Foro Global sobre Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutrición (Foro FSN)

Dear All,

SSF is necessary both for health and poverty alleviation.

Best regards.

(Dr)Prabir Dutta

Dg community

India

Dear Moderator,

In response to your request for comments, I would like to share the following:

Partnering for Implementation

Partnership should be established with all currently active (and future) LME Projects to promote the VG-SSF. Both the ‘fish and fisheries’ and the ‘socio-economic’ modules of the LME-approach provide a basis and a mandate for these projects to be active in supporting the implementation of the VG-SSF. This will also function as transboundary or sub-regional mechanisms, since the Regional Fisheries Management Organisations (other than some RFBs like SEAFDEC) will rarely be concerned with SSF.

Furthermore, and taking Section 10.6 of the draft as a starting point, States should be requested to clearly designate a focal point / ‘desk’ within the fisheries agency responsible for SSF concerns. This would be the main point of contact, but there should also be established, under a government decree or similar strong mandate, an inter-agency task force or standing committee dealing with concerns of SSF. This would be a starting point at national level, with clear linkages to local and decentralised levels.

Information and Communication

The language of the VG-SSF is as terse as the CCRF’s. I would recommend to also develop a popular version, similar to the “What is the CCRF” series in national / local languages. This should be used as a vehicle to popularize the VG-SSF. Much more can be said regarding the use of electronic communication media. With regard to M&E, there will be no other way as the development of suitable process indicators, as a step along the way to participatory monitoring. It will be more ambitious still to define “socio-economic or resource status indicators”, and these should anyway only be expected to be used after several years of implementation.

Challenges and Opportunities

In the short-term, the main challenges will be linked to the two preceding points: communication and “institutionalization”. There is a need to develop a comprehensive (and well resourced) communication strategy, and a clear road map for governments to establish functional focal points and inter-agency task forces.

Best regards,

Rudi

Dr Rudolf Hermes

Chief Technical Advisor

Bay of Bengal Large Marine Ecosystem Project (BOBLME)

c/o Andaman Sea Fisheries Research & Development Center

77 Moo 7 Sakdidej Rd., Makham Bay

Tambon Vichit, A. Muang, Phuket 83000, Thailand

Les directives sont développées pour apporter des réponses et une approche intégrée aux défis actuels de la pêche artisanale dans le monde.

Il s’agit d’un secteur très dynamique dont l’importance pour la securité alimentaire, l’emploi et le developpement social sont reconnus mais qui paradoxalement souffre d’une grande précarité et d’une vulnérabilité préoccupante. Dans de nombreux endroits du monde, les communautés de pêche artisanale n’ont pas accès aux services sociaux minimums et font face à la pauvreté, sans avoir accès à des alternatives. Ces communautés sont exclues des processus de décision ce qui posent un reel problème de gouvernance pour la gestion durable des ressources.

Le défi principal pour la mise en œuvre de ces directives est donc d’atteindre la cible visée, c'est-à-dire les communautés de pêche.  Il faut donc que les communautés de pêche artisanale s’approprient ces directives et soient acteurs de leur mise en œuvre.

Pour ce faire, la formation, la sensibilisation et le développement de capacités doivent être des prérequis indispensables à la mise en œuvre des directives.

Il faut donc commencer par former des formateurs, issus des communautés de pêche, pour initier un processus de sensibilisation sur les directives et de renforcement des capacités des communautés de pêche.

A ce niveau, le défi est de renforcer l’organisation professionnelle et les osc au niveau local, regional, national et international. C’est un prérequis indispensable aussi bien pour la gouvernance et la gestion durable des pêche, que pour la mise en œuvre des directives.

La mise en œuvre des directives pourrait donc se faire en plusieurs étapes :

1. Développement de capacités et sensibilisation dans chaque pays au niveau local, régional et national. Cette phase doit permettre de former des formateurs, personnes ressources issues des communautés de pêche, sur les directives et sur l’organisation professionnelle. L’objectif est de développer les capacités des communautés de pêche artisanale et de créer un tissu d’organisations locales (associations, cooperatives, groupements de pêcheurs….) réprésentatif des communautés de la pêche artisanale, gérées par et pour les acteurs du secteur.
2. Diagnostique. Dans chaque région et pays, ces organisations effectuent un diagnostique de la situation (etat de référence), pour dresser un état des lieux sur la pêche artisanale selon les cinq thématiques identifiées par les directives :
   1. Une meilleure gouvernance sur les régimes fonciers et gestion des ressources
   2. Le développement social, l’emploi et le travail décent
   3. Les chaînes de valeur, l’activité après pêche et le commerce
   4. L’égalité des sexes (thème transversal)
   5. Les risques de catastrophe et le changement climatique (thème transversal)
3. Restitution du diagnostique. Cette phase doit permettre de diffuser les résultats du diagnostique auprès des acteurs qui doivent être impliqués dans le processus, et de valider ensemble les priorités d’interventions, les activités à mettre en œuvre et les acteurs responsables de leur mise en oeuvre
4. Mise en œuvre des activités spécifiques en fonction des priorités d’intervention validées. L’accent doit être mis sur la participation des communautés de pêche dans la mise en des activités.
5. Suivi, évaluation et réajustement et renforcement. Les activités mises en œuvre sont suivies, évaluées, réajustées et/ou renforcées en utilisant les résultats du diagnostique comme point de référence. La encore les communautés de pêche devront être les acteurs clefs sur l’ensemble des étapes de ce processus.

Pour conclure, il semble que la première étape est cruciale pour la réussite de la mise en œuvre des directives. Le développement de capacités, la formation et l’appui à l’organisation sont des processus longs qui demandent un soutient important mais qui sont des prérequis indispensables pour garantir une appropriation des directives par les bénéficiaires.

La sécurisation des pêcheries artisanales se fera avec la mise en oeuvre des plans d'aménagement et gestion au niveau des Aires marines protégées. les AMPs étant des outils de gestion des pêcheries, leur appropriation par les communautés de pêche  constitue un chemin sûr pour la restauration des ressources halieutiques.

• Challenges and opportunities – needs for support and interventions.

  What do you think the main implementation challenges are, generally as well as in a specific country context, and how could they be overcome?

  Indeed there will be challenges that must be contended with. The main implementation challenges that would be highlighted lies within two areas. These would be modifying the SSF guideline in order for it to mesh with each country’s political structure and setting up an efficient information network so that different stakeholders can communicate with each other and efficiently send feedback so that the process can be monitored. Each country is different and therefore requires a customized program that would best suite it but still hold to the SFF guideline. To combat this, a sample must be taken from a handful of countries in the different regions of the world. This would help to draw attention to different government structures, allowing for a better, efficient and more effective formulation of plans to be implemented. They would be tailored to what will best serve the given objective. Also the partnership with the government in implementing the laws/legislation necessary for the success of the project may be hindered or prolonged due to conflict of interest with parties that stand to lose in some way by the implementation the SSF guideline. The information network is of the most crucial part of the successful implementation and monitoring of this project. With the need for such a large scope of information sharing, every level of communication even though on different levels, must find common ground of some kind in their communication of information. That been said there must be a standard and universal method of information transition that that would be best suited for this task.

   

   
•  

Dear All, 

Fish is an important dietary form of protein that is necessary in achieving the required daily protein intake by every person. It is pervasive in nature in rural areas in that it is easily accessed by the poor for consumption.Primarily due to it being a form of business and employment in rural areas and thereby constitutes a large percentage of the income for the poor who are employed in these areas.Fish is also known as one of the cheapest of meats available to the poor owing to its abundance and the beneficiaries social relations with the seller or patron. With this in consideration, the attempt of implementing the Voluntary Guidelines for Securing Sustainable Small-Scale Fisheries plays an important role in outlining what is needed to improve the small-scale fisheries and give persons involve in the fishing industry insights in relation to the maximization of this resource.

Despite fish being cheap, easily accessible and available in large quantities for the poor, they are purchased in small quantities at low prices where as other forms of protein are very expensive and in most parts difficult to access. The underpinning argument behind them being able to purchase fish in small quantities in rural settings is that most fishermen are from rural areas. After their catch, they return home to sell to their counterparts at low prices for their subsistence consumption and the excess are sold on the local market at going local market prices. The access to fish provides the consumer with a significant source of protein, micro-nutrients, and essentially fatty acids that acts as a complement to the carbohydrate-based diet of the poor in developing countries.Therefore, the ability of small –scale fisheries plays a vital and indispensable role of supplying the poor with an easily available and cheap source of protein providing that they do not overexploit their privilege in doing so. More importantly, their involvement in improving food security plays a crucial role.

Given the necessity for fish as a form of protein and its importance in achieving food security in this form, an implementation of the guidelines for securing sustainable small-scale fisheries must consider how fisheries can be controlled through managed exploitation, enhancement to increase production and must be able to manage conflict over access to resources as pointed out by Fisheries Management Science Programme(FMSP) Policy Brief, Fisheries and Food Security outline. [1]

Dear Colleagues,

Group 4 is a group is a students currently attending the University of Guyana involved in a term project with its hope to improve Food Security with their aims and ideas. We therefore base our contribution to the following area of discussion;

Implementing the Voluntary Guidelines for Securing Sustainable Small-Scale Fisheries

Small-scale fisheries play a vital role in economies as a very important contributor to the alleviation of poverty and in the continuous increasing of food security.  Recent data from the FAO has shown that small-scale fisheries contribute to approximately 54 percent of global marine and inland fishing to the developing countries.  Small-scale fishermen not only provide themselves with a meal and income but they also provide these to the local market and others leading to a significant increase to nutritious food.

Because small-scale fisheries are so important for every country, implementing voluntary guidelines for securing sustainable Small-Scale Fisheries is a great way in helping countries as well as accomplishing the MDGs for those countries.  As such, this post aims to make contribution towards the ‘partnering for implementation’ aspect of the FAO article.

For this program to be successful, all should be involved in the partnership for the implementation of the SSF guidelines.  To be more specific however, the main actors of this program would involve the government, NGOs, international agencies and the fishing communities. In addition, to be able to include the ‘voices of the marginalized’, it would be best to produce information and data (results) about this program through viable sources such as the newspaper, the internet via a web page and/or through the television.

Furthermore, there should be a team in charge of this program. Each person will be entitled their own responsibility. For example, a different individual will be in charge of the local level, another at the national level, and so on for the regional and global level, etc. Of course frequent communication will be a major necessity. Assuming that the budget is available, if this is done, then the partnership will be effective and efficient.

How can partnerships be fostered and strengthened to include the ‘voices of the marginalized?

It was noted in our previous contribution to this discussion that the fisheries sector adds a seemingly small percentage to the GDP. However the sector also plays an important role in being able to help in ensuring food security and nutrition as outlined by the SSF Guidelines. The issue at hand is how can those involved in small scale fisheries be furthered developed given that these fishers inclusive of women may lack resources to continue undertaking fishery as their main form of livelihood.

The World Fish Center in Malaysia in a study of the role of Public Private Partnerships in Small-Scale Aquaculture and Fisheries concluded that some major factors that can contribute to successful PPPs include a supportive government PPP strategy, good leadership and management within the PPP, and transparency.[1] These very strategies can be enforced since it will ensure that communication will likely be enhanced allowing small-scale fisheries to be more able to voice their concerns thus ensuring sustainable fisheries in the long run.

Implementation of the SSF Guidelines in relation to this aspect needs the government to play their part. This would entail the full adherence to the laws regarding fisheries in a country. In Guyana for instance fishery legislations are not fully adhered to. There may be some fishers who may for example who may be operating without a license. The strength of a successful PPP needs the support of a government who will at all cost enforce fishery laws since the private sector will of course have no interest in being involved in a partnership where in the near future there are no longer fishery resources available. Laws regarding protected species for example should be enforced.

In addressing the issue to include the “voices of the marginalised”  farmers can be represented through co- operatives to voice their issues at the relevant government entities .In Guyana the ministry of Agriculture has a department of fisheries located within the Ministry of Agriculture. For the Public Private Partnership to be successful activities need to be co ordinated by government .Furthermore, government needs to provide the relevant information necessary to promote growth within the industry. The mobilisation of farmers through co operatives can spur the growth necessary due to greater bargaining power in the representation of the interests of the farmers in contrast to individual farmers seeking partnerships with government .It can be posited if individual farmers engaged in private public partnerships with the government they can gain an “unfair” advantage over other fisher men due to asymmetric information and more resources. In conclusion, partnerships can be fostered and strengthened through an entity such as a co operative representing the interests of the fisher folk forming a collaboration with the government to promote  efficiency in the sector

Dear SSF forum contributors – and contributors-to-be,

Just over two weeks have now elapsed of our e-consultation and we have a bit less than one week to go. I’d like to thank those of you who have already posted your comments and inputs – and encourage those who have not done so yet to start writing and post at your earliest convenience so that we have time to share and consider your experiences!

Reading through your contributions so far, I note that there is broad agreement on that we all have to engage and promote partnerships for the implementation of the SSF Guidelines. The special responsibility of governments is being pointed out, in particular with regard to giving priority to the small-scale fisheries sector, but there is often a need to clarify the different roles of different government departments. It is also important that small-scale actors take ownership of the implementation process and, at the local and community level, empowerment, leadership training and organisational development (building on existing structures) are needed. With regard to information and communication, aspects highlighted include the need for awareness raising and increased use of various forms of media - respecting cultures and languages - and dissemination of facts and figures to improve the knowledge on and visibility of small-scale fisheries. Some of the challenges cited include absence of policy frameworks that reflect the reality of the small-scale fisheries sector, a lack of funding and also the incidence of corruption. Looking at the brighter side, there are of course also important opportunities, for example by seeking increased engagement by youth and support from consumers, including through fair trade initiatives.

This was of course just a very brief overview of some of the inputs – I hope you will read the different contributions to learn more. Please feel free to reply to propositions already made when posting your contributions. I look forward to hearing from you!

With best wishes,

Your facilitator Lena

1. Partnering for implementation

Once we are in a semi-arid region, SSF is highly demanded, especially when food security and budget increase of small producers are involved. Not only for my institution, but for ours partners as well as the community involved.  

We believe that gathering the results so far achieved and through a media effort to show it around as well, is what needs to be done to include the ‘voices of the marginalized. Once this first process is done, a network can be build up in order to submit research and extensions projects.

A team involved in the cause is the key success to ensure effective and efficient partnership. Although a realistic budget, is essential for a project to achieve its goal.

1. Information and communication – promoting experience sharing and collaboration

At local level, it is of extremely importance that all stakeholders involved at the SSF chain are in a very clear communication process. Producers must understand what researchers want to achieve, as well as researchers must understand producer’s needs. From this level on, the process is easier once meetings and workshops work very well in the communication process where experiences and needs are exchange among different groups involved. Articles published are also a great and essential communication tool.

My experience is at local and national level, where research and extension projects were involved. In my organization´s point of view, there is no better tool to monitor and evaluate a project other than be in the field with as many stakeholders as can be involved in the productive chain. Once all together, it is possible to listen, talk, and analyze problems. Also highlight the points of success.

Strategies to measure SSF Guidelines must be settled locally, in my point of view. It can change from on situation to other. The classical way to report is through documents and articles published.

1. Challenges and opportunities – needs for support and interventions

Federal government has been investing a lot of efforts and financial support to eradicate poverty. Even though it seems that there is a need of understanding in a deeper level, the importance of SSF in order to maintain small producers living in the country side of the country states, instead of migrating to bigger cities. This is  an example of an important challenge to be overcome. But, in the other side there is a huge problem involving the SSF producers, once they have a cultural dependence from the government for any purpose and/or reason.

I have experienced it in couple projects. It is always a great opportunity to be with all stakeholders in the field (SSF). Make producers continue on their own is a challenge! We have not yet settled a strategy to decrease this bottleneck.