Introduction

This study on the “Participation in the management of small-scale fisheries in West Africa” was conducted as part of the activities of the Sustainable Fisheries Livelihoods Programme or SFLP (GCP/INT/735/UK), in collaboration with the Medium term programme of the FAO Fisheries Department on the “promotion of coastal fisheries management”. This study seeks to identify ways of increasing the participation of fishermen in the management of coastal fisheries, as a means of improving the livelihoods of these fishermen and that of their families. With this in mind, four SFLP studies conducted in Mauritania, Senegal, Guinea and Ghana were analysed, and additional interviews were conducted in Senegal and Ghana. The analysis focuses mainly on the following topics:

• The role of small-scale fishermen and the government in the management of coastal fisheries;
• The problems and constraints encountered in the management of coastal fisheries;
• The impact of coastal fisheries management on the livelihoods of fishermen.

Results

The results show that small-scale fishermen are generally involved in informal management measures which exist alongside official measures initiated by the fisheries administration. The official participation of fishermen is done in the form of consultation during the drafting of fisheries laws and regulations, whereas the informal involvement implies doing and executing in concrete terms, local regulations prepared by the community’s fisheries committees. The most efficient experiences are recorded in local informal measures and in cases where the fishermen and government representatives support and complement each other’s efforts. Government fisheries policies are generally based on long term biological concerns while those of the fishermen tend to have short term socio-economic objectives. Some relatively efficient aspects of fisheries management that have a positive effect on (some) livelihoods include the existence of strong local authority figures in some communities, the material interest shown by the fishermen and the government in the mechanisms, cooperation among all the groups involved, clear communication processes, and the learning-by-doing approach within the group.

However, whether because of the formal or informal nature of the measures, it would appear as if it is only in a few cases that the desired result on the livelihoods of the fishermen, like access to some resources, to income and to employment are obtained. This is due to a number of factors. One of these is related to the weakness in application of decisions, and some inefficient and ineffective processes within and between the groups involved. A second factor is linked to the obstacles encountered during the application, and another is linked to the fact that the different groups of small-scale fishermen have divergent interest and can be affected in different ways by the fisheries management measures taken. It would therefore appear as if the most powerful stakeholders derive more profit from these measures than the poorest. The underlying assumption of this study which stipulates that fisheries management improves the livelihoods of fishermen is therefore not as obvious as one would expect, at least in the short term. Finally, the analysis shows that the stakeholders are not “passive receivers” influenced by the same fisheries management mechanisms, but active agents that use, modify, and sometimes ignore or counter the mechanisms to gain access and control of the resources, as well as to satisfy their own personal objectives.

Conclusions

A number of trends that have contributed to greater collaboration between fishermen and the government in fisheries management measures as well as greater consideration for issues relating to livelihoods can be identified. On the part of the fishermen, some rules and committees (although not always “traditional”), already exist to regulate fisheries and there is an increased awareness in the communities about the need to protect their fish stock. The government’s interest in small-scale fisheries and in the existing processes for consulting fishermen in the elaboration of management plans is increasing. Furthermore, some decentralization mechanisms encourage responsibility-sharing with local institutions in the management of natural resources, as well as associated mechanisms like local councils and community management committees for fisheries management.

However, a number of factors complicate the consistently increasing collaboration between the fishermen and government on fisheries protection measures and issues relating to livelihoods. Collaboration is made difficult because of the divergent interests of the different fishermen and fish-processor groups. There was a period in the past when the relationship between fishermen and government was forced. The relationship between fishermen and government authorities has always been fraught with tension. The authorities had not been able to or did not want to apply already existing laws, and the vague or de facto mandates on the division of labour among the different government organizations involved in fisheries and maritime affairs. Finally, communication, funds and staff recruited to run the government institutions are not always adequate to manage fisheries as well.

Recommendations:

To ensure that fisheries management becomes more focused on livelihoods, the following two aspects must be improved:

1. All the phases of  fisheries management such as the preparation, implementation, Monitoring, Control and Surveillance (MCS), as well as the application, should be addressed individually or globally, and should be clearly linked to livelihood issues and objectives; and

2. There should be a conscious and considerate commitment to the concept of participation, representation, information and communication on the part of those involved in livelihoods and fisheries management.

Where the fisheries management phase is concerned, the FAO and the SFLP with their partner countries can provide support to fishermen and government functionaries and other institutions by:

• Undertaking awareness-raising and training activities on fisheries management and on the different mechanisms and phases of management as they relate to the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (CCRF);
• Including livelihoods consideration and objectives in fisheries management; and
• Organizing fora for exchanging experience on fisheries management and management mechanisms with case studies to support the process.

Where the fisheries management process is concerned, the FAO and the SFLP and their partner countries can provide support to fishermen and government functionaries and other institutions by:

• Undertaking activities on awareness-raising, training and experience exchange on participation and participation mechanisms at national and community levels, and encourage decentralization and moving beyond consultation to co-management;
• Undertake training activities to strengthen the associations and their representatives in the official process; and
• Create opportunities for improving collaboration and communication between the stakeholders, by giving special consideration to the poorest.

 

Download the document (pdf)