In Hulaliu, conflicts between the village head and kewang, and, in particular, problems with
accountability for the use of resource rents in the past, lie at the root of the decline of sasi. The
current leader is trying to revitalize sasi but his position is unstable because he lacks the
support of a large part of the village population. The revitalization process is thereby
threatened. In Tuhaha, there have been problems in the past between formal and traditional
authorities. There is also a tendency to revitalize sasi, but the relationship between the village
government and traditional authorities first needs to be restored. The village government,
which is only partly functional, has to be reorganized before a kewang can be installed.
In Toisapu-Hutumuri and Seri, sasi is lost and fisheries management is minimal or lacking.
Traditional village structures are, to a large extent, replaced by formal structures at the desa
level, although less so at the dusun (sub-village) level. Artisanal fishers have to compete directly
with large-scale fishers. Both villages are located on Ambon and close to regional markets
and hence are more in contact with modernization and urban processes.
In the remainder of this chapter, we describe the various elements of sasi and provide an
analysis of how sasi functions and persists under different conditions.
17.5.1 Objective of sasi
The general objective of sasi, as articulated by villagers, is to protect resources from theft and
destruction. Theft is prevented through active monitoring and enforcement. To maximize
yields, immature shellfish and fish are protected, and to ensure sustainable yields, there are
access and harvest restrictions. In Nolloth for example, there are lengthy closed seasons and
a minimum legal size for top shells (Trochus niloticus). In Haruku, destructive and overly
efficient gear types are banned. Thus in these cases, sasi does have a conservation objective.
In addition, Haruku kewang leaders expressly identify the equitable distribution of fish,
particularly the support of village poor, to be an objective of their revitalized sasi institution.
In a 1995 study, von Benda-Beckman et al. wrote: “Throughout history the objectives of sasi
have changed from limiting access and the regulation of power, to defining social conduct
and the increase of economic benefits.” The use of sasi for economic purposes, which has a
long history in Maluku (von Benda Beckmann et al. 1995), is also illustrated by Nolloth. Top
shells were formerly important as a food source. When in the 1960s the shells became
commercially interesting, the village government of Nolloth replaced the communal harvest
with a system that allowed the village government to auction the harvest rights. This was to
the dismay of some villagers who saw their personal direct benefits decrease.
A shift from communal harvests to the sale of marine harvest rights occurs in most villages
where sasi is revitalized by a local government with commercial interests. Although in most
villages the principle of sasi is valued and sasi is perceived as a “good thing”, a majority of
fishers we interviewed object to the auctioning of marine sasi harvest rights, especially to
outsiders. Both Tuhaha and Hulaliu village heads plan to auction the harvest rights and use
sasi revenues for village development. Yet, fishers declared that they would respect sasi only
if they would get direct benefits from a communal harvest. Villagers may be kept satisfied
with village development projects, but there may also be problems because village income
and expenditures are not transparent. For example, at one point in the 1980s, when profits
appeared to be being used for the village head’s personal benefit rather than the public good,
sasi in Nolloth nearly broke down.
248 An Institutional Analysis of Sasi Laut in Maluku, Indonesia