7. PROJECT PLANNING - THE IDENTIFICATION STAGE

Sound planning of integrated development projects in fishing communities should involve two main stages. The first, dealt with in this Chapter, is the identification of suitable locations for the establishment of the CFCs and FDU. The second is the preparatory planning phase.

7.1 Two scenarios

The first stage may develop according to one of the two options:

the responsibility for the identification of the project sites lies with expatriate experts or consultants sent by a donor or an international technical assistance agency (e.g., FAO or UNDP;
the project and its prospective sites are identified by national authorities, sometimes upon a request from provincial, tribal or community leaders or local associations.

7.2 A few hints for expatriate experts on identifying potential CFC sites

Expatriate experts should bear in mind that the national and provincial fishery authorities will in most cases know of villages and communities which could benefit from an integrated development programme along the lines suggested above and can provide advice as to their location and the logistic and other problems involved with the project identification and planning efforts. The authorities also may have their own political, social and economic preferences as to the area or province where the programme should first be demonstrated or implemented.

Before rushing into the field, the expatriate experts should also discuss their mission with more government departments and institutions other than just the fisheries department. Thus, they can obtain a better understanding of the policies and programmes for various areas which may fit in with and complement an integrated development programme in fishing communities or, conversely, may be detrimental to such programmes. It is advisable to have discussions also with the related non-government private and public interests such as fish dealers and distributors, marketing organizations, manufacturers, suppliers and their agents, banks, religious leaders and others, to gauge their interest and possible support to the proposed programme.

It is of utmost importance that the expatriate experts from an early stage are accompanied by knowledgeable and motivated national counterparts who should participate actively in the preliminary discussions and, obviously, in all field activities.

The experts selected for the identification stage should have considerable knowledge of the general area and development experience. They must be able to realistically evaluate local situations and “detect” conditions both favourable and adverse to the programme.

7.3 Main objectives of the identification stage

The following five objectives should be attained during this stage:

establishing the support and commitment of the authorities;
identification of groups of communities interested in and suitable for the development of CFCs and the establishment of an FDU;
establishing the support within the community and preliminary identification of the main participating groups within the communities;
information on the prevailing production and market conditions and on the facilities, services and other infrastructure already existing in the identified communities, and on special problems and constraints; a preliminary list of what may be required to overcome the existing limitations and of the main components of the prospective CFCs;
preparing the ground for the fielding of the project's preparatory planning team and listing the logistic and other requirements.

During the preliminary site survey the team, besides reporting on the local and other conditions for the establishment of a CFC/FDU complex, should also be able to tentatively suggest alternatives for the type and scale of the potential development at each CFC location.

7.4 Project identification by national authorities

In many countries the identification stage can be performed in full or in part by national experts. They would, in many cases, know very well where to look for suitable sites for the project. It would be best if one or more members of the identification team come from the prospective project area, speak the local language or are otherwise acquainted with the local conditions. The same can be said about the national counterparts to expatriate experts.

7.5 The work and composition of the identification team

Having established the potential area or even specific localities for the CFC/FDU complex, the national fisheries authorities should instruct the team to investigate in more detail the problems, needs and opportunities in the fishing communities concerned in view of the general concept of the integrated development programme. This will involve, first of all, travelling in the field to the prospective sites, and staying there as long as necessary. Therefore, a pre-condition to successful conclusion of the mission consists in adequate logistic arrangements which would include transportation, accommodation in the field and local contacts.

The identification team has an important role to play, for its analysis, judgement and recommendations will form the foundation of the whole development programme. The team must acquire an understanding of the problems and needs of all sectors of the communities it is investigating. While it must be sympathetic to the needs and aspirations of the local people, it must by all means avoid wishful thinking, taking a realistic view of what can or cannot be done. In reaching its conclusions it should give particular importance to what the local people themselves are prepared to contribute to the programme and, indeed, this may be the determining factor in deciding where the proposed CFC's might be established.

To be mobile and agile, the team should be small. It certainly should include a specialist in integrated small-scale fisheries development who may serve as team leader; a field fishery officer with a good knowledge of the areas to be visited and, possibly, a community development specialist. The team leader should be a permanent member of the team. He would thus visit all the locations under investigation; in this way he will be able to judge the respective advantages and disadvantages of one location over another. this will ensure consistency and coherence in the analysis of the findings and in the presentation of the final report and proposals. Preferably, the other team members should also be assigned full-time to the team. When a different specialist is required to assess a local situation, such as, e.g., a civil engineer, masterfisherman, fish-processing expert, health officer, or others, such specialist could either replace an existing team member as occasion demands or be added to the team. Hence, while the duration of the whole mission may be, for example, two months, a particular specialist may be called in for, say, 2–3 weeks to assess the best site for a small fishing harbour or landing beach, or the level of post-harvest losses.

The team's task being mainly fact finding, it will not engage in detailed planning but rather in filling in gaps in the already available information. A period of one or two months in the field should be generally sufficient for such a team to collect the information. For each possible location this would normally include the following:

the number of fishermen in the community and the number and types of their boats and gear; their fishing methods;
general information on the community: population, economy and employment other than fishries, organization and institutions, etc.;
levels of fish production, seasonal fluctuations, etc.;
fish handling, processing, distribution and marketing patterns;
services, facilities and equipment available to fishermen, fish processors, distributors, etc.;
the operational problems and technological needs relevant to (a), (c), (d) and (e);
other, especially social needs of the community, e.g., water, roads, health services, educational facilities, etc.;
the attitudes, values and interests of the local people and the degree of motivation and mobility indicated by them;
the general educational, technological, economic and social levels in the community and the availability and character of local leadership.

This is not an exhaustive list. An experienced team would know what sort of information it should concentrate on and how to collect it.

7.6 Annotated check list and guide for situation assessment

Less experienced leaders and members of both project identification and preparatory planning teams, may find it useful to consult the following annotated check list. It may assist them in the assessment of local situations and in the inventory of the required information. The check list may also help in the organization and formulation of reports. The list is by no means complete and the users should add items and sub-items as appropriate, and, if necessary, cover some aspects in much greater depth than indicated.


A.	FISHERY RESOURCES:
	A.1	Under-exploited	- initial development effort may be directed at fishing (capture) technology;
	A.2	Reasonably exploited	- initial development effort would be directed at post-harvest activities (fish handling, processing, transportation, marketing, etc.);
	A.3	Over-exploited	- initial development effort would be as for A.2 which, however, ought to be combined with resource management schemes and creation of new employment opportunities away from capture fisheries; In the case of A.2 and A.3, one should bear in mind the possibility that additional resources exist in the area, but are not accessible to the fishermen because of inadequate technology (vessels, gear and methods). Here, exploratory fishing may be indicated, followed by a feasibility study to establish the overall potential of the resources and the prospective benefit to the community from expansion of fishing over these resources (additional species, offshore fishing grounds, etc.);
	A.4	Unknown	- catch rates estimate by expert or, even, a special fishing survey may be necessary;
B.	HUMAN RESOURCES
	B.1	Abundant and unskilled	- training and extension programmes may be indicated where needed for concrete projects;
	B.2	Abundant and skilled	- access to credit may spur development;
	B.3	Lacking because ….
		B.3.1 -		of preferred opportunities away from the fishery:
			B.3.1.1	- locally (in or near the community);
			B.3.1.2	- elsewhere, e.g., in an attractive industry or in big cities;
		B.3.2 -		the area does not encourage habitation (e.g., for lack of water, hard climate, isolation, etc.);
		In cases of B.3.1.1 and B.3.1.2, presence of fishery resources may not be enough to attract manpower or prevent emigration. Access to credit, infrastructure development (roads, transport, communications, water supply, etc.), may improve the conditions for the exploitation of the resources, reduce urban drift and prevent a decline or even abandonment of the community; in the case of B.3.2, integrated regional or provincial settlement schemes may be necessary to attract settlers.
C.	TECHNOLOGY OF PRODUCTION (CAPTURE, CULTURE, PROCESSING):
	C.1	Sufficient for the resources now exploited and the present marketing level
				- the initial development efforts would not be directed at technology improvement;
	C.2	Insufficient for either the resources or the market, or both;
				- technology improvement may become a priority issue;
	C.3	Sufficient for the resource exploited, but not for:
		C.3.1-		a prospective additional resource: expert's assessment of available and required fishing technology would be indicated;
		C.3.2 -		more distant, but better market, or new and promising market requirements: expert's assessment of the existing and required processing technology, handling and transporting facilities and marketing channels would be indicated;
	C.4	More than sufficient; there is evidence of overcapitalization:
				- management measures, e.g., control over access or fishing effort limitation may be indicated.
D.	CHARACTER OF THE FISHING OPERATIONS:
	D.1	By size:
		D.1.1 -		individual - single fisherman operations;
		D.1.2 -		small-group operation up to 8–10 persons in a crew;
		D.1.3 -		large-group operation (e.g., large beach-seine teams);
		D.1.4 -		combined operations (e.g., smaller groups joining forces to create large gear units);
	D.2	By duration:
		D.2.1-		single-day (or night) fishing;
		D.2.2 -		2 or 3 days fishing trips;
		D.2.3 -		4 days and more;
		D.2.4 -		season-long camping outside of community;
E.	OWNERSHIP OF THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION:
	E.1	Boats and gear owned by working, self-employed fishermen - no hired hands involved;
	E.2	Boats and gear owned by working, self-employed fishermen who employ also others;
	E.3	Boat and gear owners do not work themselves:
		E.3.1 -		small owners own 1–2 units;
		E.3.2 -		medium-scale owners 3–6 units;
		E.3.3 -		large-scale owners;
	E.4	Means of production owned by out-of-community enterprises:
		E.4.1 -		large private owners;
		E.4.2 -		private corporations;
		E.4.3 -		public and para-statal corporations;
		E.4.4 -		government;
	E.5	Means of production owned by people's associations:
		E.5.1 -		cooperatives;
		E.5.2 -		communities;
		E.5.3 -		tribes or extended families;
		E.5.4 -		fishermen associations;
		E.5.5 -		others.
F.	STANDARDS OF LIVING IN THE COMMUNITY:
	Standards of living and incomes of the different groups in the community should be described. Attention should be paid to the relative position of the fishermen and other groups in the community with respect to each other and of the community in general to the rest of the country. Such comparative approach is important. Expatriates from developed countries may misclassify local standards of living, if they only compare them to what they know from other homelands. They may under-rate some standards and also may not recognize the relatively considerable difference between the different socio-economic groups in rural communities.
G.	DEVELOPMENT CAPITAL (PRIVATE, PUBLIC, GOVERNMENT):
	G.1	Locally available and eager;
				- feasibility demonstration and business and technical guidance may lead to investments in local fisheries;
	G.2	Local savings available but inactive;
				- a very persuasive demonstration of secure revenues would be needed to activate savings traditionally invested in non-productive property (e.g., prestige livestocks, land and houses, gold, jewelery, etc.);
	G.3	Local capital is employed in productive activities, but is not attracted to fisheries;
				- this may be for good reasons and caution should be recommended at both the identification and the planning stage;
	G.4	Not available locally, but available nationally;
				- to attract non-local capital in the community, in most cases, government promotion and support would be required. For private capital, strong evidence of commercial feasibility would be needed;
	G.5	Totally unavailable;
				- donor agencies could be approached; also, slow development may take place using local resources where good leadership and spirit are available and the people do not shun hard work. Useful fisheries development can occur even without major capital inputs.
H.	MARKETS:
	H.1	Apparently non-existent for any present local product;
				- this is a subsistance fishery; a thorough study may identify development options through, for example, creation of access to a non-local market;
	H.2	Nearby market for some local products;
				- a partly subsistance fishery; development options may include the creation of access to more remote markets and product development (improved or new processing methods);
	H.3	Nearby market for all products;
				- this would indicate room for production increases, resources permitting; in some cases introduction and development of aquaculture would be indicated;
	H.4	Nearby market for the local products at present production level, but inadequate for increased production;
				see E.2 - options;
	H.5	Too remote;
		H.5.1-		for some of the local products;
		H.5.2 -		for any unprocessed products. In both cases development efforts at improved handling, processing and transportation would be indicated; major infrastructure development investments may be necessary (e.g., road, bridge, etc.).
	Markets are one of the key issues, therefore a realistic assessment of the present situation and of the various development options is of utmost importance. Hence, stick to realism and expertise and beware of wishful thinking.
I.	INFRASTRUCTURE:
	I.1	Transport
		I.1.1 -		community inaccessible to either vehicles or water transport;
				- a study may be indicated to identify possible options for infrastructure development;
		I.1.2 -		inadequate road exists;
				- road improvement and maintenance project may be indicated;
		I.1.3 -		adequate road nearby, but connection to the CFC is lacking;
				- such solutions as a tractor with trailer,4-wheel truck, etc., may be indicated; where possible road construction, preferably, as a community project should be recommended;
		I.1.4 -		adequate road, but no means of transportation;
				- acquisition of vehicles may be considered, but any project involved must provide also for fuel supply and maintaince facility;
		I.1.5 -		there is a railway in the area, but service either inadequate or non- operational;
				- a railway reconditioning project might be considered in association with integrated rural development (IRD) programme;
		I.1.6 -		adequate railway, but access road or other connection link needed;
		I.1.7 -		site accessible to water transport;
				- water transport for large enough quantities of product is generally cheaper than land transport though slower; acquisition of fish- carrier vessels may be indicated;
	I.2	Storage
		I.2.1 -		not available;
		I.2.2 -		available for dried or salted fish only;
		I.2.3 -		refrigerated fish storage available, at distance;
				- insulated transport needed;
		I.2.4 -		refrigerated storage available but inadequate;
		I.2.5 -		refrigerated storage available and adequate;
		I.2.6 -		ice not available locally;
				- consider possibility that it may not really be needed;
	Do not haste to recommend refrigerated fish storage or icing. In some countries smoked fish fetch higher prices and are much cheaper to store, handle, transport and sell;

		I.2.7 -		ice locally available but inadequate;
		I.2.8 -		ice locally available in adequate quantities;
	I.3	Landing facilities:
		I.3.1 -		none - beach landing - non-mechanized;
		1.3.2 -		beach landing with some degree of mechanization;
		I.3.3 -		non protected anchorage;
		I.3.4 -		port facilities available (protected landing jetty, etc.)
	In examining the infrastructure, note should be taken of other projects in the area, such as agricultural, hydroelectric, etc., which might be planning or undertaking improvements in communications, power and water supply, etc. Various aspects of general or integrated rural development (IRD) should also be borne in mind. For example, where paving a jungle road or constructing a harbour may not seem feasible in only a fishery context, such investments may become worthwhile if they also serve purposes other than just fisheries. Where water transport is feasible, a harbour or an anchorage serving other sectors besides a fishery may become a worthy enterprise.
J.	THE MIDDLE-MAN SYSTEM AND FINANCING:
	J.1	-		non-existent, fishery at subsistence level or direct fishermen consumer trade;
	J.2	-		insufficient and exploitative;
		J.2.1		• socially unacceptable, an active conflict, pending or potential;
		J.2.2		• traditionally accepted or part of wider or deeper dependence;
	J.3	-		insufficient but socially acceptable;
	J.4	-		sufficient and exploitative (see J.2.1 and J.2.2);
	J.5	-		sufficient and socially acceptable.
	A degree of exploitation is inherent in almost all small-scale rural and artisanal fisheries. The financing/marketing systems, middlemen system and supply may comprise a variety of fish traders: wholesalers, hawkers, peddlers and “mammies”, all sorts of middlemen, traditional leaders, chiefs, sheikhs and other village bigwigs, boat and gear owners, food, equipment and fuel suppliers, etc., as well as cooperatives, government run enterprises, etc. The preliminary study should reveal at what level the present system is operating, whether the existing degree of exploitation deters efforts to improve and develop, and, finally, to what degree will the individual fishermen and the community as a whole benefit from the prospective development.
K.	PEOPLE'S ATTITUDES TO CHANGE AND THE PROSPECTIVE DEVELOPMENT:
	K.1	-		indifference, scepticism, or resignation;
	K.2	-		various degrees of mixed reaction, with an active or foreseeable conflict in the background;
	K.3	-		various degrees of mixed reaction, without active or potential social conflict;
	K.4	-		moderate acceptance;
	K.5	-		enthusiastic acceptance.
	This is a very critical field, the study of which requires sensitivity, patience and understanding. Without participation, goodwill and significant cooperation in the communities there can be no real change. Ample time must be allowed for discussing the needs, wishes and possibilities and for sounding out the reactions to different ideas and alternatives. Remember that the real reasons for one or another reaction from the local people may be quite different from the apparent or the declared ones.
L.	GEOGRAPHICAL, CLIMATIC, AND TOPOGRAPHICAL CONDITIONS:
	L.1	-		very favourable;
	L.2	-		moderately favourable;
	L.3	-		unfavourable.
	A detailed breakdown would be needed in this part of the study especially on items influencing H (market availability), I (infrastructure) and fishing activities.
M.	AUTHORITIES'ATTITUDES:
	M.1	-		indifference;
	M.2	-.		inactive to varying degrees (for example, stalemated
				because of tribal problems or corruption);
	M.3	-		positive:
		M.3.1		-including desire for socio-political changes;
		M.3.2		-conservative;
	M.4	-		negative (openly or insidiously);
	In some cases the attitudes of central government is contrasted with the attitude of the provincial governments with respect to both general (e.g., political) and specific matters (e.g., the character, contents and priorities of the programme). Irremediable negative attitudes should be discovered well at the beginning to avoid bogging down in dead-end situations.
N	INSTITUTIONS AND SERVICES:
	N.1	-		extension and technical services available;
		N.1.1		-satisfactory;
		N.1.2		-of little use (e.g., lack of, or unsuitable staff, lack of
				means, out of touch, etc.);
		N.1.3		-counter-effective (e.g., corrupted, opposing the
				programme, etc.);
	N.2	-		extension and technical services rudimentary but capable of
				development;
	N.3	-		total absence of any relevant government services;
	N.4	-		total absence of any relevant government services at local
				level, but existing at national level;
	In the case of N.1, N.2 and N.4, the FDU may become an element in the existing extension service, provided that their character, structure and attitude would not be detrimental to the FDU activities, as in N.1.3. Also, local extension workers may be incorporated in the FDU or CFC management staff, according to their qualifications and attitudes.

7.7 Do not raise hopes of the local people in vain. Keep them informed

During this first stage of identifying possible locations for CFC/FDU complexes, the identification team may decide against a particular location or a particular community. It may be that the location is too remote and inaccessible to be provided at this stage with the required continuous support and assistance, that the development possibilities are too limited, or that the social and political conditions are unfavourable. A decision not to proceed should be relayed to the local people as soon as it is taken. Also, a location which had been thought suitable during the site investigation stage, might later prove to be unsuitable following more detailed preparatory planning. In this situation, the decision not to proceed with the CFC/FDU approach to development should be made immediately and the local people informed. Such instances will usually indicate shortcomings in the earlier work of the site investigation team.

7.8 Where the programme depends on donor's support

The uncertainty of assured donor/government support for particular sites (or even for the whole project) in these early stages poses some problems for the identification team. Therefore the team should not raise the hopes of the local people by making promises and commitment for assistance which may not be fulfilled.

This is not an easy assignment and we recommend to follow the golden path of truth: just explain the situation to the local people and make sure that they understand that although you will do your best to bring about the implementation of the programme, the final decision is taken elsewhere and may or may not be positive.

Since in most cases financial and manpower resources are insufficient for very large country-wide or province-wide programmes, it is better to concentrate on a few well chosen locations to establish CFC/FDU complexes. Demonstrated success and good results from one or two well-planned pilot projects will attract attention, additional resources, and possibly result in the successful spread of the programme.

When an agreement has been reached on the establishment of CFC/FDU's there must be firm assurances and commitments from the donor and/or government as to the scale, duration and phasing of assistance and funding which will be made available. Without such assurances, it would be unwise to proceed to the next, more detailed preparatory planning stage.