Chapter 8
Comparison of Equity, Efficiency and Sustainability in
Sasi and Non-Sasi Villages of Central Maluku
8.1 Performance of Marine Management as Perceived by Sasi and Non-Sasi Fishers
In theory, sasi rules that restrict access and limit harvest periods have the potential to provide
long-term ecological as well as related economic benefits. In a few cases, recently revived or
augmented sasi rules are explicitly meant to conserve or protect marine and coastal resources (for
instance, in the Ihamahu and Haruku villages). In addition, there may be benefits in terms of
equity and social harmony. Marine resources under sasi may be harvested as communal crops
and distributed equitably among the population (for example, the lompa fish harvest at Haruku).
Marine resources may also be sold to provide funds for infrastructure and projects that benefit
the whole community (as in Nolloth with the Trochus harvest). It would also seem logical that a
local institution would be more accessible and responsive to local needs than a centralized
bureaucracy, and one can argue that sasi is relatively efficient as it does not rely on expensive state
infrastructure and bureaucracy. But can these potential benefits be proven to exist?
To evaluate the performance of sasi, a method was used by which the perceptions of fishers on issues
related to social and biological sustainability and the equity and efficiency of fisheries management in
their villages could be quantified (Pomeroy et al. 1996). Each of the 508 respondents provided
information on current conditions, changes through time (past 15 years) and future expectations for
each of the indicators. For comparative purposes, the responses were divided into two groups: those
from fishers in marine sasi villages and those from fishers in villages lacking the sasi institution.
8.2 Equity Indicators
Indicators used to measure equity were: 1) the role of fishers in management, 2) the individual
access of fishers to marine resources, 3) fair distribution of fishing gears, and 4) economic
equality among villagers. A definition for each indicator is given in Table 2.6. Significant
differences between sasi and non-sasi villages (for statistical methods see Section 2.3.3) are
represented in Tables 8.1 and 8.2. Comparisons were made between the average condition in
the past in sasi and non-sasi sites, between past and present conditions in each type of village,
and between average change through time in sasi and non-sasi villages (Table 8.1). The same
series of comparisons was made for present and future conditions (Table 8.2).
The role of fishers in management
There were no significant differences between sasi and non-sasi fishers in terms of average current
and past levels of the first three indicators of equity, i.e., the role of fishers in fisheries
management, access of fishers to marine resources, and fair distribution of fishing gears (Table
8.1). Both types of fishers recorded a static level of involvement in management (Table 8.1) i.e.,
their role had not changed over the past 15 years. Perceptions of fishers from any one village
regarding their involvement in management were usually mixed, as if involvement depended
on factors other than being involved in the fishery. A few comments indicated that wealthier,
commercial fishers had more influence than artisanal fishers but others simply said that some
people’s ideas were better than others and were listened to, or not, depending on their merit.
Comparison of Equity, Efficiency and Sustainability in Sasi and Non-Sasi Villages of Central Maluku 81