The differences in average marine management score for villages, grouped by presence or
absence of sasi, geographical location, population size and religion were determined
statistically using analysis of variance (SPSS 1997).
Table 2.5. Attributes used to quantify the level of marine resource management rules existing
(but not necessarily effectively enforced) in both sasi and non-sasi villages.
Attribute |
Indicator |
Reply |
Score |
Notes |
Gear |
Is there any type of |
No |
0 |
Usually a local rule |
Yes |
1 | |||
Other |
Is there any other |
No |
0 | |
Yes |
1 | |||
Access |
Is there an area where |
No |
0 | |
Yes |
1 | |||
Species |
How many types of |
None |
0 |
corals=1 reef (food) fish=1 |
Yes |
1-7 | |||
Enforcement |
Is restricted access |
No |
0 | |
Yes |
1 | |||
Maximum score possible score |
11 |
2.3 Performance Analysis of Sasi
2.3.1 Objectives
The purpose of this survey was to evaluate performance of the sasi institution over the entire
research area in terms of four standard criteria: equity, efficiency, social sustainability and
biological sustainability. Some socio-economic data were recorded to assess the average
economic status of each fishing community.
Part of the survey questionnaire dealt with the ethnic background of respondents. Cultural
homogeneity may be important to the success of traditional management systems. Therefore
the material was useful to test the hypothesis that sasi would be more effective in relatively
homogeneous villages.
The objective of direct biological surveys was to determine whether there were quantifiable
differences in the coral reef cover and the incidence of selected species between areas managed
sasi and areas with no access restriction. Biological surveys were carried out in and beside
the marine territories of four of the case study villages.
Methods 17