Table 11.3. Results of the performance analysis in Haruku. n=30 heads of fishing households. ns =trend
not significant; *=p<0.05, **=p<0.01, ***=p<0.001.
|
Indicator |
Average |
Average change |
Average future | ||
|
Equity | |||||
|
1. Role of fishers in management |
6.07 |
0.5333ns |
+5% |
0.5333* |
+5% |
|
2. Access to marine resources |
7.50 |
-1.2000*** |
-12% |
-0.6667*** |
-7% |
|
3. Fair distribution of fishing gears |
7.00 |
1.8333*** |
+18% |
0.4000ns |
+4% |
|
4. Economic equality |
6.13 |
-1.0333* |
-10% |
-0.7667** |
-8% |
|
Efficiency | |||||
|
5. Communal decision-making |
6.73 |
-0.1000ns |
-1% |
-0.0333ns |
-0,3% |
|
6. Ease of entry into the fishery |
7.07 |
-1.6333*** |
-16% |
-1.1333*** |
-11% |
|
7. Control over access to fishery |
7.47 |
1.2333** |
+12% |
-0.1000ns |
-1% |
|
8. Compliance with fishery rules |
6.73 |
-1.1000* |
-11% |
-0.5667* |
-6% |
|
Social Sustainability | |||||
|
9. Family well-being |
6.47 |
0.4333ns |
+4% |
0.7000* |
+7% |
|
10. Income |
6.00 |
-1.1333* |
-11% |
-0.2000ns |
-2% |
|
11. Tradition of collective action |
6.30 |
-1.8333*** |
-18% |
-0.9000*** |
-9% |
|
12. Discussion of village issues |
6.40 |
-1.5667*** |
-16% |
-0.1000ns |
-1% |
|
13. Community harmony |
5.73 |
-2.4000*** |
-24% |
-0.9333** |
-9% |
|
Biological sustainability | |||||
|
14. Marine resource health |
6.00 |
-2.6000*** |
-26% |
-1.4333*** |
-14% |
|
15. Fish catch |
5.73 |
-3.0333*** |
-30% |
-1.7333*** |
-17% |
4. Income distribution
On an average, the level of economic equality is perceived to have declined and is expected to
decline significantly in the future. The reasons for the decline are: 1) because of increasing
opportunism, and 2) because some people simply work harder than others. On the other
hand, some people reported that the drop in clove prices has resulted in more equality among
the villagers, because the very rich have “dropped” into the middle class. Also, the fact that
generally people have to work harder and others are supported by government programs,
has resulted in more equality.
11.8.2 Efficiency
5. Communal decision-making
Communal decision-making is seen as stable. The style of decision-making in the village was
seen by 62% as being a process of common or majority agreement. The rest thought that the
village head, with the village government staff, makes the decisions. In either case, the process
is seen to be legitimate. However, when asked directly about their involvement, nearly all
respondents (97%) agreed that all stakeholders should participate in decision-making,
especially now that people have become more educated.
Seventy-three percent felt that local groups do have a role in decision-making, whereas an
even larger number (83%) was convinced that outsiders had no involvement at all. Outsiders
are mostly Butonese fishermen.
Desa Haruku and Sameth, Haruku Island 137