Setting priorities is invariably a difficult task. Nor is setting targets any easier ? The same can be said for defining goals and objectives. The sectoral plans for fisheries as found in the different past five year plans similarly have such deficiencies or shortcomings. In these sectoral plans, every proposed activity seems to be a priority or will receive high priority or special attention/emphasis. There is thus no semblance of order in a tight or constrained budget situation such as found in the country.
A real need to rank all these important “high priority or special attention” items in some order to minimise implementation confusion thus clearly exists. Planners and policy-makers have to discipline themselves in keeping the number and size of projects to a manageable portfolio.
Along this line, there is also another real need to resolve from the outset problems related to inconsistent and conflicting objectives and targets of the sectoral plan between and among such goals as increase fish production for domestic consumption and export to earn foreign exchange or increase employment or improve the socioeconomic welfare of the fishing and fish farming communities (read raise standards of living) or improve fisheries conservation. In one way or another and to different degrees, these objectives are not entirely compatible with one and another.
Trade-offs and sacrifices between and among the different goals and objectives have to be clearly resolved to arrive at a well-conceived and easy to implement plan.
A development plan is a government statement which presents and describes:
aa) the government's perspective on how economic growth can be stimulated and sustained in nation-building,
bb) enabling government policies and legislations to underpin the attainment of the stated goals and targets,
cc) public expenditures and investments to provide the necessary services and amenities to the population and how they are mobilised,
dd) projects and other activities to increase national output (measured as national income, gross national product [GNP] and gross domestic product [GDP]) for domestic consumption and exports to earn foreign exchange, create employment and income-generating opportunities for the population in improving its quality of life,
ee) mobilisation, allocation, combination and transformation of national resources and revenues and frequently external resources (loans and grants) as well to pay for such expenditures and investments to produce the goods and services needed, and
ff) appropriate incentives (pecuniary and non-pecuniary) and fiscal and monetary policies (tax holiday, foreign exchange control and repatriation of income) to attract investments from the domestic and foreign private sector.
The formulation of a development plan for the fisheries sector is not a task to be taken lightly. It commits and spends scarce national resources and revenues on capital investments which would create additional production capacity to stimulate economic growth. The nation and the people depend on it. They know that properly conceived and implemented, the plan can bring prosperity and improved standards of living for them. The plan brings together in one place well thought-out and clear national need and policy statement, objectives and targets, development strategies, available resources in terms of budgetary allocations, and lastly implementation procedure of the government governing fisheries development and management within the broad national economic policy context.
Now that the poldered complexes and flood mitigation structures and measures are in place, investors and producers can begin to plan and invest in “durable” factors of production, structures, facilities and equipments. Being a poor country with predominantly limited-resource producers and rural people, government incentives and assistance are clearly needed to attract and accelerate the levels and rates of such investments. In this regard, fisheries investment planning should go hand in hand with fisheries sectoral planning and management.
Because of the present lack of suitable investments in the fisheries sector, among others (especially from the local private sector), employment opportunities are virtually non-existent in the rural areas and to some extent in the urban sector too. Unemployment and under-employment are thus widespread. Unemployment involving involuntary unemployment is not healthy as it wastes human resources. Employment or income-generating opportunities provide the people with the means of livelihood, to earn a living to improve living standards.
Investments, especially long-term investments are therefore critical in stimulating the economy. So far, public expenditures in the form of fixed-term projects have been the source of limited employment in the rural areas. They are largely financed through external assistance. Greater investments and public expenditures need to be ploughed into the rural economy to stimulate business activities and start the multiplier effect of such investments.
For the next five-year plan, the Government of Bangladesh has earmarked Tk750 crore (US$217 million) to be invested from the public sector and another Tk900 crore (US$261 million) is expected from the private sector. The latter sum is more than twice the amount of expected private sector investments during the Second and Third Five-Year Plans (SFYP and TFYP).
Although no actual figures are available, preliminary estimates showed that the realised amount of the planned SFYP and TFYP private sector investments fell short of the projected allocation. Bangladesh private sector has (rightly or wrongly) been cautious in investing large sums of money in risky rural enterprises or ventures such as commonly found in the fisheries sector. This situation is, however slowly changing since the poldered complexes are now largely completed. As a result, risks associated with rising water levels are now more manageable.
As for the public expenditures for fisheries, it is now almost a foregone conclusion that such allocations have to be brought forward each year in terms of spillover projects. For the last plan, about Tk210 crore out of Tk350 are spillover projects. These have to be continued and thus will deprive the new plan of fresh initiatives and new ideas.
A critical review of the potentials and opportunities for and constraints to expanded fisheries production would provide both the public and private sectors with the basic ideas for future investments in fisheries. With such an overview of the sector, the government can begin to attract both domestic and foreign investments into fisheries.
Along this line, it is strongly recommended that the government prepare different INVESTMENT PROFILE for the various possible fisheries investment opportunities available in the country. These should then be widely distributed. To this end, the discussion and description of the different types of fisheries which have been elaborated upon in this analysis will provide the basic information for such an exercise.
Here, it should be reiterated and impressed upon the potential investor that there are presently no managed fisheries in the different poldered complexes found in the country. In other words, although fisheries projects are planned by the government, it is found that both capture and culture fisheries are largely carried out on a piecemeal basis. In many ways, they are basically subsistence fisheries.
With a few exceptions like trawl fisheries, there are no really commercial operations. This represents tremendous opportunities for investors to develop the fisheries on a sound business footing. Local and foreign investors should be provided with all the necessary data and information on the potentials, nature, prospects, opportunities, technology packages, technical and economic feasibility, estimated returns on investments and profitability, existing and potential problems and constraints of the Bangladesh fisheries industry. In short, what the FISHERIES INVESTMENT PROFILES referred to above should contain.
At present, not enough is done or being done to attract these potential investors. This is because there is a dearth of information on Bangladesh fisheries, in particular the capital investment requirements of the different fisheries ventures, their costs of production, input availability and prices, output prices and demand for fisheries products, local and foreign market opportunities, joint-venture policy, profitability as well as tax structure and incentives, fiscal policy on repatriation of funds and foreign exchange. Without such information, it is difficult to attract investors.
If such information is available, they are either out-of-date and need to be revised or they are scattered in different sources within the government bureaucracy or semi- or quasi-government agencies. Further, institutions of higher learning are another valuable source of information, especially from well-researched theses and disertations.
Along this line, a small beginning has been made by this Project (UNDP/FAO Project on Institutional Strengthening in the Fisheries Sector) to develop a Management Information System (MIS) and Database for Fisheries Planning. See UNDP/FAO Project BGD/87/045 Field Document No 08 for details).
It is similarly recommended that the government compile such information into a fisheries investment opportunity package for distribution locally and abroad. Knowledge-intensive production and marketing systems would go a long way in not only attracting the needed investments but also ensuring that the industry grows and prospers on a stable, sustainable and equitable basis.
It is of utmost national importance that the government clarifies from the beginning the policy orientation of its fisheries sectoral planning and development objectives, thrust and direction. A balance between export-oriented fisheries to earn the much needed foreign exchange and production of fish for domestic consumption and fish self-sufficiency must be made. This will minimise counter-productive measures and programmes being planned by the different institutions through their projects.
Discussions with fisheries officials belonging to the different government institutions show that there is considerable frustrations and feelings of hopelessness because programmes are not only not well-coordinated, some are even working at cross-purposes. There is very little consultation taking place, let alone working closely together.
A good case in point is the cooperation and coordination between the Ministry of Irrigation, Water Development and Drainage on the one hand and the Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock on the other. Up until 1989, there is no active and close working relationship between the two government agencies in fully harnessing and utilising the vast water resources managed by the Ministry of Irrigation, Water Development and Drainage for fish production. It was only until this year when a Memorandum of Understanding between the two agencies was signed.
Until last year, the Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock has not been directly involved in the planning on the use of such waters, let alone direct access to such waters. There are more than 200 such water development projects involving either FCDI or FCD systems. It is minimally consulted and in fact has to lease such waters for their work. A review of the budget of the Ministry of Irrigation, Water Development and Drainage will show that fisheries is only allocated a small percentage of its total budget, estimated at about 4.25 %.
