REGIONAL FISHERIES LIVELIHOODS PROGRAMME

FOR SOUTH AND SOUTHEAST ASIA (RFLP)

---------------------------------------------------------

National Legal Framework and Current Status of Indonesia

Fisheries: Steps to Improve Small Fishers Livelihood

(GCP/RAS/237/SPA: Preparation of a national report on “Current

fisheries and aquaculture policies relevant to RFLP”)

For the Regional Fisheries Livelihoods Programme for South and Southeast Asia

Djuhendi Tadjudin

National Consultant

RFLP INS 2010

"This publication has been made with the financial support of the Spanish

Agency of International Cooperation for Development (AECID) through

an FAO trust-fund project, the Regional Fisheries Livelihoods Programme

(RFLP) for South and Southeast Asia. The content of this publication

does not necessarily reflect the opinion of FAO, AECID, or RFLP.”

i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Small-scale fisheries make an important global contribution such as providing

food and households’ cash income. However, they are still underdeveloped,

vulnerable, and poor. The lack of collaborative management, the vulnerability of

small fisheries, the loss of income because of poor post-catch treatment, the lack of

alternative livelihood, and the lack of access to finance are the most important small

fisheries’ problems. Such problems will be addressed by the four year Regional

Fisheries Livelihood Programme (RFLP) for South and Southeast Asia which is

operating in Cambodia, Indonesia, Philippines, Sri Langka, Timor-Leste, and Viet

Nam. In Indonesia, RFLP has activities in East Nusa Tenggara and specifically in 4

of its 20 regencies namely Kupang, Kota Kupang, Rote Ndao, and Alor.

The paper describes two component may affect small fishers livelihood, i.e.

national regulation as well as national and local fisheries state conditions. The first

component is containing law and regulation on responsible fisheries, water-

resources and habitat, commercial fisheries, spatial planning, collaborative

management, micro finance, safety of life on the sea, and disaster mitigation. The

second component is containing resource mismatch, shifting to aquaculture,

mismatch between administrative and fishing ground boundary, conflict between

utilization and conservation, unequal profit margin and benefit inequity, bounded

rationality, and declining aquatic resources.

Based on two components above and project aims, the paper recommends six

forthcoming actions regarding fisheries co-management mechanisms, measures to

improve safety at sea and reduce vulnerability, measures for improved quality of

fishery products and market chains, diversified income opportunities for fisher

families, facilitated access to micro-finance services, and promoting sharing

knowledge.

ii

CONTENT

List of Boxes .................................................................................................... iii

List of Annexes .............................................................................................. iv

List of Abbreviations ........................................................................................ v

Livelihood Glossary ........................................................................................ vi

1. Introduction ......................................................................................... 1

2. National Regulation: Support to RFLP .............................................. 2

2.1. Responsible Fisheries .................................................................. 2

2.2. Water-resources and habitat ........................................................ 3

2.3. Commercial Fisheries ................................................................. 3

2.4. Spatial Planning .......................................................................... 4

2.5. Collaborative management ......................................................... 5

2.6. Micro finance .............................................................................. 5

2.7. Safety of life on the sea ............................................................... 6

2.8. Disaster mitigation ...................................................................... 6

3. Challenge to RFLP: From National to Local Perspective ................. 7

3.1. Resources mismatch .................................................................... 7

3.2. Shifting to aquaculture: behind the global trend ......................... 8

3.3. Mismatch between administrative and fishing ground

boundary...................................................................................... 9

3.4. Conflict between utilization and conservation ............................ 9

3.5. Unequal of profit margins and benefit inequity .......................... 10

3.6. Bounded-rationality .................................................................... 10

3.7. Declining aquatic resources ........................................................ 11

4. Small Fishers Livelihood and Vulnerability ...................................... 13

4.1. Livelihood ................................................................................... 13

4.2. Vulnerability ............................................................................... 13

4.3. Relevance to RFLP ..................................................................... 13

5. Forthcoming Actions ............................................................................ 13

5.1. Fisheries co-management mechanisms ....................................... 13

5.2. Measures to improve safety at sea and reduce vulnerability ...... 14

5.3. Measures for improved quality of fishery products and

market chains .............................................................................. 14

5.4. Diversified income opportunities for fishers families ................. 15

5.5. Facilitated access to micro-finance services ............................... 15

5.6. Promoting sharing of knowledge ................................................ 15

References ..................................................................................................... 16

Annexes ..................................................................................................... 19

iii

LIST OF BOXES

1. Perception of Fishermen in Sei Serindan Village ................................... 7

2. Aquaculture ............................................................................................. 8

3. Lobster Capturing in Nias ....................................................................... 9

4. Traditional Textile from Amarasi ........................................................... 10

iv

LIST OF ANNEXES

1. Annual Growth Rate of Fish Production Among Ten Leading

Countries, 2000-2007 .............................................................................. 19

2. Turnover of Indonesia Fishery Workers and Vessels, 2002-2007 .......... 20

3. World Fish Production ............................................................................ 21

4. Number of Indonesia Fisheries Worker (person).................................... 22

5. Number of Vessel Used in Captured Fisheries in Indonesia .................. 23

v

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AIGRP-ANU Australia Indonesia Governance Research Partnership –

Australia National University

CCRF : The Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries

FAO : Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nation

FMA : Fisheries Management Area

GR : Government Regulation

GT : Gross Tonnes

HP : Horse power

IEEZ : Indonesian Exclusive Economic Zone

IUP : Ijin Usaha Perikanan (Fisheries Enterprise Certificates)

KKPE : Kredit Ketahanan Pangan dan Energi (Loan for Food and

Energy Security)

KUR : Kredi Usaha Rakyat (People-based Small Business Loan)

MMAF : Ministry of Marine Affair and Fisheries

MOA : Ministry of Agriculture

MOTR : Ministry of Transportation

MSME : Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprise

RFLP : Regional Fisheries Livelihood Programme

Siswasmas : Sistem Pengawasan Masyarakat (Communities Self-

Monitoring System)

SIKPI : Surat Ijin Kapal Pengangkut Ikan (Fish Transport Vessel

Licence)

SPI : Surat Penangkapan Ikan (Fishing License)

SOLAS : Safety of Life at Sea

UNCLOS : United Nation Convention on the Law of the Sea

vi

LIVELIHOOD GLOSSARY

Adaptive capacity = ability or capacity of a system to modify or change to cope

with changes in actual or expected stress of vulnerability context

Asset = a useful or valuable thing

Exposure = nature and degree to which fisheries production systems are exposed to

any stress

Institution = policies, rules, and plans, and the organisations that promote them.

Markets are also understood to be institutions

Living = an income sufficient to live on, or the means of earning it

Livelihood = a means of securing the necessities of life.

Livelihood = a economic and social system, made up of assets and activities, and

influenced by factors outside the control of individuals and households

Potential impacts = all impact that may occur without taking into account planned-

adaptation

Sensitivity = degree to which smallholders economies are dependent on fisheries

and therefore sensitive to any changes in the sector

Vulnerability = degree of risk to which people are exposed and their ability to

adapt, cope with, or recover from the impacts of an external shock to their

livelihoods

Vulnerability context = the circumstances, situations or other external factors that

make people vulnerable or increase their vulnerability

1

1 – Introduction

Small-scale fisheries make an important global contribution, providing food and

a major source of animal protein to about one billion people. While in coastal areas

the importance of aquatic products is usually even much higher (FAO, 2003). In

Indonesia between 2003 and 2007 fish was the major source of animal protein

supplying 70% of total national protein supplies (MMAF, 2009a), with the

remainder being supplied by meat and livestock products.

Around 38 million people worldwide are employed in fisheries and aquaculture,

95% of them in developing countries. The majority are involved in small-scale

fisheries (FAO, 2004). The related industries such as processing and marketing also

provide employment for approximately 50 million people.

Fisheries can provide an important contribution to households’ cash income. In

Indonesia, most fish production is sold, while in comparison subsistence agricultural

farmers consume more than 70% of their production. The cash income from the sale

of aquatic products is used to buy foodstuffs, clothing, education, health services,

etc.

Despite this a variety of factors mean that coastal communities are under-

developed, vulnerable and poor. One of third of the poor people in Indonesia come

from coastal communities; with fishermen generally being more poor than farmers,

workers in home industries or handicraft workers. Moreover, coastal communities

because of greater vulnerability, suffer more from external factors such as shocks

and trends, e.g. natural disasters like tsunamis and changing climate conditions

(Carney, 1998).

The problem is characterized as the failure to manage the interface between

fisheries and the wider external environment. A renewed interest in, and support of,

fisheries management and sustainable livelihood enhancement is urgently needed in

order to forestall severe poverty and to halt ecosystem degradation to the detriment

of fishers, fisher communities and entire coastal populations and economies. The

key problem areas that need attention are: (i) The lack of mechanisms and capacity

for joint management of the fisheries between the fishers and government authorities

– co-management; (ii) The great vulnerability of small-scale fishers and their

families in view of the risky occupation and exposed habitats; (iii) The loss of

income from fish and fishery products due to poor handling, preservation and

processing practices and inequitable returns because of the marketing system; (iv)

The need for alternative incomes to provide livelihoods when fishing activities have

to be reduced to sustainably manage resources; and (v) The access to micro-finance

to diversify income, adapt fishing equipment to new management regulations and to

reduce vulnerability.1

Such problems will be addressed by the four year Regional Fisheries

Livelihoods Programme (RFLP) for South and Southeast Asia which is operating in

Cambodia, Indonesia, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Timor-Leste and Viet Nam. In

Indonesia, RFLP has activities in East Nusa Tenggara province and specifically in 4

1 RFLP Program Document

2

of its 20 regencies namely Kupang, Rote Ndao, and Alor districts and Kupang

municipality.

2 - National Regulations: Support to RFLP

2.1. Responsible Fisheries

The Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (CCRF) which was ratified by

FAO member countries in 1995 was designed to encourage responsible fishing

practices, to ensure that future generations can also benefit from fisheries (Adrianto

and Hartoto, 2009).

Even though implementation of the CCRF is voluntary rather than obligatory

for FAO’s member countries, Indonesia is implementing the code through Fishery

Law 31/2004. Article 3 of this law notes that the purpose of fisheries management in

Indonesia is to:

a) Enhance the living conditions of small-scale fishers and fish farmers;

b) Increase government income and foreign exchange;

c) Drive the growth of job opportunities;

d) Enhance the supply and consumption of fish protein;

e) Optimize the management of fisheries resources;

f) Increase productivity, quality, added value, and competitiveness;

g) Increase the supply of basic commodities for the fish processing industry;

h) Achieve optimal utilization of fisheries resources and aquatic environments;

and,

i) Ensure the preservation of fisheries resources, areas for fish culture, and

spatial management.

Law 31/2004 is legally necessary and is sufficient to both implement the

national policy agenda as well as the CCRF. Furthermore, in comparison with

earlier laws and regulations, the Fisheries Law 31/2004 provides new paradigms in

Indonesia fisheries management. Adrianto and Hartoto (2009) listed these as:

a) Sustainable farming (Article 6).

b) An important goal is to improve the living standards of fishers and the

small-scale fish farmers (Articles 65 and 67).

c) Fishery management must be democratic (Articles 65 and 67) and co-

management principles must be implemented (Article 6).

d) Implementation of the ecosystem conservation principles in natural resource

management for the prosperity of human beings (Article 13; Article 14;

Articles 15 and 16).

e) Implementation of conservation principles, including protection, mitigation

and rehabilitation, in the utilization of natural resources (Article 7).

f) Utilization of the best information available in the fields of science and

technology (Article 46; Articles 52 and 53), as well as the state of local

ecology (Article 52).

g) The existence of strict sentences and clear jurisprudence where regulations

are violated and crimes are committed against the fishery (Articles 72-109).

3

2.2. Waters-resource and habitat

Indonesia has laws on management and protection of waters-resources and

habitat. These are Law 5/1990 on “conservation of natural living resources and its

ecosystem”; Law 27/2007 on “management of coastal regions and small islands”;

Law 32/2009 on “environment management”; and Law 31/2004 toward “fisheries”

juncto; Law 45/2009 on “amendment on Law 31/2004” that regulating any aspect of

fisheries. These laws lay down the values, principles, and aims of proper water-

resources management and utilization in respect to maintaining sustainable

livelihoods of Indonesia people including coastal fisheries communities.

The laws have since been described by more operational legal-frameworks like

Government Regulation (GR) 60/2007 and GR 19/1999. GR 60/2007 which regulate

the detailed aspects of conservation of fish resources including fish ecosystems, fish

species, and fish genetic conservation. GR 19/1999 on “Control on Sea Pollution

and Sea Destruction” states that nobody shall contaminate seawaters with any kinds

of substances (organic matter, mineral, energy, and other elements) or do any kind

of treatment of seawater which will result in harmful degradation of seawater

quality.

There are sufficient ministry regulations or ministry decrees, with Ministry of

Marine Affairs and Fisheries (MMAF) regulations covering: planning on coastal

regions and small islands management (PER.16/MEN/2008); and procedures on

definition of water conservation (PER.02/MEN/2009). There are also MMAF

decisions covering: the manual on sustainable and community based small islands

management (KEP.41/MEN/2000); quarantine treatment to protect trans-boundary

and inter-region mobility of potential vector of fish pests and diseases

(KEP.18/MEN/2003); and media conditions for living-fish transportation

(KEP.42/MEN/2003).

Some additional legislation is needed to maintain marine water quality and

resources so that human livelihoods are sustainable. Several years ago, a private

mining company dumped mining tailings containing heavy metals offshore in North

Sulawesi resulting in both the destruction of fish habitats and skin diseases.

However the mining company was found innocent in court because the standards on

sea water quality were unclear.

Even where there is sufficient legislation, enforcement is problematic for a

variety of reasons including insufficient government staff and equipment to cover

enforcement across a country consisting of thousands of islands.

2.3. Commercial Fisheries

The Commercial Fisheries law is derived from Law 31/2004 (juncto Law

45/2009) known as the Fishery Law. At the operational level this regulation covers:

a) Commercial Fishery is detailed (PER.05/MEN/2008 amended with

PER.12/MEN/2009). It regulates the types of commercial fishing and

licensing; fishing activities; fish transportation activities; the capture and

fish transportation in the fishing fleet unit; fish landing; license issuance

authority; procedure for issuing licenses for commercial fisheries; validity,

extension, amendment or replacement of commercial fisheries licenses for

4

Indonesian individual or legal entity; procurement of fishing vessel and/or

fish carrier vessel; physical check of fishing vessel, fishing gear, and

document of fishing vessel and/or fish carrier vessel; operational area and

fishing base port for capture fishing vessel and/or fish carrier vessel;

integrated commercial fisheries; use of expatriate crew on vessel;

enhancement; supervision and control; sanction; and many others.

b) Specific regulation on commercial fisheries, such as allowing the use of

trawl nets in the northern part of East Kalimantan waters

(PER.06/MEN/2008); utilization of fish nets in Indonesian Exclusive

Economic Zone (PER.11/MEN/2009); and registration and signing fishery

vessel (PER.27/MEN/2009).

c) Regulation on fish culture: responsible fish culture (KEP.02/MEN/2007);

and licensing on fish culture (KEP.12/MEN/2007).

The government has many legal instruments for large-scale commercial fishing

vessels (greater than 5 gross tonnes {GT}) which are also covered by regulations on

safety of life on the sea and trans-boundary fish catching. However the small-scale

capture fishery, for vessels of less than 5 gross tonnes (GT), is almost unregulated

within Indonesian waters.

2.4. Spatial Planning

Law 24/1992 on “spatial planning” obligates everyone in Indonesia to protect

the quality of space and to take order from spatial planning (Article 5). The law

defines protected and economic areas (Article 3). A functional definition of areas is

provided in a collaborative manner (Article 4).

The government defined Fisheries Management Areas in Indonesia by

Government Regulation 54/2002 and MMAF Regulation PER.01/MEN/2009.

Indonesia marine water areas are specified by 11 FMA. East Nusa Tenggara where

RFLP is geographically located, is covered by four FMA: FMA 573 (Indian Ocean

South of Java, South of East Nusa Tenggara, Sawu Sea, and West of Timor Sea);

FMA 713 (Makasar Strait, Bone Bay, Flores Sea, and Bali Sea); FMA 714 (Tolo

Bay and Banda Sea); and FMA 718 (Aru Sea, Arafura Sea, and East of Timor Sea).

In order to enhance the optimal utilization of resources in entire regions,

MMAF have enacted MMAF Regulation (PER.12/MEN/2010) toward

“minapolitan” – a similar concept with ‘agro-politan’ applied to fisheries.

Minapolitan is an area based development concept for marine and fisheries in

respect to integrated, efficiency, quality, and acceleration principles. It is designed to

improve communities’ livelihoods as well as to equalize inter-regional development.

MMAF Decree KEP.32/MEN/2010 then defined 197 regency/municipal as

minapolitan locations. Among others, Kupang Municipality, and Rote Ndao and

Alor Regency have been designated as minapolitan locations in East Nusa

Tenggara. This means that 3 of the 4 RLFP locations have been designated by

MMAF regulation as regions for accelerated development effort.

5

2.5. Collaborative Management

The Reform era began with the establishment of the Ministry of Marine Affairs

and Fisheries (MMAF) and the Local Autonomy Law in 1999 by the former

President Abdurahman Wahid. Prior to that the fisheries sector was under the

coordination of the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA).

During the Reform Period, several regulations recognizing collaborative

management systems were enacted as below (Satria and Matsuda, 2004):

a) Law 22/1999 or Law 32/2004 and Fisheries Law 31/2004: small-scale

fishers are given open access to fish in all fisheries management areas of

Indonesia.

b) Article 3 of Government Regulation 60/2007 on the “Conservation of

Fisheries Resources”: sets conservation of fisheries resources as the

responsibility of central government, local government, and communities.

c) MMAF Decree 41/2000 on “Guideline of small island development”: (i)

The state recognizes the existence of customary-law-based resources

management for small islands; and (ii) Local people must participate in

surveillance activities.

d) MMAF Decree 58/2001 on “Guideline of community-based marine and

fisheries surveillance”: (i) The state promotes the role of local institutions in

promoting communities self-monitoring (Siswasmas); (ii) Local government

is obligated to facilitate empowerment of fisher groups as surveillance

actors.

e) MMAF Decree Kep.10/Men/2002 on “Guideline of integrated coastal

management planning”: The local people shall be given the opportunity to

express their opinion, objections, perceptions, and suggestions during the

process of integrated coastal management planning, and shall be involved in

all the stages from preparation, initiation, planning, certification,

implementation, and institutionalization processes.

f) Regarding licensing (PER.05/MEN/2008 juncto PER.12/MEN/2009),

delegates the authority to issue Fisheries Enterprise Certificates (Izin Usaha

Perikanan or IUP), fishing licenses (Surat Penangkapan Ikan or SPI), and

fish transport vessel licences (Surat Ijin Kapal Pengangkut Ikan or SIKPI)

to fisheries companies that engage in fishing activities by using non-

motorized boats, outboard engine boats, inboard engine boats, with the

following provision: (i) the central government: boats over 30 GT with

engines bigger than 90 horse power (HP); (ii) the provincial government:

boats between 10-30 GT with engines less than 90 HP and without foreign

crew and capital; and (iii) the regency (municipal) government: boats less

than 10 GT with engines less than 90 HP, and without foreign crew and

capital.

2.6. Micro Finance

There are at least two micro finance schemes that can be accessed by small-

scale fishers. These are KUR (Kredit Usaha Rakyat, People-based Small Business

Loan) and KKPE (Kredit Ketahanan Pangan dan Energi, Loan for Food and Energy

Security).

6

The Indonesian government constituted the President’s Decree 6/2007 on policy

to accelerate real sector development and revitalize MSMEs (micro, small and

medium enterprises). It was followed by a memorandum of understanding between

Technical Ministries, Banks, and Insurance Companies signed on 9 October 2007,

which was marked with the launching of insured loans to MSMEs which is now

called People-based Small Business Loan (Kredit Usaha Rakyat).

Loan recipients must have a feasible business entity which has yet to prove

profitable. There are two kinds of loan scheme: (i) up to Rp 500 million: effective

interest 14% per annum for maximum of 5 years; and (ii) up to Rp 20 million: flat

interest 1.125% per month (13.5% per annum) for a maximum of 3 years.

In order to accelerate the achievement of community and private sector food

and energy security, the Ministry of Finance constituted Ministry Regulation

79/PMK.05/2007. MMAF Regulation PER.06/MEN/2009 (amended by

PER.01/MEN/2010) sets out rules for fishery sector related credit including loan

size for particular fisheries ventures.

2.7. Safety of life on the sea

Indonesia has ratified the three most important global legal-frameworks on

safety; these are: (i) SOLAS 1974 (Safety of Life at Sea 1974) which was ratified by

Presidential Decree 65/1980; (ii) SOLAS Chapter XI-2 Special Measure to Enhance

Maritime Security and ISPS Code 2002 (International Ship and Port Facility

Security Code); and (iii) UNCLOS III 1982 (United Nation Convention on the Law

of the Sea III 1982) which was ratified by Law 17/1985 on Shipping that was

amended by Law 17/2008.

The Ministry of Transportation (MOTR) issued MOTR Regulation

KM.20/2006 which obligates all Indonesian flagged fishing vessels to be classified

by the Indonesia Classification Bureau. Its classification includes safety statutes.

However it only covers national and international shipping vessel above 100 GT

with engines above 250 HP. Traditionally built smaller wooden fishing vessels are

therefore not covered by the existing safety regulations of the Indonesia

Classification Bureau.

Boats of above 5 GT and under 100 GT follow the safety statutes of the fishery

vessel regulation (PER.05/MEN/2008 with its amendment PER.12/MEN/2009).

Fishing vessels under 5 GT are uncovered by any existing MOTR or MMAF safety

regulations.

The MMAF also regulates certifies and monitors fishery vessel feasibility to

operate under (PER.03/MEN/2007). A fishery vessel will be issued a Shipping

License if and only if, it has been certified. However this regulation also only

applies to larger fishery vessels.

2.8. Disaster mitigation

There are two laws related to disaster mitigation: Law 24/2007 on “handling

disaster” and Law 27/2007 on “management of coastal regions and small islands”.

Law 24/2007 states that reduction of disaster risk and provision of guidance on

reduction of disaster risk is the responsibility of regional government (Article 8c).

7

Disaster handling is categorized into: social, economic, and culture of community;

conservation of living environment; utility and affectivity; and coverage area

coverage (Article 31). Mitigation is conducted to reduce the risk of disaster for

people located in disaster prone areas. It is conducted through: conducting layout;

management of development, construction of infrastructure, building arrangement;

and conducting education, guidance, and training whether in conventional or

modern way (Article 47).

Law 27/2007 states that development of integrated management plans and the

utilization of coastal areas and small islands is the responsibility of both central and

regional government (Article 48). Central government, regional government, and

communities should all be involved in disaster mitigation (Article 49). Article 50 is

identical with Article 31 of Law 24/2007.

3 – Challenges to RFLP: From National and Local Perspectives

3.1. Resource mismatch

More than 80% of Indonesia population live in Java and Sumatera islands that

contain only 30% of the nation’s seawater area, while the other 70% of the EEZ is

occupied by the remaining 20% of the population. This resource and population

mismatch is heightened by under-developed fisheries infrastructure and commercial

fisheries initiatives in areas with lower population density.

Access to appropriate fishing gear and vessels is another kind of resource

mismatch. Artisanal fishers, who are the majority of fishers in Indonesia, are mainly

located in areas where fish stocks are in decline (Box-1). In areas like East Nusa

Tenggara where marine stocks are abundant coastal communities have insufficient

fisheries infrastructure and small-scale fishers lack the gear types to take full

advantage of the sea’s bounty.

Box-1

Perceptions of Fishers in Sei Serindan Village

Sei Serindan village located on the Sei Kepayang estuary of the

Asahan River, Asahan Regency, North Sumatera Province.

Desa Sei Serindan fishers are mostly artisanal, but they are aware

that local fish resources have already declined.

Without vessels of above 5 GT or going out to sea over 3 miles

from the coast to fish, they catch insufficient fish to feed their

families.

________

Source: Focus group discussion conducted by Tadjudin (2008)

In the near future East Nusa Tenggara is likely to face: An increasing number of

conflicts as it rich marine waters attract outsiders from adjacent regions to the

fishing grounds. Since fisheries infrastructure in the adjacent regions such as Bahu-

8

Bahu at South-East Sulawesi is better than that of East Nusa Tenggara, then

economic rents from capture fisheries will flow outwards to adjacent regions. This

will further intensify the pressure to more fully exploit the sea areas of East Nusa

Tenggara and the need for improved livelihoods for its coastal communities.

3.2. Shifting to aquaculture: behind the global trend

Between 2000 and 2007, total world capture fisheries production declined at

0.52% and 0.62% per annum with and without the inclusion of China, (Annex-1)

reflecting trends of the major capture fisheries nations. In contrast Indonesia, the

Philippines, and India showed substantial positive annual growth rates of 3.00, 4.55,

and 1.12% per annum respectively.

By 2007, world aquaculture production contributed 35.8% of world total

production. In summary there has been a significant shift from capture fisheries to

aquaculture production. For China, Viet Nam, India and the Philippines aquaculture

contributed 68.19%, 50.41%, 45.90%, and 36.02% of total production. In contrast

Indonesia aquaculture provided only 22.01% of its total production.

Focus group participants cited expensive feed prices (compared to Viet Nam or

Thailand) and poor aquaculture product differentiation as constraints to aquaculture

development in Indonesia. Demand for land for urban development has also

constrained aquaculture production increase in Indonesia. Currently 45,000 hectares

of national agricultural land (including fisheries) is converted annually to urban

development compared 12,600 and 8,255 ha year-1

during 1983-1988 and 1988-

1993 respectively.

The above situation is likely to result in a prioritization of aquaculture before

fisheries by both government officers and fisher and farmer groups. However, not

all aquaculture practices are environmentally sound (Box-2). Proper planning and

regulation is required, applying precautionary principles, if there is to be a policy

shift to aquaculture in Indonesia.

Box-2

Aquaculture

Certain aquaculture practices, e.g. cage culture of fin-fish depend

on low value (trash) fish as feed. This increases the demand for

low-value (trash) fish and encourages the use of non-selective and

destructive fishing gear to the detriment of the fishery resources.

________

Source: RFLP Program Document

9

3.3. Mismatch between administrative and fishing ground boundary

Administrative boundaries between Indonesia regions are only terrestrial. No

regional boundaries have been delineated in the sea. Kinseng (2006 in Adrianto,

2009) cites the following conflicts which have arisen from this situation:

“From 13 to 14 January 2006, several purse seine fishing boats from

Juwana, Central Java entered Balikpapan port in East Kalimantan after

catching fish in the waters around Makasar Strait. The fishermen sold their

catches in Balik Papan City. On 16 January 2006, traditional fishers from

Balikpapan attacked those purse-seiners because they thought the boats

from Juwana were disrupting their livelihood.

Kinseng (2006) gives this example as a case of class conflict between

modern and traditional fishers. Kinseng also determined that the class

conflict was not on the level of exploitation, but only on the level of

domination”.

Conflict intensity and frequency are likely to increase due to: (i) Increasing

population pressure; (ii) Decreasing resources; and (iii) Increased household needs

within the region. Thereafter conflicts like the Balikpapan conflict, will probably

occur more frequently with associated and increased rivalry and competition for

marine resources.

3.4. Conflict between utilization and conservation

Tomascik et al (1997) noted that one of the many challenges facing Indonesia

today is the reconciliation of development objectives and conservation aims in the

marine and coastal sector. While this did occur during the decentralization era, the

implementation of regional autonomy has resulted in coastal resources management

tending to be significantly more exploitation-oriented rather than conservation-

oriented, with massive resultant environmental damage (Rudyanto, 2004). In Nias

this is evidenced by the size of lobster captured by local fishermen declining (Box-

3).

A similar situation has arisen in the Arafura Sea, one traditional fishing ground

of East Nusa Tenggara fishers. Use of ‘fish-net’ (a legal term for a trawl net) has

endangered the sustainability of the fish resources to such an extent that a

moratorium on trawl utilization is urgently required (Solihin, 2009).

Box-3

Lobster Fishery in Nias

Lobster capture around Nias Island was spurred when a private

company opened a new air route from Medan to Gunung Sitoli,

Nias during post-tsunami reconstruction in 2005. During the

second year of airline operation, local lobster fishers reported that

lobster size was declining. “It is now hard to find a large lobster

within the sea around Nias,” said a local fisherman.

______

Source: Focus group discussion conducted by Tadjudin (2006)

10

3.5. Unequal profit margins and benefit inequity

Fishery sector profit margins vary greatly among the different stakeholders in

the value chain. Typically primary producers (both capture and aquaculture) usually

get about 10%, the secondary sector (processors of aquatic products) about 50%,

and the tertiary sector (marketing and distribution) about 30%. As a result any

improvements made to fish landing, processing and aquatic product trading infra-

structure will primarily give benefits to the secondary and tertiary sector rather than

to primary producers like fishers. In other words there are inequitable opportunities

for key stakeholders to benefit from capture fisheries and aquaculture, with the

primary producers like fishers being the most disadvantaged (Tadjudin, 2010a).

Thus graduating from the primary sector to the secondary and tertiary sectors

within fisheries may be one method of improving fisheries livelihoods. Other

opportunities may include promotion, branding and marketing of local products and

handicrafts including palm sugar and honey, and traditional textiles into high end

markets (Box-4).

Box-4

Traditional Textiles from Amarasi

Amarasi women, from Timor Island, are expert in making cloth

and textiles using traditional methods. They die cotton yarn with

natural colourings. A single bolt of cloth takes a month to weave

and it sells at 200,000-300,000 Indonesian Rupiah.

Following entrepreneurship training where they learned about

savings and marketing, the Amarasi women have increased their

productivity 50% and now produce three bolts of cloth in two

months.

As a result the Amarasi women now have a lucrative livelihood

which contributes significantly to household income.

________

Source: Lessons learnt from Inspirit.Inc (Bogor) action in

Amarasi

3.6. Bounded-rationality

Pragmatic fishers demonstrate bounded-rationality2 in response to fluctuating

seasonal income. Marine fishers in particular cannot fish all year with the peak

capture season running from February-September, while October-January is the

main off-season because of inclement weather. The exact period varies from one

region of Indonesia to another, though most fishers have four months off-season

annually. However the cash needs of fisher households are essentially constant all

year around, which results in an income deficit period on October-January and an

income surplus on February-September (Figure-1).

2 Individuals make decisions based upon the limited information available to them, the

limitations of their minds and the time available to decide.

11

Fishers anticipate the fish production cycle in a sub-rationale manner. During

the peak season, fishermen buy anything they want including luxury goods like

televisions, motorbikes, jewellery, etc., but they will often resell the luxury goods in

the off-season. They also often borrow from traditional money lenders called

punggawa in coastal areas and repay with monthly interest rates which are typically

around 10% (Tadjudin, 2009a).

Another kind of bounded-rationality is fishers’ perception on accidents and loss

of life at sea (Sverre, 1989). The main cause of accidents and loss of life in the

fishing industry is not only poorly designed, constructed or equipped vessels, but

inappropriate human behavior, sometimes compounded by error, negligence or

ignorance. In some cases, there is a simple lack of awareness of safety issues, and

fishing practices and seamanship may be poor. These behavioral traits, practices and

malpractices are sometimes regarded as facets of the fishers’ culture: “.... a high risk

of loss of life or injury has been accepted as a part of the ‘fishing-culture’. A

fisherman’s life should and had to be dangerous. This attitude has perhaps been one

of the major underestimated obstacles to improved safety and work environment in

fishing.” The above is highly relevant to the cultural profile of Indonesian fishers in

general.

3.7. Declining aquatic resources

Annual catch (marine and inland) per capture fisher declined from over 5 tonnes

fisher-1

year-1

in 1970 to about 3 tonnes fisher-1

year-1

in 2000 (Munro, 2010).

Munro noted that:

“The significance of this decline in average output per fisher has to be seen in the

context of the enormous technological developments that have taken place in the

J F M A M J J A S O N D

Figure-1

Marine Fishermen Production-Consumption Curve

(Tadjudin, 2009a)

PRODUCTION LINE

CONSUMPTION LINE

Off

Season

Peak Season

Off

Season

12

world’s capture fisheries during this period, including large-scale motorization of

traditional small-scale fisheries, the expansion of active fishing techniques such as

trawling and purse-seining, the introduction of increasingly sophisticated fish-

finding and navigation equipment, and the growing use of modern means of

communication. This technological progress has increased labour productivity in

many fisheries. However, at the aggregate global level, the resource constraint in

combination with widespread open-access conditions has prevented an increase in

average labour productivity in the world’s capture fisheries. On the contrary,

productivity has declined significantly, a decline caused by a shrinking resource

base and a growing number of fishers.”

The dynamics and the decline in aquatic resource availability are reflected in

turnover of fishery vessels and workers (Annex-2). The exodus of vessels over 30

GT indicates declining aquatic resources. Larger vessels are usually operated by

private commercial companies which are very sensitive to resource availability and

profit margin. In contrast, low resource availability may not be a ‘barrier to entry’

for small-scale fishers, who may fish under sub-optimal conditions for subsistence

purposes and as a livelihood of last resort.

Around 68,000 fisheries workers are exiting the marine and aquaculture

fisheries sector annually, with marine capture fisheries contributing 81% of the total

number of workers exiting from capture fisheries. As larger vessels are taken out of

service and their crews laid off, more small fishing vessels enter the fishery.

Rivalries among fishery resources users have arisen in marine capture fisheries.

16,500 and 35,000 aquaculture workers are exiting annually from freshwater

pond and paddy field culture systems respectively. These culture systems contribute

65% of aquaculture production. The fishery and urban development sectors are both

competing keenly for labour. However about 33,000 workers are entering marine

aquaculture annually.

Marine resources near East Nusa Tenggara are also declining. All of the fishery

management areas are almost fully exploited; except for small pelagics in FMA 713,

FMA 714, and FMA 718 that are considered to be at a moderate exploitation levels

(Table-1).

Table-1

Resources Status of Fishery Management Areas Around

East Nusa Tenggara

FMA Status of Fish Resources

Demersal Shrimp Small pelagics Large pelagic

FMA 573 F F F F

FMA 713 F O M UN

FMA 714 UN UN M M

FMA 718 F/O O M UN

Resource: MMAF (2009b)

Note: O = over exploited; F = fully exploited; M = moderate; UN = uncertain.

13

4 – Small Fishers Livelihood and Vulnerability

4.1. Livelihood

Previously a ‘livelihood’ meant nothing more than an ‘occupation’ or

‘employment’, or a way of making a living. More recently, the meaning of the term

has been expanded to encompass social, economic and other attributes.

Carey’s (1998) logical framework approach to sustainable livelihoods

demonstrates that livelihood outcomes result from interactions between livelihood

assets, vulnerability context, and institutions. Livelihood assets include human

(people, education, health, etc); natural (land, fish stock, bio-diversity, etc); financial

(savings, credit, etc); physical (infrastructure, consumer goods, etc); and social

(institutions, organizations, networks, kinships, etc). Livelihood outcomes are

varied and can include income, well-being, food security, reduced vulnerability, and

sustainable resource use.

4.2. Vulnerability

Vulnerability and adaptive capacity largely determine the likely impacts of

shocks, trends and seasonality on a household’s livelihood. Adaptive capacity is the

ability or capacity of a system to modify or change to cope with changes in actual or

expected stress of vulnerability context (FAO, 2007).

Sources of vulnerability stress include natural (climate change, tsunamis, etc.),

technical (vessel construction, navigation equipment, etc.), behavioral (perceptions

of fishers on safety, etc.), and institutional (inequitable distribution of catch-yields

between fishing crew and vessel owners, and limited access to alternative income

opportunities, etc.). Small fishers in East Nusa Tenggara are exposed to many of the

above vulnerability contexts and additionally East Nusa Tenggara is the most

vulnerable region in Indonesia for tsunamis, suffering six tsunamis between 1961

and 1992, i.e. one almost every five years (MMAF, 2009b).

4.3. Relevance to RFLP

RFLP will promote improved livelihoods by strengthening adaptive fisheries

capacity, including the promotion of co-management, improved post-harvest

practices, diversified income opportunities, and the facilitation of access to

microfinance services. Vulnerability will be reduced by provision of safety training

and equipment and knowledge sharing. This is further described below.

5 – Forthcoming Action

5.1. Fisheries co-management mechanisms

The prominent policy issues are: revision and strengthening of the legal framework;

capacity building and strengthening institutions involved in the implementation of

14

co-management mechanisms; and trans-boundaries fisheries involving Indonesia

and Timor-Leste.

Recommended forthcoming activities are:

a) Fisheries legislation. Especially, though not limited to small-scale fishers,

including:

An assessment of the current legal-framework to identify gaps and

shortfalls.

Revision, and drafting and approval of new laws and legislation as

needed to fill the identified gaps and shortfalls.

Mass awareness campaigns to make stakeholders aware of the

implications of, and requirements to meet new legislation.

b) Capacity building. Including needs assessment, module formulation,

training delivery, and conducting participatory workshops.

c) Strengthening local institutions.

d) Promoting an ecosystem based approach to fisheries.

e) Promoting bilateral collaboration on the management of trans-boundary

fishery stocks.

f) Collaborative and participatory monitoring and evaluation.

g) Promote collaboration between different regional authorities in order to

combat IUU fishing activities.

5.2. Measures to improve safety at sea and reduce vulnerability

Safety at sea is a priority area for all fishers including small-scale fishers.

Recommended policy activities include:

a) Institutionalization of an accident database.

b) Small-scale fishing vessel registration.

c) Enhancing accident preparedness in coastal communities.

d) Enhancing disaster preparedness in coastal communities.

5.3. Measures for improved quality of fishery products and market chains

The prominent issues are limited awareness on food safety and hygiene issues,

limited entrepreneurialship, poor fish handling, and poor access to market and the

need to promote greater involvement of the private sector and to use market forces

to promote better and sustainable post-harvest operating procedures beyond the life

of RFLP.

Recommended forthcoming policy actions include:

a) Promoting entrepreneurialship amongst fish handling, processing, and

marketing stakeholders.

b) Promoting public awareness on food safety issues.

c) Improving management of fish landing centers.

15

d) Promoting and improving fish processing and marketing operations.

e) Improving market information.

5.4. Diversified income opportunities for fisher families

The prominent issues are: under-employment of people in fisher communities, less

developed business and entrepreneurial capacity, limited market access and market

information. This program will include women and unemployed youth in particular,

and will focus on both the strengthening of existing livelihoods which are working

well and on the development of alternative income generating activities which may

or may not include a dependence on the fishery sector.

Recommended forthcoming policy actions include:

a) Preliminary assessment for the promotion of better livelihoods in coastal

communities.

b) Promoting entrepreneurship skills amongst stakeholder to facilitate

alternative livelihood development.

c) Promoting vocational training.

d) Piloting of appropriate alternative livelihoods.

e) Local government to link with private enterprises to promote alternative

income generating activities.

f) Seaweed culture success within the province should be replicated where

appropriate more widely throughout East Nusa Tenggara province.

5.5. Facilitated access to micro-finance services

Prominent issues are: limited availability of formal credit in fisher communities, the

perception of banks that fisher communities are risky investments, and a distrust of

households in formal banking mechanisms.

Recommended forthcoming activities are:

a) Promotion of formal banking support to finance fishers.

b) Development of fisher household capacity to manage economic ventures.

c) Promoting and improving the micro-finance capacities of fisher

organizations.

d) Promoting fisher access to commercial loans.

5.6. Promoting sharing of knowledge

PLEASE REFER TO “Policy Briefs: social capital and marine resources among

coastal communities in Eastern Indonesia. AIGRP-ANU 2010, Sec 10-11.

Isolated coastal fisher communities in particular need social creativity to innovate.

And innovation under the pressures of interaction between ecological complexity

and socio-economic uncertainty needs sharing of knowledge and lessons learned on

among other things better fisheries practices, alternative livelihoods, and

vulnerability reduction matters.

16

Recommended priority policies include:

a) Promoting the sharing of both indigenous and recent knowledge between

fisher communities and government staff. Article 6 of Fishery Law 31/2004

mandated that fisheries management (both capture and aquaculture) should

consider customary law and local wisdom as well as communities’

participation. There are at least three kinds of social capital which should be

taken into account: Firstly, local wisdom, such as sasi and petuanang that is

found in Maluku and is based on indigenous environmental knowledge and

awareness. (Nikijuluw, 1994). The practice of sasi entails a closed season

and a number of closed areas. At certain times villagers are not allowed to

fish in the waters bordering their village; this is generally taken to mean the

area that can be seen with the naked eye from land. While petuanang

governs the right to fish in certain areas; it often covers bays, lagoons,

submerged atolls, and underwater reefs. People from other villages may not

enter the petuanang; however, if they are permitted entry, the gear they use

must be of the same size and type as that employed by the local people.

Secondly, local practices that derive from modern management systems

such as gapoktan (cooperative among farmers group) and arisan (any kind

of collective saving developed by communities) such as found in Bungi and

Dufa-Dufa villages in North Maluku (Kasim et. al., 2010). Thirdly, lessons

learnt of any marine-based income generating activities within East Nusa

Tenggara provinces such as seaweed culture. These include:

Identification of social capital already existing in East Nusa Tenggara

or adjacent provinces having similar cultures.

Identification of to what extent this kind of social capital can be

utilized in coastal community empowerment.

Promoting proper measures to scale up such social capital into large-

scale economic practices within the province.

Promoting proper interaction amongst stakeholders.

b) Promoting inter-regional knowledge sharing. The benefit of inter-regional

knowledge sharing has been shown by the interaction between Sinjai and

local fishermen in Sendang Biru of East Java. Tuna fishing has become a

recent commonplace practice of Sendang Biru fishermen following

information exchange with Sinjai fishermen (Tadjudin, 2009b).

c) Promoting inter-sector knowledge sharing. Industry and urban development

stakeholders dispose of their pollutants and trash into streams. They need to

be made aware of the likely impact on the environment and on coastal fisher

communities in particular.

17

References

Adrianto, L. 2009. Social facets of fisheries co-management. In Hartoto, D.I., L.

Adrianto, D. Kalikoski, and T. Yunanda (Eds). Building capacity for

mainstreaming fisheries co-management in Indonesia: Course Book. FAO,

Rome and Directorate of Fisheries Resources of Indonesia, MMAF, Jakarta.

Adrianto, L. and D.I. Hartoto. 2009. Introduction to fisheries co-management. In

Hartoto, D.I., L. Adrianto, D. Kalikoski, and T. Yunanda (Eds). Building

capacity for mainstreaming fisheries co-management in Indonesia: Course

Book. FAO, Rome and Directorate of Fisheries Resources of Indonesia,

MMAF, Jakarta.

Carney, D. (1998) Sustainable rural livelihoods: What contribution can we make?

Implementing the sustainable rural livelihoods approach. Paper presented to

the DfID Natural Resource Advisers’ Conference. London: Department for

International Development.

Directorat of Coast and Ocean. 2009. Means of Adaptation and Mitigation of

Climate Change and Disaster at Coastal Areas and Small Islands. MMAF –

JICA. Jakarta.

FAO. 2003. Assessment of the World Food Security Situation. 29th Session of the

Committee on World Food Security, 12th

-16th

May 2003. Rome: FAO

FAO. 2004. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture (SOFIA), 2004. Part 1:

World review of fisheries and aquaculture, Fishers and fish farmers. Rome:

FAO.

FAO. 2005. Increasing the contribution of small-scale fisheries to poverty alleviaton

and food security. FAO Technical Guidelines for Responsible Fisheries. No.

10. FAO, Rome. 79 pp.

FAO. 2007. Building adaptive capacity to climate change: Policies to sustain

livelihoods and fisheries. New Directions in Fisheries. A Series of Policy

Briefs on Development Issues. No 08. Rome.

FAO. 2009. FAO Yearbook 2007: Fishery and Aquaculture Statistics. FAO, Rome.

Kasim, M., M.M. Richter, and S. Amin. 2010. Social capital and marine resources

among coastal communities in eastern Indonesia. Policy Briefs. Australia

Indonesia Governance Research Partnership, Crawford School of Economic

and Government, ANU College of Asia and the Pacific, The Australian

National University.

MMAF. 2009a. Indonesian Fisheries Statistics Index 2009. MMAF, Jakarta.

MMAF. 2009b. Indonesian Fishing Ports 2009. MMAF – JICA. Jakarta.

Munro, G.R. 2010. From drain to gain in capture fisheries rents: A synthesis study.

FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper No. 538. FAO, Rome.

Nikijuluw, V.P.H. 1994. Indigenous Fisheries Resources Management in the

Maluku Islands. Indigenous Development Monitor 2 (2). CIRAN/Nuffic.

18

Rudyanto, A. 2004. Management Framework for Coastal and Marine Resources.

Paper presented in National Socialization for MFCDP Program, 22

September 2004. (in Bahasa).

Satria, A. and Y. Matsuda. 2004. Decentralization of fisheries management in

Indonesia. Marine Policy 28: 437-450.

Sverre, J.E. 1989. Accidents in the Norwegian fishing fleet: preventive measures

and resources in the event of man overboard. In: International Symposium

on Safety and Working Conditions aboard Fishing Vessels, Proceedings,

p.39. Rimouski, Canada, Université du Québec à Rimouski.

Tadjudin, D. 2009a. “Punggawa”: (Indigenous Money Lender in Coastal Region).

Power point presented in National Meeting of ‘Punggawa’, Jakarta 27 April

2009. Ministry of Marine Affair and Fishery. (in Bahasa).

Tadjudin, D. 2009b. Opportunity Viewer from Sendang Biru. (in Bahasa).

www.djuhendi70.wordpress.com.

Tadjudin, D. 2010a. Why Marine Socio-preneurship? Power point presented in

staffs’ workshop of Directorate Business and Investment, Bogor March

2010. MMAF.

Tadjudin, D. 2010b. Optimalize KKMB (Bank Partner in Finance Consultant).

Power point presented in fishermen financing workshop held by Directorate

General of Capture Fishery, MMAF in Yogyakarta.

Tomascik, T., A.J. Mah, A. Nontji, and M.K. Moosa. 1997. The Ecology of the

Indonesia Seas. EMDI and Periplus, Singapore.

Solihin, A. 2009. Need to Do Moratorium at Arafura Sea. “Sinar Harapan”, 6

January 2009.

(http://purbayanto.com/?pilih=news&mod=yes&aksi=lihat&id=21)

19

Annexes

Annex-1

Annual Growth Rate of Fish Production Among Ten Leading Countries 2000-2007

Description Production (ton) Annual

Growth (%) 2000 2007

A. Capture Fishery:

1. China 14,648,606 14,659,036 0.01

2. Peru 10,657,265 7,210,544 -4.62

3. Indonesia 4,080,847 4,936,629 3.00

4. USA 4,717,638 4,767,596 0.15

5. Japan 5,054,799 4,211,201 -2.38

6. India 3,666,427 3.953,476 1.12

7. Chile 4,300,218 3,806,085 -1.64

8. Russian Fed 3,973,535 3,454,214 -1.87

9. Philippines 1,896,132 2,499,634 4.55

10. Thailand 2,997,124 2,468,784 -2.52

World Including China 93,469,272 90,063,851 -0.52

World Excluding China 78,820,666 75,404,815 -0.62

B. Aquaculture Fishery:

1. China 21,522,095 31,420,275 6.57

2. India 1,942,204 3,354,754 10.39

3. Viet Nam 498,517 2,156,500 47.51

4. Indonesia 788,500 1,392,904 10.95

5. Thailand 738,155 1,390,031 12.62

6. Bangladesh 657,120 945,812 6.28

7. Norway 491,329 839,190 10.11

8. Chile 391,587 829,842 15.99

9. Japan 762,824 765,846 0.06

10. Philippines 393,863 709,715 11.46

World Including China 32,415,750 50,329,007 7.89

World Excluding China 10,893,655 18,908,732 10.51

Source: FAO (2009)

Note: Production of fish, crustaceans, molluscs, etc.

20

Annex-2

Turnover of Indonesia Fishery Workers and Vessels, 2002-2007

Description 2002 2007 Turn over

(unit/year)

A. Fishery Worker

1. Capture 3,046,473 2,755,794 -58,136

- Marine 2,572,042 2,231,967 -68,015

- Inland 474,431 523,827 9,879

2. Aquaculture 2,270,164 2,344,183 14,804

- Marine 65,624 232,274 33,330

- Inland 2,204,540 2,111,909 -18,526

Brackish-water pond 352,875 469,100 23,245

Fresh-water Pond 1,248,903 1,166,138 -16,553

Cage 55,210 72,113 3,381

Floating Net 8,700 41,335 6,527

Paddy field 538,852 363,223 -35,126

B. Fishery Vessels

1. Marine 460,298 590,314 26,003

- Non-power boat 219,079 241,889 4,562

- Outboard motor 130,185 185,509 11,065

- Inboard motor 111,034 162,916 10,376

< 5 GT 74,292 114,273 7,996

5-10 GT 20,208 30,617 2,082

10-20 GT 5,866 8,194 466

20-30 GT 3,382 5,345 393

30-50 GT 2,685 913 -354

50-100 GT 2,430 1,832 -120

100-200 GT 1,612 1,322 -58

> 200 GT 559 420 -28

2. Inland 134,670 198,534 12,773

- Non-power boat 120,522 159,781 7,852

- Outboard motor 11,768 37,747 5,196

- Inboard motor 2,380 1,006 -275

Source: Annex-4, Annex-5

21

Annex-3

World Fish Production

Description Share in world total (%) Average annual rate of growth (%)

1980 1990 2000 2006 2007 80-90 90-00 00-06 00-07

1. Production 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 3.1 2.6 1.4 1.6

- Inland waters 10.7 14.8 22.1 28.1 29.2 6.6 6.8 5.5 5.7

- Marine waters 89.3 85.2 77.9 71.9 70.8 2.6 1.6 0.1 0.2

2. Aquaculture 6.5 13.4 25.8 34.5 35.8 10.8 9.5 6.5 6.5

- Inland waters 3.6 8.3 15.3 20.9 22.1 12.1 9.1 6.8 7.0

- Marine waters 3.0 5.1 10.4 13.6 13.8 8.9 10.1 6.0 5.7

3. Capture 93.5 86.6 74.2 65.5 64.2 2.3 1.0 -0.7 -0.5

- Inland waters 7.1 6.6 6.8 7.1 7.1 2.4 2.9 2.2 2.3

- Marine waters 86.4 80.0 67.4 58.4 58.4 2.3 0.8 -1.0 -0.8

Source: FAO (2009)

22

Annex-4

Number of Indonesia Fisheries Worker (person)

Description Year Average

annual

growth (%) 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

1. Capture Fisheries 3,046,473 3,857,597 2,935,289 2,590,364 2,700,174 2,755,794 -1.91

- Marine 2,572,042 3,311,821 2,346,782 2,057,986 2,203,412 2,231,967 -2.64

- Inland 474,431 545,776 588,507 532,378 496,762 523,827 2.08

2. Aquaculture Fisheries 2,270,164 2,384,208 2,459,355 2,506,614 2,275,307 2,344,183 0.65

- Marine 65,624 67,735 81,377 101,400 134,419 232,274 50.79

- Inland 2,204,540 2,316,473 2,377,978 2,405,214 2,140,888 2,111,909 -0.84

Brackish-water pond 352,875 376,835 440,545 445,643 482,161 469,100 6.59

Fresh-water pond 1,248,903 1,310,451 1,131,078 1,162,590 1,144,557 1,166,138 -1.33

Cage 55,210 60,741 58,565 68,949 53,491 72,113 6.12

Floating cage net 8,700 18,446 51,439 52,344 38,907 41,335 75.02

Paddy field 538,852 550,000 696,351 675,688 421,772 363,223 -6.52

Source: MMAF (2009)

23

Annex-5

Number of Vessel Used in Captured Fisheries in Indonesia

Description Year Average

annual

growth (%) 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

1. Marine Fisheries 460,298 528,717 549,100 555,581 590,317 590,314 5.65

- Non-power boat 219,079 250,469 256,830 244,471 249,955 241,889 2.08

- Out-board motor 130,185 158,411 165,337 165,314 185,983 185,509 8.50

- In-boat motor 111,034 119,837 126,933 145,796 154,379 162,916 9.35

< 5 GT 74,292 79,218 90,148 102,456 106,609 114,273 10.76

5-10 GT 20,208 24,358 22,917 26,841 29,899 30,617 10.30

10-20 GT 5,866 5,764 5,952 6,968 8,190 8,194 7.94

20-30 GT 3,382 3,131 3,598 4,553 5,037 5,345 11.61

30-50 GT 2,685 2,388 800 1,092 970 913 -13.20

50-100 GT 2,430 2,698 1,740 2,160 1,926 1,832 -4.92

100-200 GT 1,612 1,731 1,342 1,403 1,381 1,322 -3.60

> 200 GT 559 599 436 323 367 420 -4.97

2. Inland Fisheries 134,670 173,517 180,582 198,400 193,308 198,534 9.48

- Non-power boat 120,522 154,907 145,529 172,322 163,735 159,781 6.51

- Out-board motor 11,768 17,677 33,599 23,844 27,212 37,747 44.15

- In-boat motor 2,380 933 1,454 2,234 2,361 1,006 -11.55

Source: MMAF (2009)