau are significant.

Gau Island, in Lomaiviti Province, is the fifth largest island in Fiji(Figure 1). Gau Island has a cloud forest in its interior where the endemicindigenous Fiji petrel or Kacau (Pseudobulweria macgillivrayi) is found. Theforests in Gau Island have never been logged commercially and providepeople with healthy, clear water, wild foods, building materials and specificitems like medicine and planting implements. Gau Island is home to around3,000 people, all predominantly indigenous Fijians. It is divided into threeadministrative units (tikina). These are Sawaieke, which has eight villagesand a settlement; Navukailagi, which has three villages; and Vanuaso, whichhas five villages and a settlement (Figure 2). The villages of Vanuaso districtrepresent typical villages in the outer islands of Fiji that depend heavily onnatural resources for their livelihood. Fishing and farming are among themain sources of food and income in the Tikina. The average income forhouseholds surveyed in 2003 in Vanuaso is about F$210 per month. Projectinitiatives aim to eventually improve the household income levels.1

The villages and settlements are all on the coast, the part of the islandwhere human activities have been most profound, but the people own allthe land up to the mountains and out to sea. Semi-subsistence farming is themain activity. With modernization and the changes associated with ruraldevelopment, the people are rapidly altering the environment. Throughtheir gardens, the people are expanding areas of secondary vegetation andare progressing towards the interior mountains that are clad with virgincloud forest. The pressures placed on the use of coastal resources in GauIsland are felt in the villages and settlements. This was the reason why thepeople sought to manage fisheries resources in the first place. In addition,the rehabilitation of coastal habitat undertaken in Vanuaso Tikina is toconsolidate the marine resource management activities undertaken in thedistrict. The villages involved in the project are Lekanai, Vanuaso,Nacavanadi, Malawai, Lamiti and Naovuka. The symbolic name of theinitiative, Mositi Vanuaso, is part of the attempt to incorporate goodenvironmental management practices within close-knit social units.

‘‘Mositi’’ is a Fijian adjective that depicts painful attachment tosomething that is cherished, treasured and deeply valued. The name of theproject aims to interest and involve people in the preservation and

1. P.S. Fong and R. Ratuniata, 2005, Vanuaso Locally Managed Marine AreaSite Report, Institute of Applied Science Unpublished Report.

Human Factors in Fisheries Development and Regulatory Processes 291

Fig. 1.—The Fiji Islands


Fig. 2.—Gau Island

maintenance of the environmental resources in the district so that they andtheir future generations enjoy the same environmental goods and services.‘‘Mositi Vanuaso’’ is also intended to evoke a common commitment amongthe people of the district to a future in which the management of resourcesis linked to the welfare and livelihood of the people. The people want theenvironment that they leave to their children and to future generations tobe their most significant legacy, and have made Mositi Vanuaso initiativesforward-looking, innovative and relevant.


Over the last five years, the people of Vanuaso Tikina have worked tomanage marine and other environmental resources and are building betterfutures to improve their household economic status. The people haveundertaken community-based development activities and are rehabilitatingtheir coastal habitats based on the management plans that the peopleformulated during Participatory Learning and Action workshops. Thepeople are also looking for alternative sources of livelihood.

This article aims to relate how the collaborative experience in thedistrict of Vanuaso has addressed human factors. Resource management isabout managing human activities, and so this article attempts to explainhow human factors have been addressed to ensure the effectiveness of theinitiative. The experience seems to be working well and can be a usefulsource of information for the rest of Fiji, the Pacific Islands and for similarinitiatives worldwide.

The article is divided into four sections. The first section describes thevision of life in the district in the future that drives project activities. Thepeople are convinced that they need to have a healthy environment onwhich to base their development initiatives. The second section describesthe human factors that have been addressed in the collaborative activitiesundertaken. The third section highlights the challenges of the project, whilethe fourth and final section focuses on the future and some of the lessonslearned.

MOSITI VANUASO VISION

The vision of Mositi Vanuaso that was agreed to at the ParticipationLearning and Action workshop is the basis of the engagement in the Tikinasince 2001. The Mositi Vanuaso initiative emphasizes the genuine participa-tion of local people in activities involving them, the process of learning thatis the necessary part of the new changes that are proposed, and action,which is what the engagement is all about.2 People are expected to takeaction quickly based on what they know is required for sustainable livingnow and into the future and to act to correct the problems that haveresulted in the environmental challenges they face.

The engagement workshop, which was requested by the people in theVanuaso district, was the first occasion to consider whether partnershipscould be forged to address the concerns that people have raised over their

2. J. Veitayaki, B. Aalbersberg and A. Tawake, 2003, ‘‘Empowering LocalCommunities: Case Study of Votua, Ba, Fiji,’’ in E.M. Borgese, A. Chircop and M.McConnell, eds., Ocean Yearbook 17 (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press,2003): 449–463.


resources. At the workshop, which focused on depleted coral reef fisheries,it was obvious that there were a variety of environmental issues that neededto be addressed if the people were to avoid the impoverishment associatedwith the misuse of environmental resources. Villagers who participated inthe workshop included representatives from Lekanai, Vanuaso, Malawai,Lamiti and Naovuka. These villagers listed the environmental issues theyfaced and how they proposed to address them. The villagers agreed thatthey wanted to make their district a place where environmental resourcessuch as the coral reef, mangrove forests and seagrass beds were protected sothat the environmental goods and services these resources offer continue tobe sources of livelihoods for the people.

The people agreed to work together to improve environmentalconditions within their district. They showed commitment by quicklymoving on the perceived problem of depleted inshore fisheries resources.Various resource management decisions were made and five locallymanaged marine areas were declared. The people also undertook manage-ment activities such as the banning of fish poison, the targeting of land-based issues such as waste disposal and the rehabilitation of native habitats.The people have taken their management plans and activities to the islandand the provincial councils, where they are soliciting assistance andpublicizing their activities. These initiatives are expected to have a betterchance of success compared to other management initiatives previouslyundertaken because the owners and users of the resources made thedecisions based on their belief that the resources require management. Inaddition, the initiatives are determined by the people who are aware of whatactivities they need to undertake and are not driven by governments anddetached interest groups.

The participation, learning and action approach emphasizes ongoingconsultations between the partners. Consultation and communication areimportant and encouraged because good communication linkages betweenall partners are useful in establishing long-term relations based on mutualtrust and goodwill. Mutual respect and trust are important because of theuncharted paths that need to be considered and chosen. Consultations areemphasized to ensure that people are involved in all issues affecting them.Consultations in which the people only confirm decisions already made bythe partners are not appropriate and are avoided.3

The effectiveness of the community initiative depends on the involve-ment of the whole community, which needs to determine the activities itundertakes.4 For this reason, the traditional practices and social units are

3. R. Chambers, Whose Reality Counts: Putting the First Last (London: Intermedi-ate Technology Publications, 1997).

4. R. Chambers, Rural Development: Putting the Last First (London: Longman,1983); R. Chambers, Managing Rural Development Ideas and Experience from East Africa(Uppsala: Kumarian Press, 1985); Chambers, in n. 3 above.


useful because at these levels, effective action depends on the membersobserving the rulings and decisions of their group. The traditional practicesand units are useful common features to which everyone in the district canrelate. The people are closely linked and are the owners of customaryfishing rights and areas. The tight unit stimulated united effort in thepromotion of environment management in the villages, district and in therest of the island.

Local resource management actions were varied and depended onwhat the people wanted to do. The activities were easier to organize oncethe people were convinced that the initiatives are for their benefit and thatthey really cannot afford to continue with their practices up to this point.The people instituted resource management practices that they areconvinced are appropriate for their purposes. Traditional resource manage-ment practices were used in this instance as the basis for engaging people inthe management of environmental resources. Prohibitions were declared bythe people on fishing grounds and resource use practices that were deemeddestructive and the people were asked to observe these within their realm.

The community initiatives are driven by local people. Leaders of landowning units and chiefs are prominent in the drive for marine resourcemanagement. Community leaders who are reputable and committed to theinitiatives are engaged as agents in the communities. These agents liase withthe people and coordinate actions with outside partners.

The partners provided follow-up activities such as training, biological,social and economic surveys, and monitoring that demonstrate the effective-ness of the intervention and the lessons to be learned from its implementa-tion. Other follow-up activities are undertaken to continually engage thepeople. This continued involvement strengthens the partnership andextends the engagement and resource management activities. This is howthe trust and confidence of the people are earned. Regular follow-upactivities also allow for the reinforcement of support for communityinitiatives because people are reminded of their commitment to the projectevery time they are visited by outside partners.

ADDRESSING THE HUMAN FACTORS

The activities undertaken in the Vanuaso district since 2001 illustrate theimportance of addressing human factors.5 The initiative in Vanuaso Tikina

5. J. Veitayaki, 2003, ‘‘Empowerment and the Challenges of Involving LocalCommunities,’’ in W. Aalbersberg, B. Thaman, L. Sauni and M. Power, eds.,Proceedings of the Pacific Regional Workshop on Mangrove Wetlands Protection andSustainable Use, the University of the South Pacific, Marine Studies Facility (Apia: SouthPacific Regional Environment Programme, 2002): 85–94.


is a personal contribution by people who are convinced of the need togenuinely engage local communities in the management of their environ-mental resources. This is a timely intervention given the desire of the peoplein these communities to improve local conditions. The approach adopted inthis case emphasizes the importance of genuinely involving the peopleaffected by resource management decisions. The challenge is demanding,because the people are asked to change their activities in order to protectthe environmental resources that support them. The engagement thereforemust be based on trust, genuine concern and commitment as they areundertaking activities that will benefit themselves and their environment inthe short and long term.

The partnerships that are a critical aspect of this engagement processhave enabled the experts to contribute where their effort is needed. Thepartners complement each other’s work, allowing quick results. Thefunding came from outside sources that agreed with the proposed activitiesand decided to support these initiatives. The plight of these ruralcommunities is made known to their partners in government, non-govern-ment and education and development institutions. The partners are unitedin their promotion of local participation, successful and effective conserva-tion and flexibility. These collaborative undertakings have been responsiblefor the success of the approach used in Fiji.

The engagement of the Tikina is based on the belief in the strength ofthe social unit and traditional practices. These close-knit social units canenhance the enforcement of resource management practices if they areconvinced of the credibility of the activities to be undertaken. This is whycommunity-based resource management is favored—because it is easy toorganize and can produce quick results. On the other hand, involving thepeople of these local areas will demonstrate the success with whichinternational conventions, treaties and national legislation can be imple-mented. In Vanuaso, Fiji and some other parts of the Pacific Islands, theinvolvement of local people is also significant because they own theresources and are taking care of their own interests by agreeing to managethem. Traditional practices are relatively easy to implement because thepeople, who remember their effectiveness, already know them.

Community training workshops are an important component of theproject. Most of the people are normally not familiar with the ideas behindthe project. Through the training workshops, capacities in the local areasare organized to enhance understanding of the issues and involvement inthe initiative. The training workshops are useful means of the empower-ment process. Many of the issues are new to local communities who need torevise their knowledge and how to deal with these. Surveys and monitoringprotocols are taught to local community groups involved in these activities.


The monitoring results have been useful in promoting the effectiveness ofintervention.6

The message in all of the villages in the Tikina is that people need tomanage environmental resources better today if their future generations areto enjoy the same resources. Local action is required so that resources havea chance to recover. Local people are trained by their external partners andinvolved in the follow-up activities. These initiatives provide the partnerswith a holistic understanding of the situation in the district in terms of theimportance of the marine resources—their current status as well as theoutlook for the future. Regular follow-up activities were needed to introducenew ideas and techniques.

The social and economic surveys undertaken in the communities aspart of the initiative illustrate how the interventions affect people’s lives. Amajor finding of the survey is the notable increase in the community’s levelof awareness and knowledge of environmental and development issues. Allof the reports from the district agree that the people are benefiting fromtheir management of environmental resources. The people are aware that ahealthy environment is linked to their health and have explored the futurethat they face. People are talking about courses of action that can influencetheir lives and those of their children. In all of the villages, alternativesources of livelihood have been undertaken. People are planning forrelevant and appropriate development options. The search for alternativesources of income is important because of the need for income in ruralareas where the people are paying higher prices for goods and services thanthose who have a secure and regular income and who live in centers ofeconomic activity.

The project has enabled the people to work together to create a spiritof communal living, which was in previous times non-existent. In VanuasoTikina, this point was supported in the convening of a meeting of the vanua(a traditional subdivision of the land and its people) in July 2003 after alapse of many decades. Also in 2003, some of the youth of Vanuaso Tikinawere trained as honorary fish wardens. These villagers are now licensedhonorary fish wardens and lead the enforcement of all the fisheriesmanagement decisions that have been made by the communities in thedistricts. They have formed a committee and have vowed to enforce thedecisions made by the people. Ironically, as the results of the fisheries

6. A. Tawake, J. Parks, P. Radikedike, W. Aalbersberg, V. Vuki and N. Salasfsky,‘‘Harvesting Clams and Data: Involving Local Communities in Implementing andMonitoring a Marine Protected Area. A Case Study from Fiji,’’ in Conservation Biologyin Practice 2, no. 4 (2001): 32–35; S. Meo and P. Radikedike, Tikina VanuasoCommunity Biological Survey of Marine Protected Area Report, Mositi VanuasoProject, Gau, Institute of Applied Science Environmental Studies Report 122,University of the South Pacific, Suva, Fiji.


recovery in the managed areas are made known, the most serious threats arecoming from outside the communities. This is a bigger challenge because itinvolves people who are not from the communities helping themselves tothe people’s reserves. These outsiders are better equipped and have moreresources, making it more difficult to control them. Fishers from outside thevillages are periodically sighted fishing on the reefs, while most of thevillagers are on land, oblivious to what is happening. The honorary fishwardens have the support of the community to uphold their communities’management decisions but need better equipment to carry out theircommunal responsibilities.

The people of Vanuaso district have extended their environmentalmanagement activities and are working with the U.S. National Fish andWildlife Foundation, the University of the South Pacific and the Internation-al Ocean Institute-Pacific Islands Operational Centre with funding supportfrom the Ocean Science and Research Foundation’s Women and the SeaProgramme to rehabilitate coastal habitats and secure alternative sources ofincome. This initiative complements the management of fisheries undertak-en in the district and encourages people to adopt the broader and all-encompassing integrated resource management approach. It is agreed thatthe management and recovery of fishing grounds need to be complementedby the reduction of land-based sources of pollution for a more meaningfulenvironmental management strategy.

The people are extending resource management activities from themarine environment to the coastal and land areas. This approach makespeople more appreciative of the interconnected nature of the environment.People have not fully appreciated the linkages and significance of marineresources and the environment generally. An important aim of thesystematic approach is to lead people to new ideas on a need-to-know basis.The approach is chosen so as not to overwhelm people with informationand Western conservation concepts, but rather to work with the people touse the integrated resource management approach to undertake activitiesthat make sense to them.

Some of the issues that are addressed under this initiative include theprotection and rehabilitation of mangrove forests and coastal vegetation,the promotion of sustainable land use, the fight against deforestation andwild fires, the promotion of good drainage and the protection of watersupply, the proper disposal of domestic waste, the treatment of waste waterand the fencing of domesticated animals to allow people to cultivate nearbylowland areas.

The people in the six different villages have determined the coastalhabitat rehabilitation and management work they undertake. The projectnow promotes better land use practices amongst the people and contributesto sustainable development initiatives in rural areas. The project is expectedto benefit all the people in the villages, including their future generations,


Table 1.—Issues Raised at the 2001 Vanuaso Tikina Resource ManagementPlan Workshop

ISSUESVILLAGES

Lekanai Vanuas Nacavanadi Malawai Lamiti Naovuka

Dumping rubbish along � � � � � �

shoreline

Pigs roam freely and � � � � � �

not fenced

Unnecessary cutting X � � X � �

down of trees

Burning vegetation � � � � � �

Protection of water � � � X � �

source

Protection and mainte- � � � � � �

nance of drains

Upholding communal X � � � � �

lifestyle

Education issues X � � � � �

Sources of food and X � � � � �

income

Cutting down man- X X X X X Xgrove forests

Preparedness to take X X X � X �

part in developmentinitiatives

improve life in the village, protect critical coastal habitats, providealternative sources of livelihoods and complement the initiatives that havebeen taken to better use the resources of the environment in accordancewith sustainable development aspirations. This stance is significant given thedesire of the people for development and the global quest for sustainabledevelopment. The integration of development activities and the environ-ment will ensure that the environmental concerns are taken into consider-ation whenever new development activities are proposed.

Consultative meetings on the project have been regularly held withinthe Tikina since 2001. Attempts are made to ensure that everyone in thedistrict is aware of what is being done and of the reasons for what is beingdone. Based on the environmental problems identified in 2001, each of thesix villages has formulated resource management plans. These plans, whichfocus on the environmental issues listed in Table 1, were published asposters and are available in every house in the villages. The posters are areminder of the tasks for which everyone is responsible.


Consultative visits have allowed for the validation of village resourcemanagement plans and development activities. The longer, concertedcollaborative effort has strengthened and consolidated the position ofresource management in the district. Topics of discussion in the consulta-tive process have included the project cycle, leadership, project planningand preparing project proposals, compost toilets and smokeless stoves.Regular visits to individual villages are made to encourage local action. Thistraditional way of checking on activities that the people are undertaking ontheir own enabled the workshop participants to gauge the effectiveness ofthe project in the different villages. The exercise is hoped to boost theinvolvement of villages in the project.

The amount of work that has been undertaken in Vanuaso Tikina isindicative of the effectiveness of the engagement process. The people inthese communities are helping themselves and are undertaking activitiesthat they can manage on their own. The people are thinking more of theirfuture and hopefully will set the standard from which their children canlearn. In addition, the people are also learning from each other and arefostering closer social linkages that augur well for these rural communities.The hope is that an environmental ethic has been established within thevillages and the Tikina to influence their environmental managementactivities and motivate their children to improve on what their parents havestarted.

The involvement of youth and women will hopefully ensure sustainabil-ity of the project. Youth have their future ahead of them and are a powerfulsocial force. If properly coached and supported they will appreciate theproject goals and maintain support for them. The women are happy withtheir new-found independence and are working to bring about more self-determined improvement in their lives and those of their families. Thesetypes of support are required for unity of purpose within the communities.

Leadership in Fijian communities is a major issue. It is well known toeveryone in Vanuaso Tikina that while all support is promised by thepartners, the leadership role for the project has to come from the people.These people are used to living in these areas and should decide on theenvironmental management issues they can address. Traditional leaders areborn into positions of leadership and need to lead in this regard so thatdecision making is consistent with the need for resource management. Thework in Vanuaso Tikina has been easy because of the support of the chiefswho have been pillars of strength in this engagement process. However, theneed for good leadership needs to filter right through the social fabric. Thisis to ensure that people are genuinely committed to and are thebeneficiaries of initiatives mounted in their names. Long-term communitysupport will only be assured if the leadership is fair, transparent andinspirational.


People are asked to determine their environmental management anddevelopment activities. The actual project activities differ given the per-ceived problems in different villages. The important issue is that the chosenactivities reinforce the management of environmental resources and aresustainable. At the moment, all of the people in the six villages have accessto a development activity that is also a source of income. In Naovuka, thevillagers have an outboard punt that they use for transporting their childrento school and for providing better transport means. In Lamiti, a copra-purchasing venture operated by a clan buys copra from the villagers. InMalawai, the youth group is raising cattle while the women sell mats formarketing in Viti Levu. In addition, there is a family yaqona (kava) buyingventure that buys the villagers’ products for sale in Suva. In Nacavanadi, aclan is operating an oil-selling outlet for the boat owners and villagegenerators on the island while a different group is now purchasing matsfrom the women. In Vanuaso, the villagers sell pandanus and coconut to afamily-owned venture that then markets these commodities in Suva, themain urban center. The people also have a store that was opened as part ofthe work being done in the district. The store has revived the commercialactivities because it now purchases copra as well as provides supplies. InLekanai, the villagers sell copra to a family operation that markets copra inthe village. These new initiatives are expected to reduce fishing pressurewithin the villages. The Mositi Vanuaso has also enabled four of the villagesto open investment accounts with the Unit Trust of Fiji. Work is continuingon expanding the villagers’ sources of income and livelihood. The peopleare eager to improve their position and are supporting these initiatives andthinking of new ones.

The people have recognized the need to secure alternative sources oflivelihood and have agreed that each village should have income-generatingactivities if it is to be actively involved in the economic activities of thecountry. Some of the new initiatives that the communities have mentionedinclude cattle farming, pig farming and agricultural production of short-term crops. The need is different in different situations and the people areencouraged to adopt iterative learning and adaptive management. Thesestrategies can contribute to the evolution of environment and developmentactivities within Vanuaso Tikina and Gau Island.

Some of the long-term initiatives that are currently undertaken includethe declaration of no-take or taboo areas in all of the six villages, planting ofnative hardwood and the replacement of aging coconut trees. Theseactivities are for future generations and articulate the spirit of long-termdevelopment that demonstrates the people’s desire to better provide fortheir future generations. These activities, small as they are, should be widelypublicized to ensure that the lessons are not lost. In Vanuaso, this issue hasbeen addressed through publication and discussion at workshops andconferences both locally and externally. As people become aware of the


network of community-based initiatives, comparisons can be drawn amongsuch initiatives.

THE CHALLENGES

Community-based resource management in Vanuaso has been effective andsatisfying for the people, but there are inherent challenges that need to bekept in mind. First is the desire that people have to utilize resources toimprove their living conditions. People look to their resources as a means toenrich themselves. It is hoped that people will also look after their long-terminterests. In these cases, the challenge is to find a balance betweendevelopment and the need for environmental management. The challengewill be huge but there is enough evidence available to support the argumentthat environmental management makes economic sense. This is the reasonwhy community development partners need to appreciate the aspirations ofpeople to better their living conditions.

The enforcement of management decisions remains a huge challenge.As more community-based resource management decisions are made, theexercise of control by these communities becomes the major deciding factorbetween success and failure. In nearly all of the places where locally-managed marine areas have been declared, the biggest threats areemanating from outside the communities. Traditional authority andinstitutions are a necessary part of the process. Local communities can easilyagree to a united course of action but government support is also requiredto address other issues. With the passage of time, the local threats are oftenreplaced by threats from commercial fishers who have the resources toaccess the management areas whenever they wish. This is an issue that theFisheries Department should address, as it is the licensing authorityresponsible for developing and managing the resources. Given the existingsystem of fisheries licensing, the challenge is to decide whether it isworthwhile to mobilize people at the community level to manage theirresources knowing that more well-off outsiders stand to be the mainbeneficiaries.

It is important that outside partners be aware that local communitiesare under pressure to make a living. Resource management has to makesense to be a part of people’s normal consideration. This is the reason whythe consolidation of efforts at the local level is required; the processdemands longer-term engagement and creativity. Engagement has to bemeaningful to people whose time is constantly in demand. This is the reasonwhy the project activities have to be tied to people’s lives and the life theywant to live and share with loved ones. People have to look out for theirinterests and be committed to bringing about changes that will first andforemost improve their own positions. Creativity is also important because


of the variety of situations that exist in different areas. The potential andneeds in different areas are different and need to be taken into accountwhen resource development and activities involving the people are consid-ered.

The marine resource management actions that are discussed here areneeded at all levels to produce the type of desired effects that arehighlighted in international resource use and management instruments.This is important because of the inherent contradictions that are experi-enced when the same national and local organizations are responsible forthe development and management of natural resources. Community-basedresource management action taken at the local level must be supported andlinked to national and international initiatives. This will be the final test ofaccomplishment . . . when international conventions and treaties areimplemented locally by the people who articulate sustainable developmentactivities. At the moment, there is a need to ensure consistency in purposefrom resource management actors at all levels and amongst all stakeholders.

The need for economic activities to provide people with a source ofincome is critical to the success of local resource management activities.People in rural areas need a source of income as they are required to pay fortheir needs and wants. In Vanuaso Tikina, the search for sources of incomeis the most difficult issue to address given the rural surrounding. People payprices that are much higher than what wage earners pay because of thedistance from economic centers. People with experience in only semi-subsistence commercial activities are confronted with huge challenges tooperate successful commercial ventures. They have to overcome poortransportation links, poor markets and capital sources and cultural hin-drances. This is the reason why actions at all levels from differentstakeholders are required to bring about success in economic development.

Another challenge to face is the poor record in rural developmentgenerally. There are ample records of projects with noble intentions thatwere never realized. Contemporary projects need to be properly planned sothat they stand a real chance of working. The initiatives should beimplemented for the benefit of local communities and should be supportedby all stakeholders who are well versed with the social and economicconditions in the areas where the projects are established.

This is the reason why it is important that local projects are effective,efficient, appropriate and relevant. Again, proper and realistic preparationsare required in the formulation and implementation of local projects. It isalso important that the performance of the project activities are monitoredand evaluated. These evaluations are important to the success of thecommunity-based resource management experience.

The performance of community resource management activities shouldbe widely publicized to take advantage of the lessons learned from suchactivities. These lessons should be used in the planning, formulation and


implementation of other community-based resource management activities.Project activities and reports should be widely promoted in all areas wheresimilar activities are planned or undertaken. Schools can also be used toengage and share the outcomes and lessons from these initiatives. Successesand failures happen for a variety of reasons that need to be taken intoconsideration if they are to be adequately addressed.

THE FUTURE

The Mositi Vanuaso initiative to manage the environmental resources in thedistrict has been made possible by the partnerships of community members,resource owners, conservation practitioners, researchers, government offi-cials and international funding agencies. These various groups, which areexpert in some aspects of project development, have all played a critical rolein the project. The number and skills of people practicing effectivecommunity-based resource management has increased while the peoplehave made the network responsive and workable. Through collaborationwith external partners, important resource management activities have beenundertaken. Likewise, international funding has been secured for resourcemanagement at the local level. In Vanuaso Tikina in Gau, some villagers arenow licensed honorary fish wardens leading the sustainable use ofenvironmental resources. These people were trained because their externalpartners were able to organize the training. This example from VanuasoTikina demonstrates how local initiatives have been made a part ofinternationally accepted approaches and instruments in order to addressglobally recognized problems and issues. Ultimately, it is the partnershipthat has helped in the preservation of natural biodiversity while providingfor the livelihoods of the communities in the district.

Community-based resource use arrangements make marine resourceconservation at that level more effective. By using the communities’resource use traditions and close ties, the people are better able thangovernment agencies to determine the level of use of resources, while theirtraditional cultural values allow for the effective implementation ofmanagement decisions. The effects of having close social relations are lostin international and national resource management initiatives and arestrengths that should be taken advantage of in resource management. InVanuaso Tikina, the experience has been so enriching and popular that ithas motivated the people to embrace resource management. In addition,other villagers in Gau and nearby islands have been enticed to be involvedin the same process. In October 2005, after a fisheries managementworkshop in the island paid for by the Japan International CooperationAgency (JICA), the people of Gau decided to adopt the approach that wastested in Vanuaso Tikina for implementation in the whole island. This is a


sign of endorsement by the people of the island who have formed theLomani (‘‘care for’’) Gau Committee to lead them in their quest forsustainable development on the island.

Biological, social and economic surveys and monitoring are undertakenby the partners to improve the effectiveness of their chosen interventions.These exercises are important to maintain the people’s commitment toresource management initiatives. This is crucial because local communitieslive with the dilemma of choosing between incomes from the immediateand unsustainable use of resources and the more remote futuristic benefitsof conservation activities. People therefore have to be continually remindedof the effectiveness of the conservation activities they undertake.

It is also critical that management actions are given time to work, as thelessons people learn from these resource conservation efforts will be asource of inspiration for the continuation of conservation and resourcemanagement into the future. The partnerships in this project allowed thepeople to collaborate and work together to make conservation better for thepeople involved and the environment. The core values that the partnersobserve have enhanced the partnerships. Commitment, teamwork, transpar-ency, empowerment, respect, fun and the belief that practitioners can makea difference has ensured that the people understand each other and trusteach other to come through with what each is expected to do. Thisemphasis on common values has overcome the rivalry, competition andsuspicion that existed among conservation practitioners and their organiza-tions in the past. These barriers to genuine partnership cannot be easilyuntangled through legal contracts as such but through a social commitmentto doing better in terms of conservation and making a difference for thepeople.

It is obvious that government agencies need to play an active role ininvolving community-based groups in the management of environmentalresources. Government support will bring legitimacy to the approach as wellas assist in the mainstreaming of the process. Government support can alsoenhance the securing of funding and address issues such as surveillance andcontrol that are currently hindering the performance of local resourcemanagement initiatives. Funding or the lack of it hinders surveillance andenforcement. Indeed, it is sad that people in semi-subsistence existence areexpected to match the resources of commercial operators in such areas.Without government support, the potential of the experience as mentionedhere will not be given the attention it demands.

It is critical to point out that resource management can not only be thebulwark against poverty in rural communities, it can also make economicdevelopment sensible. Resource management in Vanuaso Tikina is mainlyaimed at securing people’s livelihood but there are already signs thateconomic conditions are improving. People are learning that the resourcesof the environment need not only be extracted to be beneficial and the


financial benefits of having good environmental resources are being slowlyappreciated.

Government agencies need to commit resources to these initiatives thatinvolve local communities. They cannot pay for most of the work that isrequired as part of the sustainable development initiatives and process, butcan meaningfully assist the partners that are working in that area.Government can also help promote the approaches that are proven to workso that other communities may be spared the anguish associated with failedinitiatives.

The initiatives in Vanuaso provide guidelines as to how people shouldbe involved in the management of resources and their developmentactivities. At all levels from the communities to the Tikina, province, and thenational government, the people and their partners must promote andpractice integration, collaboration and iterative management, which are thepillars of the integrated resource management approach. The approachshould be adopted in all areas where the local communities are trying tomanage marine resources. The coastal communities and resources arecomplicated and need to be managed in the best way possible. This is whythe integrated approach used by the partners to the Mositi Vanuaso projectshould be taken into consideration. The aims of the conservation andmanagement must reflect the need to manage marine resources and involvepeople in the process. This is the way to go because it is appropriate to doso. The lessons learned strongly support this approach.

Documents

Addressing Human Factors