Households under pressure : the impacts of the EU ban on fisher livelihoods, Sri Lanka

(1)

Households under pressure

The impacts of the EU ban on fisher livelihoods, Sri Lanka

Master Thesis

International Development Studies Maura van den Kommer

11093250

maurakommer@gmail.com Supervisor: Dr. J.M. Bavinck Second Reader: Dhr. J. Scholtens University of Amsterdam

(2)

(3)

A

CKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I owe my thanks to several people who helped me with my research and thesis writing process. I would first and foremost like express gratitude to my thesis supervisor Dr. Maarten Bavinck of the University of Amsterdam. Whenever I ran into trouble his door was always open and he helped me with great enthusiasm. He steered me in the right direction while writing this thesis, but also made sure that it would be my writing piece and not his.

I would also like to thank Prof. Oscar Amarasinghe from Ruhuna University, who made me feel welcome in Sri Lanka from the moment I arrived. I must thank him for guiding me in the right direction and suggestions, and for allowing me to make use of his valuable social network in Sri Lanka.

My sincere thanks goes to Maduka Sampath and his family, for taking me in their home and making me feel like a part of the family. As my translator and host family, Maduka guided me throughout the research. He showed me all insights of the fisheries sector and many other social and cultural aspects of Sri Lankan life. Furthermore, I must express my thanks to his wife and other family members who always welcomed me with open arms. I must also thank the other members of the Southern Fisheries Organization in Dondra, especially Mr. Gamage who was willing to assist me in conducting surveys.

Finally, I would like to thank my family for providing me with support during the time when I was in Sri Lanka. In particular, I must thank my brother Aiko and my father Jiri for proofreading my thesis and giving me essential comments and tips in the last stages of the writing process. The accomplishment of this thesis would not have been possible without them.

(4)

A

BSTRACT

People’s livelihoods are often exposed to external vulnerabilities and shocks that threaten their daily lives. However, limited research is done on how top-down international economic regulations influence and possibly change a local situation. This study addresses the question of how the EU ban on fish exports from Sri Lanka and the response of Sri Lankan government affect the livelihoods of multi-day boat fisher households in three villages in Matara District. The study does this through an analysis of the livelihood strategies that these households use to adapt to the economic ban and overcome this external shock. In doing so, the research analyzes the different livelihood capitals of fisher households, making use of the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework. Data is based on surveys and interviews with men and women from fisher households in Dondra, Gandara and Talalla; extensive observations of Sri Lankan daily life in these fisher villages; and interviews with government officials. The results show that under international pressure the income of fisher households has decreased enormously due to the collapsed export market that resulted in lower prices for fish. As a consequence households have used their livelihood capitals to create different strategies to adapt to the new economic situation. The study concludes that social relations, networks and access to financial institutions form important indicators for these strategies. The study provides valuable insights into fisher households’ strategies to cope with vulnerabilities in the multi-day boat fisheries sector and provides a framework to analyze other external shocks.

(5)

I

NDEX OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone ... 8

Figure 2: Livelihoods framework ... 17

Figure 3: Conceptual scheme of this research ... 19

Figure 4: Dondra, Gandara and Talalla ... 26

Figure 5: Sri Lanka ... 26

Figure 6: Matara District ... 26

Figure 7: Age of female respondents ... 31

Figure 8: Average daily schedule of Wasani ... 32

Figure 9: Average daily schedule of Silanthi ... 33

Figure 10: Education levels of respondents ... 35

Figure 11: Number of loans and average amount of loan ... 36

Figure 12: Average income of fisher households per month ... 40

Figure 13: Income for February 2016 of the skipper of HH 4 ... 42

Figure 15: Purse seine nets ... 43

Figure 14: Longlines ... 43

Figure 16: Income generating activities of women ... 45

Figure 18: Woman making incense sticks in her home ... 45

Figure 17: A doormat made from coir ... 45

Figure 19: Main tasks of the Sri Lanka Road Map ... 49

(8)

A

CRONYMS

AL Advanced Level

CSO Community Social Organization

CPR Common Pool Resources

DFAR Department of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources DfID Department for International Development

DS Divisional Secretariat

EC European Commission

EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone

EU European Union

FAO Food and Agricultural Organization FMC Fisheries Monitoring Center

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GN Divisions Grama Niladhari Divisions

HIES Household Income and Expenditure Survey

HH Household

ILO International Labor Organization

IOTC Indian Ocean Tuna Commission

IUU fishing Illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing

JVP Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (People’s Liberation Front)

LKR Sri Lankan Rupee

NHE New Household Economics

OL Ordinary Level

RDB Regional Development Bank

SFO Southern Fisheries Organization

NPOA-IUU National Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate IUU Fishing UNCLOS United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea

UNFSA United Nations Fish Stock Agreement

VMS Vessel Monitoring System

WWF World Wildlife Fund

Currency

Exchange rate as per 22-01-2016: 1LKR=€0.0064

(9)

C

HAPTER

1:

I

NTRODUCTION

This chapter introduces the topic of the study. The first section describes different elements of the Sri Lankan fisheries sector. The second section discusses the research context of the EU ban on fish imports and the third section elaborates on the social and academic relevance. The final section provides an overview of the thesis chapters.

In recent years the global demand for fish products for consumption has increased substantially. In 2011 the annual per capita fish consumption was 18.9 kg whereas this was 17.2 kg in 2009 (Food and Agricultural Organization). This worldwide increase in fish stock demand has had consequences for the sustainability of the marine fishing sector. According to the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) the marine fishing fleet is currently two to three times the size of what the oceans can sustainably manage. As a result, it can be reported that eighty percent of the world’s fish stocks is labeled as overexploited, depleted or recovering from depletion (FAO, 2010). The environmental situation of both the fish stocks and the marine areas are worrisome and deserve worldwide attention. International actors have taken action against the decreasing sustainable fish stocks and this has resulted in an economic ban on fish imports from Sri Lanka to the EU.

1.1 Sri Lanka’s fishing industry

Sri Lanka has been a fishing nation for centuries. This is not surprising because the country is an island nation and therefore it has easy access to the oceans. Sri Lanka’s coastline is around 1,785 km long and the nation has sovereign rights over the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) since 1978. This EEZ zone contains 517,000 km² of ocean (FAO, 2006). The ocean has proven to be important for the Sri Lankan fisheries industry because 86% of the total fish production of 440.000 tons is caught in coastal zones and deep sea fishing areas, respectively 50% and 36% (Beukers et al., 2012). Even though the fishing sector only contributed 1.8% to the nation’s gross

domestic product (GDP) in 2014 (Ministry of Fisheries, 2016), the sector is large in size. More than 221,000 people are actively involved in the fishing industry and another 275,000 people are indirectly

Figure 1: Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone Source: www.globalsecurity.org

(10)

involved in fisheries through the building and repairing of boats and nets, ice production and fish trading (Amarasinghe, 2013). Additionally, 800,000 households are highly dependent on the fishing sector because they earn their main income with fish related professions, such as merchants, salesmen or fish processing employees (Ministry of Fisheries, 2015a). The total export value of fish was LKR 34,796 million (€221 million) in 2014 and LKR 24,716 million (€157 million) in 2015 (Ministry of Fisheries, 2015b). Sri Lanka is a large exporter of seafood products to the European Union (EU), already in 2000 Europe became Sri Lanka’s main export destination for tuna (CBI, 2012) and in 2010 67% of the total fish exports went to the EU (Beukers et al., 2012).

Sri Lanka’s fish resources can be divided into three types: marine, inland and brackish water resources (Amarasinghe, 2013). The marine fishing sector consists of coastal fishery and off shore or deep sea fishery. Coastal fishing is performed by small scale fishermen who concentrate their work within 40 km off the shore. A large part of these fishermen only fish during certain parts of the day, preferably the morning. Their boats range from traditional crafts to small boats with outboard motors. The offshore and deep sea fishing activities take place beyond 40 km from the coast. The boats used for this practice are called multi-day boats, their length ranges from 28 to 45 feet and include inboard engines. The Sri Lankan fleet consists of 46,989 crafts, of which 3,858 multi-day boats (Amarasinghe, 2013). The crews of these boats stay at sea for 20 to 40 days after which they return to the harbor to sell their catch. In 2009 the marine fishing captures consisted for twenty-one percent of skipjack tuna, and yellowfin tuna contributed for fifteen percent to the total volume (Beukers et al., 2012). The large size of the Sri Lankan marine fishing fleet and its historical significance partly explains why the ban on fish imports from Sri Lanka to the EU has been of large impact.

1.2 Research context of the EU ban on fish imports

Around the year 2010 the EU became more focused on illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing around the world and it implemented new regulations to better control IUU to make sure that no illegally caught fish products enter the European market (European Union, 2008). This fits within the FAO’s international debate that addresses IUU fishing in relation to trade relations, tools, and sanction measures to create a more transparent trade sector (Chaves, 2000; Komatsu, 2000). The EU

does not tolerate illegal fishing practices and takes harsh measures

towards irresponsible fishing (European Commission, 2014). Illegal fishing covers a wide range of activities that are not allowed under national and international laws and agreements. This happens both in the small-scale and industrial fisheries (Doulman, 2000). Examples of IUU are issuing illegal licenses, using illegal fishing gear, fishing outside the season or in closed areas and a weak central control system (Daley, 2010). These practices have tremendous impacts on marine environment and biodiversity. It is claimed that IUU fishing halts the recovery of the ocean and depleted fish stocks (FAO, 2001). Besides that, the use of unsustainable fishing methods results in

(11)

environmental damage and threatens food security. It can also lead to a loss of billions of Dollars of economic benefits (Agnew et al., 2009; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2011). As a consequence of state management difficulties and overuse of the oceans, the FAO has designed guidelines to prevent IUU fishing. For example, it has designed an International Plan of Action, Port State Agreements and has established a Global Record that contains relevant data of vessels. The aim of the reports is to create a more transparent and sustainable global fisheries sector.

Where the EU became more focused on deterring IUU fishing, Sri Lanka did not pay much attention to the issue. Due to the civil war that had only ended in 2009 there was not much political will within the government to focus on the international demands regarding the fishing sector. In 2011 a new government came into place under the second term of Mahinda Rajapaksa’s presidency and they valued the problems in the fishing sector as much more important. Their first action was to ratify the FAO Port State Measures Agreement1 (2009). Although this was a good first step for improvement, government officials did not attend important meetings and deadlines were not met because other political issues were prioritized. In 2012 the EU sent out an official warning to Sri Lanka because “they were not complying with international rules on illegal fishing and their control systems were inadequate” (European Commission, 2014). Sri Lanka has ratified the United Nation Fish Stock Agreement in 1996, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) in 1994, and has been a member of the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission since 1994. However, the government did not do much to comply with international regulations. As a response to the warning, the Sri Lanka National Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate IUU Fishing (NPOA-IUU) was designed in 2013. This plan highlights Sri Lanka’s commitment to combat illegal fishing. The actions taken after the official warning were, however, inadequate and the EU concluded that it would be irresponsible to continue importing fish from Sri Lanka, as it was still unclear where tuna was caught and with which gear. Therefore, the European Commission (EC) announced a red card for Sri Lanka, which implies a ban on fish imports starting January 2015.

Given the large countrywide consequences of this ban, Sri Lanka could no longer neglect the seriousness of the IUU problem. Being highly pressured by the EU, the Sri Lankan government has since changed its attitude towards governing the fisheries sector, especially with regards to the tuna exports. The Sri Lankan government designed a road map with 57 points that should be improved in the fisheries sector. This road map included among others improvements in catch data, port departures, vessel license, marked vessel gear, and installing a monitoring center. For each subject that the EU

1_{The aim of the Port State Measures Agreement is to prevent IUU fishing by enhancing regional and}

international cooperation and ensuring long-term conservation of marine resources. All port states need to apply the measures in the Agreement to foreign and national vessels.

(12)

valued as inadequate Sri Lanka had formulated what should be changed and when the ultimate deadline is. This document is continuously being updated with information on new processes.

1.3 Social and academic relevance

Given the large quantities of fish exports to the EU, it is understandable that the ban has a large local impact in Sri Lanka. However, research on this specific topic is weak. Most research on the social effects of IUU fishing or any economic ban imposed by the European Union has a regional or global research area (Erceg, 2006; Agnew et al., 2009; Sumaila, Alder & Keith, 2005) or focuses on the value chain of undocumented and illegally caught fish (Petrossian, Marteache & Viollaz, 2015; Nazmul, Alam & Pokrant, 2009). There is one study with a more local focus in which the situational approach was applied to the fisheries sector, measuring five variables in 53 different countries (Petrossian, 2015). The study, however, aims to find ways how IUU fishing can be prevented and therefore the variables are focused on the actual fishing practice rather than the social setting. Another recent study examined the coping strategies of fishers in Bangladesh during the EU ban on fish imports (Ali et al., 2010). However, there is no attention for livelihood strategies of households or a gender analysis explaining differences in strategic choices by men and women.

This research elaborates on earlier research done by Charles Wilkinson (2015) on the effects of the EU ban among fishermen working on multi-day boat vessels in Dondra Point, southern Sri Lanka. His research shows that as a consequence of the EU ban, fishermen have seen a significant decrease in their income. Due to the EU ban, fishermen had to find alternative ways of income and they did this by changing target species to types of fish that sold well on the national market. However, this has had a tremendous impact on the multi-day boat fleet in Dondra. Wilkinson concludes that, even though the EU ban might be lifted in 2017, there will be long-term consequences for the value chain of fish and the lives of fishermen because of the practical adjustments that had to be made. Wilkinson’s research focused on men who were directly involved in fishing practices. However, the social and economic effects of the EU ban also trickle down to the households of these fishermen. For that reason the impacts of the EU ban on the household level deserve research interest. The EU ban has only been in place since January 2015 and logically not much research has been done on this specific topic. This research, therefore, aims to study how fisher households are affected by a fish market ban and how they adapt to the changing industry.

It should be mentioned that while writing this thesis, in a press release from April 2016, the EC reported that “Sri Lanka has now successfully reformed its fisheries governance system” (European Commission, 2016). The European Commission recommended lifting the ban and it came to this conclusion after a thorough evaluation of Sri Lanka’s legal framework, renewed sanctions and improved fleet control. However, until now the ban has not been lifted yet. According to news reports

(13)

the ECs decision will be discussed by the EU that will make the final decision of lifting the ban (Reuters, 2016; Economy Next, 2016).

1.4 Thesis outline

This thesis consists of eight chapters. The first chapter introduced the research topic and relevant background information on IUU fishing and the Sri Lankan fisheries industry. The second chapter provides the research questions and a discussion of the theoretical perspectives on which this study is based. The third chapter gives a schematic overview of the research location. Chapter four describes the methodology of research collection that has been used to study households and gives an overview of ethical challenges, translator biases and limitations. Chapters five and six elaborate on the daily lives of fisher livelihoods and how they have been impacted by the EU ban. Chapter seven discusses the national government’s responses to the implementation of the fish ban. Finally, chapter eight gives a reflection of the results in relation to the theory and provides an answer to the research questions.

(14)

C

HAPTER

2:

T

HEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

This chapter presents the theoretical concepts on which this research is based. It comprises six sections. The first section presents the research question and corresponding sub-questions. The second section discusses the idea of the fisheries as a common pool resource and the third section discusses different types of livelihood strategies, with a focus on livelihood diversification as one of those strategies. The fourth section addresses the livelihoods framework that forms the basis of the research structure. The fifth section elaborates on household economics and gender relations. The last section presents the conceptual scheme that shows how this research is situated in the literature.

2.1 Research questions

The main research question for this thesis is:

How has the EU ban on fish imports from Sri Lanka affected the daily lives of multi-day boat fisher households and which livelihood strategies are being used to adapt to the new economic situation?

Related to the main research question three sub-questions have been formulated:

1. How is the EU ban currently being implemented and what is the national government’s response?

2. What are the current livelihood strategies of fisher households and what are the specific roles of men and women therein?

3. How are current livelihoods of fisher households different compared to one year ago when the EU ban was not in place?

2.2 Fisheries as a common pool resource

Common pool resources (CPR) are characterized by an unlimited number of users that have access to the resource and constantly compete with each other (McCarthy et al., 2001). As a consequence, overuse and misuse of the natural resource is a well-known problem. The fisheries are frequently presented as a CPR. The phrase ‘tragedy of the commons’ is commonly used to describe the process of overuse of natural resources if they are freely available to everyone (Hardin, 1968). Problems arise because in the idea of freedom of the commons every individual pursues their own interest and takes as much of that specific resource as s/he wants without thinking about the destructive consequences caused by the collective (Hardin, 1968). Research has shown that over usage of fisheries resources originates from the economic organization of this industry (Gordon, 1954). It is argued that fisheries management is therefore not so much about the biological aspects of the fish stock itself, but about humans using these resources.

(15)

Proper management of CPRs is sometimes difficult. Some scholars believe that privatization is the solution to overuse (Sauri-Pujol, 1992) and the tragedy of the commons is not universal per se (Leal, 1996). Research has shown that local communities have sometimes been able to protect natural resources through local management and self-organization (Ostrom, 1990). There are many evidences in which local fishermen manage the fisheries sector and by doing this they have been able to prevent overfishing. For a large part, these management arrangements occur without government interventions (Leal, 1996). This shows that the commons can be self-regulated. However, there has also been considerable attention to the relation of multiple layers within the governance framework. This is addressed as the ‘nesting principle’, which entails that “among long-enduring self-governed CPRs, smaller-scale organizations tend to be nested in ever larger organizations” (Ostrom, 1999: 6). This means that governance activities and monitoring take place at different levels of organization. Instead of one central power, multiple smaller authorities should have their own responsibilities that contribute to the bigger system.

2.3 Livelihood strategies and diversification

The concept of livelihood describes the attempt of individuals or households to make a living and meet basic economic and consumption needs while coping with uncertainties and risks (Marschke, 2006). Livelihood strategies are the economic activities that households undertake in order to reach food security and an adequate income (Rahman et al., 2013). A livelihood is considered sustainable when it is able to recover from shocks, crises, and stresses and maintain its assets and capabilities (Chambers and Conway, 1992; Maharjan, 2014; Soltani et al., 2012; Allison & Ellis, 2001). Academic approaches to livelihoods studies used to be merely focused on economic factors such as people’s income and expenditure levels. As a consequence, these early approaches treated people as passive and non-active actors (Marschke, 2006). However, since the 1990s livelihoods approaches are more people-centered and focus rather on what they have than what they are missing (De Haan, 2012). Besides that, the present livelihoods approach pays attention to the broader relations between poverty and the environment and studies the ways in which social elements of a society can be integrated into development policies and theories. In today’s development organizations the livelihood approach is often used for poverty reduction programs in order to get an idea of the different ways in which people's livelihoods are threatened and how people cope with and adjust to changing situations or so-called ‘shocks and stresses’ (Allison & Horemans, 2006).

There are multiple livelihood strategies that households can pursue in order to reach livelihood security. A classification of five basic categories of rural adaptation strategies has been proposed to cope with climate change (Agrawal, 2010). These are: mobility, storage, diversification, communal pooling, and market exchange. Mobility indicates the spreading of risk by moving to another area, storage aims at reducing risks for future times by making use of infrastructural elements,

(16)

diversification addresses the usage of multiple economic opportunities and resources, communal pooling indicates the sharing of a certain resource or activity, and market exchange is a mechanism that enables households to trade and specialize. The success of these strategies depends upon the broader institutional context (Agrawal, 2010). These five categories can be seen as modes of resilience that can also be utilized in economic disaster management in the fisheries sector and, more specifically, in the context of the EU ban. Climate change is one example of a shock that requires a reaction and adaptation from people. The way people behave in this situation can be compared to circumstances with other types of external shocks, such as an economic ban.

However, it is not only up to households to choose their adaptation strategies. In order to strengthen the adaptive capacity of households, local government institutions should understand and support the already existing strategies that households use (Brown & Sonwa, 2015). The link between local institutions and households is important because the access to institutions can create benefits for vulnerable households (Agrawal, 2008). Moreover, local institutions can bridge the gap between national and local adaptation policies and in doing so increase household resilience (Brown & Sonwa, 2015). Besides the influence of local institutions, the type of livelihood strategy that is chosen by a household is influenced by household characteristics as well. Examples are: gender division of labor, presence of material resources, geographical situation, external relations, ability to take advantage of new opportunities, and social relations within and outside the household (Rakodi, 1999).

Also in current rural poverty reduction debates the concept of livelihood diversification occupies a prominent position. Diversification can be seen as a type of livelihood strategy that reduces the risk of failures by spreading the risks, but is often treated as a free-standing economic reason for increasing income. Before the diversification theories received attention, policymakers in developing countries focused on increasing employment opportunities for single income activities. In the 1990s this changed when multiple scholars and studies demonstrated that a diverse combination of activities increases the chances of survival for rural households (Ellis, 2008) and nowadays “diversification is the norm” (Barret et al., 2001: 315). Very few people collect all their income solely from one source or have all their wealth in a single asset. Livelihood diversification refers to new and diverse income activities that households use to increase their income and reduce risks (Hussein & Nelson, 1998). These activities are undertaken additionally to the main household income activity. The reasons for creating a range of diverse income activities are among others risk spreading, consumption soothing and coping with shocks (Ellis, 1999). These reasons can be sub-divided into diversification of necessity and diversification of choice (Ellis, 2008). The first refers to the reasons in which households or individuals take a proactive and voluntary attitude towards diversifying their income activities and the second type refers to households that diversify for involuntary and desperation reasons (Ellis, 2008). Motivations for diversification can also be separated into micro level push and

(17)

pull factors (Barret et al., 2010). For example, push factors can be population pressures, reaction to crisis, and high transaction costs and pull factors are new technologies and skills, specialization, and the realization of strategic complementarities of multiple activities (Barret et al., 2001). Moreover, diversification in the fisheries not only occurs at the household level; individuals and the community also respond to fluctuations in the industry (Allison & Ellis, 2001).

Even though livelihood diversification studies tend to focus on households in rural areas, both non-farm and non-farm activities are included in the concept. Income from non-farm activities is derived from the gathering or direct production of crops, livestock, forest or fish products and non-farm income includes all other sources of income, such as the transport and processing of agricultural products (Barret et al., 2001). The presence of non-farm activities in rural households in Africa has proved to be positively correlated with income and wealth (Baret et al., 2001). From a spatial perspective rural activities can also be classified into on- and off-farm. On-farm refers to activities that can be performed within one’s own property and off-farm activities are away from one’s own property (Davis, 2006).

2.4 Sustainable livelihoods framework

Scholars and development organizations have translated the livelihood approach into a practicable framework. The five household capitals, illustrated in figure 2, form the core of the livelihoods approach. These are human, social, natural, financial and physical capital. Human capital can be further specified as health, knowledge and skills. Social capital is about relationships with people, being a member of a group, and networks. Natural capital includes different types of natural resources, such as the availability and quality of land, water, biodiversity and wildlife, and financial capital entails the financial resources that are available to people, such as income, pensions, savings and credit. Physical capital includes the appearance, or disappearance, of basic infrastructure facilities such as drinking water systems, sanitation, transport, and energy. These five capitals are however only valuable in combination with each other; they can thus generate beneficial conditions for other capitals (DfID, 1999). The strength and usage of the capitals defines the extent to which households are able to cope with risks and challenges. In other words, household’s capitals define their livelihood strategies. The chosen livelihood strategies can have positive or negative impacts for the livelihood of households.

The vulnerability context has a direct influence on how people use their assets (Deligiannis, 2012). It is necessary for people to become resilient to vulnerability shocks in order to create sustainable livelihoods (DfID, 1999). Household decision makers are influenced by contextual factors that shape the choices for their livelihood strategy. These contextual factors can be external shocks, trends and uncertainties that are the results of global forces. Examples include demography, climate and

(18)

economic change, history, and seasonality. The contextual factors and trends create fluctuations at the local level and therefore threaten the livelihoods of people. However, this does not mean that all these factors are necessarily negative (DfID, 1999). Figure 2 illustrates how the shocks and stresses in the left vertical box can influence livelihood strategies.

Figure 2: Sustainable livelihoods framework Source: Beuchler, 2004.

Structural and process factors and institutions also impact livelihood strategies. These factors are mostly man-made influences from governments, laws, policies, trade agreements, market regulations, institutions, international organizations and civil society (Deligiannis, 2012). The structures and processes can cover different levels from household to international (Majale, 2002). Besides that, the relation between livelihoods capitals and processes is two-sided: individuals can also influence the processes and structures of the public and private sector or civil society by using their capitals (DfID, 1999).

2.5 Household economics and gender relations

The livelihoods approach as explained in the previous section focuses on the strategies and capacities of households. A household can be perceived as a social group that lives in the same place, shares resources and meals, and makes joint decisions for economic and social activities (Allison & Horemans, 2006). Household decision-making is important for human development because these decisions determine the welfare of the household members (Angel-Urdinola & Wodon, 2010). In order to understand how households make decisions it is valuable to understand how households function. The classic economist model that was used to study households in the 1980s and 1990s assumes that a

(19)

household functions as a socioeconomic unity (Evans, 1991). This means that members in a household function within clearly defined social and economic boundaries that describe their role within the household. The neoclassical New Household Economics (NHE) approach assumes that individuals and households tend to maximize economic behavior to increase wealth of the household (Becker, 1976). Besides that, the theory assumes that human preferences are presumed to be more or less stable among different groups of people and therefore “the economic approach is a comprehensive one that is applicable to all human behavior” (Becker, 1976: 8). However, besides the basic main assumption of the NHE approach, there are additional assumptions, such as government interventions and social and cultural forces, which have implications for household economics that should be taken into account (Pollak, 2013).

At the household level multiple factors influence decision making processes, such as marital status, age, employment, education and gender. Gender studies focus on “how society operates through the study of the negotiation of power roles and influence between men and women” (Bennett, 2005: 452). Gender can be useful in identifying social constructions within households, not only because households are reflected upon by gender roles, but also because it is the place where they are produced (Mader & Schneebaum, 2013). Gender is especially interesting in studying decision-making processes because it is argued that women take more responsibility when it comes to income resources and the development of their children (Backiny-Yetna & Wodon, 2010). Research has shown that women favor investments in their children’s health and education and are therefore more concerned with long-term vision and chances of the household (Bussolo & De Hoyos, 2009). Gender complexities are represented in ideas, behavior patterns, personality traits and abilities of men and women that determine decision-making (Agrawal, 1997).

Two different types of household decision-making models for studying gender have been established: a unitary model and a bargaining model (Bussolo and De Hoyos, 2009) of which the latter gained increasingly more attention in the last decades. The unitary model is characterized by the idea that the male and female members of the household share the same preference for consumption and characteristics of the household. The bargaining model, on the other hand, implies that decision making processes depend on negotiating power of different household members. The outcomes of these negotiations determine how income resources are being spent within the household. This model is based on the assumptions that male and female preferences are different and both will maximize their personal influence (Backiny-Yetna & Wodon, 2010). Even though this last approach provides a useful framework, it is also being criticized for not paying any attention to: what factors define how much bargaining power a person has, links between intra and extra household decision-making, and the role of social norms and practices (Agrawal, 1997).

(20)

2.6 Conceptual scheme

The scheme below shows how this research is situated in the literature and how the concepts that occur in the research question have been studied. As shown, the situation in Dondra, Gandara and Talalla is influenced by international events. The EU ban on fish imports has been imposed outside the power of fishermen and the local can be situated within this broader context. At the local level the fisher livelihoods have to cope with a changing economic situation due to the EU ban and this has led to new livelihood strategies. As we have seen in the sustainable livelihoods approach, government responses influence how livelihoods define their strategies. These strategies in turn have led to new types of livelihoods that are expected to be different from the starting point of households.

2.7 Summary

This chapter set out the research and sub-questions and described the theoretical concepts on which the research is based. The sustainable livelihood approach showed how the vulnerability context of the EU ban on fish exports influences the position of households. The focus of this research is on the households’ livelihood capitals and the choices that these households make in order to create livelihood strategies. There are different types of livelihood strategies that households use in order to adapt to external shocks. The next chapter elaborates on how this theoretical framework has been applied in the methodology of the fieldwork in order to answer the research questions.

Influence of EU ban on fish imports Change in fisher livelihoods Livelihood Strategies Government responses to the ban

Fisher livelihoods: household/ women/ fishermen Fisher livelihoods: household/ women/ fishermen

One year ago Current situation

Figure 3: Conceptual scheme of this research Source: Author, 2016

Local context: macro-economic situation, history, seasonality, global influences, climate change

Usage of assets and capabilities

(21)

C

HAPTER

3:

M

ETHODOLOGY

This chapter describes the methodology of the research and consists of eight sections. The first section provides the unit of analysis of the study. The second section gives a detailed explanation of how the translator was chosen and his role in the research. The third, fourth and fifth sections describe the main research methods - observations, surveys and semi-structured interviews. The section thereafter provides an overview of how the collected data has been analyzed. Section seven describes the research limitations and section eight elaborates on the ethics of research.

3.1 Unit of analysis

From the research question it necessarily follows that the unit of analysis are households of Sri Lanka’s multi-day boat fisheries sector. Within this unit of analysis the distinction of job occupations is important. This distinction is relevant because it defines a fisherman’s income. A multi-day boat is generally owned by one person who has bought the boat and chooses his own crew and skipper. In some cases the owner is also the skipper of the boat. Upon return in the harbor the revenue of the catch is divided in two; one part for the boat owner and the rest will be divided amongst the crew and skipper. This means that boat owners generally earn more than their crew and skipper. This also implies that their households’ standard of living is generally higher than their crew’s. Besides that, it is necessary to take into account age differences of fisher households and their children. The age component is useful because for older women it is harder to start self-employment due to health and mobility reasons and younger women struggle with combining work with the daily care of their children. Also, when the husband reaches a certain age at which it becomes physically impossible to fish their household’s income will automatically be lower. These households characteristics of age and profession tend to create different livelihood strategies.

3.2 Translator bias

My initial plan was to find a female research assistant and translator for the reason that I would be mainly talking to women. Given the patriarchal characteristics of Sri Lankan society it seemed logical to have a female translator. However, upon arrival in Dondra I was introduced by my local supervisor from Ruhuna University to a few of the employees of the Southern Fisheries Organization (SFO). The SFO is an organization that strives to improve the rights of fishermen and their households and it has started to function as a microfinance institute by providing loans to women of fisher households. The organization also organizes workshops to empower these women. After discussing the aim of my research it turned out that one of the employees, Maduka, was an expert on the local fishing industry. Besides that, his English was sufficient to be my translator. Through his work at SFO, Maduka has gotten to know many women in different fishing villages along the southern coast. This was a good

(22)

entry point for my research. While conducting surveys it turned out that it was not an obstacle that my translator was a male. Many women were familiar with Maduka because he makes weekly visits to the villages to talk to the women and collect money for their loans. Because of their familiarity with him, the women were very willing to talk to me. It is hard to say in which ways a male translator influenced my research and how the women’s attitude would have been different if I had a female translator, but, from what I have seen, most of these jobs in Sri Lanka are done by men so women did not seem to be intimidated by his presence. Maduka has also been involved in multiple researches of my local supervisor regarding the fishery sector and has experience with data collection.

Unfortunately, Maduka was only available for my research in the afternoon hours. In the morning he had to be in the SFO office for six days a week because women could stop by for loans and other rearrangements. Luckily this did not turn out to be a serious problem as I was able to use internet in the office to work on my research. During the fieldwork period I was lucky to be able to stay with Maduka’s family in Dondra. It turned out to be very efficient to live with my translator. He took me to the villages and the harbor of Puranawella and introduced me to many people that were of relevance for my research. During the time at my host family I learned a lot about family life in Sri Lanka and this has been very helpful for my research.

3.3 Research methods

Observations

3.3.1

My observations were not only of the multi-day boat fisheries sector, but of all social aspects of Sri Lankan life. In order to understand the meaning and importance of family ties and household relations it turned out to be very fruitful to stay in a host family with a fishing background. During family trips and visits I was in a good position to observe how people relate to each other and what the different roles of men, women and children are within a household. This information was very important for the research since relations among Sri Lankans are obviously different from what I am used to in the Netherlands. At the beginning of my research I have visited the Puranawella harbor in Dondra to get an understanding of fisher livelihoods and practices. My translator explained a great deal of what was going on in the harbor, but also by making use of participant and situational observations a lot of information about fishing practices was given.

Whenever we visited a fishing village for surveys and interviews, mostly in the afternoons, I was alert as to who was present in the house to keep track of influences from any persons present. My translator and I walked around in the fishing villages, especially Dondra and Gandara, many times and during these walks many of aspects of fisher households’ daily lives became clear. I discussed this with my translator in order to gain a good understanding of fisher households. After visiting the villages regularly I acquired a good understanding of relations between and within fisher households and their

(23)

daily practices. This has helped me to position survey and interview answers within the research context.

Household survey 3.3.2

During the course of the fieldwork period 80 surveys were conducted in three different villages: Dondra, Gandara and Talalla. These surveys were the first stage of the research, and functioned as a basis for the in-depth interviews. The villages were chosen together with the translator to create a diverse sample. We visited the villages every afternoon, except for Sundays, for two weeks straight. All surveys were completed in the homes of fisher families. The survey consisted of a total of 22 questions. First, I asked a few basic questions about the household composition, age and education levels of all household members. After that questions were asked about the household’s monthly income and expenditures and how this was different from before the EU ban. For selecting respondents I mainly used the snow ball method. In the villages we started our survey with one woman that Maduka knew and then she would take us through the village to meet other people. By using this sampling method we also met women who were not involved in the SFO loan groups. Logically, there are more households with crew members than boat owners and skippers. We tried hard to reach as many households of boat owners and skippers as possible. I was able to survey 58 households of crew members, 16 skipper households and 6 boat owner households.

All surveys were completed in a face to face manner. I asked a question in English and my translator would ask the same question to the interviewee in Sinhala. The answers were then directly translated from Sinhala to English and I would write down the answers. This way it was possible to ask the women or my translator for clarifications and explanations during the survey. A few surveys were conducted in a slightly different way. Due to personal circumstances my translator was not able to assist me in doing surveys for two days. We decided that his colleague from SFO, Mr. Gamage, would help me. The surveys were translated from English to Sinhala and during the survey Gamage would write down the answers in Sinhala. Later when we were at home Maduka translated the answers to English. In total eight surveys were conducted in this way. In general, the surveys were very short and took no more than fifteen to twenty minutes. Because of this short time most women were happy to help me by answering the questions and let me into their homes. In many cases they emphasized how important it is to them that someone is doing research on their daily lives.

In-depth semi-structured interviews 3.3.3

In addition to the 80 surveys, in-depth interviews were held with women of fisher households as well as with fishermen, boat owners and merchants. The initial plan was to only interview women on their income activities and the effects of the EU ban on their households. However, after the surveys were completed it turned out to be relevant to interview fishermen, boat owners and merchants about how

(24)

they have adapted to the EU ban. Their personal answers to my questions would be more relevant than the women speculating about their husbands’ thoughts and feelings. In total 20 interviews were held over a period of four weeks. Every interview took about 30-45 minutes and took place in or around the interviewee’s home. The interviews gave me more insight into daily practices of fishermen and the differences in livelihoods before the EU ban and current livelihoods of fisher families. I only conducted interviews in Dondra and Gandara and not in Talalla. Because of the distance and few contacts in this village it was difficult to arrange interviews. For that reason, in the data analysis chapters I will only refer to Dondra and Gandara.

The idea behind doing the household surveys first was to be able to choose a number of households from the surveys and do in-depth interviews with them as a follow-up. However, due to the fact that fishermen are at sea for 20 to 30 days it was difficult to find out whether the husbands of the women whom we surveyed were at home. Therefore, a structured selection of the households for interviews was not possible. Instead, my translator and I would drive to the villages and see if there were any men or women at home who had time and were willing to participate in an interview. In some cases the respondents belonged to households that participated in the survey, but this was not always the case. Many of the interviewed fishermen were old friends or acquaintances of my translator because he could call them in advance to plan an interview. The selection for interviews was mainly based on the profession of crew, skipper, boat owner and merchant to make sure we spoke to an equal number of each category.

In order to gain a better understanding of the implementation and implications of the EU ban, interviews were also held with government officials at the Ministry of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Development in Colombo. I was able to speak to three government officials from different departments within the Ministry. The different departments are the Quality and Control division, Fish Biology and the VMS Center. The interviews gave me a good overview of the history of the EU ban as well as important elements of Sri Lanka’s multi-day boat fishing sector. Besides that, I was able to have a look at the VMS center where the registered multi-day boats are being monitored. The government officials were willing to cooperate with the interview once I explained that I was a student and that the data would not be used for any other purpose than this study, but possibly they were still cautious with answering questions.

3.4 Data analysis

A part of the data analysis already started in the field. All the surveys and interviews were transcribed directly after the data had been collected. This made it easier to formulate questions for the in-depth interviews. After I returned from the field I used the statistical program SPSS to run descriptive and exploratory tests on the survey data. The qualitative interviews have been analyzed and coded by hand

(25)

using color codes. In the data analysis chapters I will refer to household interviews as ‘HH’ and their specific numbers and occupations.

3.5 Research limitations

This research focuses on the roles of men and women of fisher families. One limitation is that it was difficult to talk to the women alone when doing surveys and interviews. The women would invite me and my translator into their home and sometimes prepare tea and some foods. However, in many cases their husband was at home enjoying his free time between two fishing trips. Other times the children were at home because schools end early in the afternoon around 1:30 pm and it is not uncommon that parents also live in the house. Moreover, these villages are not visited often by tourists so it was exceptional for them to see a white blond girl in the village. Many other villagers were curious what I was doing there so sometimes they would stop and listen to the questions I asked. In most cases this resulted in them joining the survey. The fact that I was not able to speak with women alone was not a problem per se because interesting discussions would arise that provided useful information about fisher households. However, sometimes the husband took over in answering the survey because several questions were indirectly about his fishing practices. Once the husband started answering the questions it was hard to get the women involved again. I tried to ask the question directly to the woman by directing my question directly to her and by looking at her, but often the husband would still answer.

Another limitation is that it was hard to reach merchants in the harbor. Merchants are the ones who link harbor practices to export companies. Once the multi-day boats with tuna enter the harbor the merchant calls the export companies to ask for their price. The merchants own the trucks that transport the tuna from the harbor to the companies in Colombo and Negombo, where the fish is made ready for export. It is to be expected that merchants are directly impacted by the EU ban since many export companies closed their doors. Unfortunately, very few merchants show up at the harbor nowadays, which made it hard to find them. In the end we were able to talk to two merchants.

Language differences clearly formed a limitation during the research. The interviews with the government officials were all conducted in English. However, in the fishing villages the level of English was limited to a few simple phrases and sometimes no more than yes and no. By making use of a translator there is always the risk that some information gets lost in the translation. My translator tried to do his best by translating exactly what the interviewee said, but a complete translation of every word in every sentence was not possible due to underdeveloped language skills and time limitations. The fourth limitation concerns the reliability of the household survey answers. It is hard to be sure whether households tell the truth about their income. It might be the case that some households have slightly exaggerated their income difference of the pre-ban and ban situation because of my

(26)

appearance as a Western student. Maybe they hoped they would get some money if they made their problems look bigger or they were afraid of losing face. Moreover, it can also be the case that the income difference feels like a lot more than it actual is for the households because they have to adjust their daily lives to a new standard. While analyzing the data I have taken into account these limitations.

3.6 Ethical considerations

In general, the topic of this research is not very ethically challenging. Before every survey and interview my translator would tell the interviewee the purpose of this research and some information about who I am and what I was doing in Sri Lanka. However, when asking for household’s income I could sometimes feel that the respondents were not willing to answer or seemed to doubt what to answer. My translator explained that the government would sometimes do short surveys and people would always report a lower income than they actually have for tax reasons. When I became aware of this I also explained before every survey and interview that the purpose of this research was only for my university study and none of the answers that they give would be send to the government or any other organization. Moreover, women were told that their names would receive pseudonyms or numbers to ensure their anonymity. At the end of every survey and interview I would ask my respondents if they still had questions for me. I considered it to be fair that they had a chance to ask me anything they want if I was able to take up their time to answer my questions. In many cases they were curious about my family and asked me why I was interested in fisheries.

3.7 Summary

This chapter has set out the unit of analysis, limitations and research methods for this research. A Sri Lankan translator has supported me during the entire time of research and translated both the face to face household surveys and interviews. Besides that, observations were done to understand the research within the different element of Sri Lankan life. The limitations describe the position of the researcher in the field and how the researcher dealt with ethical issues.

(27)

C

HAPTER

4:

R

ESEARCH LOCATION

This chapter contains a description of the research location and its surroundings. It consists of three sections. The first section gives an overview of Sri Lanka’s recent history focusing on the southern provinces. The second section presents a description of Matara District, which is located in the south of Sri Lanka. The last section describes the three villages in Matara District – Dondra, Gandara and Talalla – where this research took place. One of the five livelihood capitals, physical capital, is also discussed in this section.

Figure 5: Sri Lanka Source: Geology.com

Figure 6: Matara District Source: raneegarments.com

Figure 4: Dondra, Gandara and Talalla Source: Google maps, accessed April 2016

(28)

4.1 Sri Lanka

Sri Lanka is an island nation located in the Indian Ocean approximately 100 km of the south-eastern coast of India. It covers a total area of 64,300 km², which is one and a half times the size of the Netherlands. North to south the island stretches 440 km and from east to west the greatest width is 220 km (FAO, 2006). Even though Sri Lanka is small in size, it has a very diverse population. The Sri Lankan population consists of more than 22 million people of which 75% is Sinhalese, 11% Sri Lankan Tamil, 9% Moors and 5% Indian Tamil (CIA World Factbook, 2012). The most common spoken languages are Sinhalese and Tamil. Sri Lanka is also very diverse when it comes to religion; 70% is Buddhist, 13% is Hindu, 9% is Muslim and Roman Catholic and Christian are made up of respectively 6% and 1% (Ibid, 2012).

Sri Lanka’s recent history is characterized by conflict. Sri Lanka gained independence from Great Britain in 1948 and after that heavy internal political struggles and armed conflicts arose. The Tamil-Sinhalese ethnic conflict (1983-2009) was largely limited to the north of the country. However, at the same time another conflict emerged that mainly took place in the South. The Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP – People’s Liberation Front) consisted of young poor Sinhalese youth from rural areas that were driven by Marxist nationalist ideas (Samarasinghe, 2003). They felt they were being excluded based on class and their aim was to change the political regimes (Abeyratne, 2004). They launched their first armed uprising in 1971 and the second in 1988-1990. The first uprising came as a surprise for the government and they were unprepared to counterattack the rebels. Several countries supported Sri Lanka by providing arms and logistical support (Samarasinghe, 2003). When the second rebellion was organized, the government had increased its defense expenditures and had the military strength and means to fight the rebels.

4.2 Matara District

Matara District is one of the three districts of the Southern Province in Sri Lanka, 150 km south of the capital Colombo. The district has a population of 814,000, of which 424,000 are female and 390,000 are male (Department of Statistics, 2012). The majority of the population is Sinhalese, 94%, and Tamil and Sri Lanka Moor make up 6% of the population. Matara District is not very religiously diverse compared to the nationwide statistics; 94% is Buddhist and respectively 2% and 3% are Hindu and Islam and 1% other (Department of Statistics, 2012). The marine fishing sector of Matara consists of more than 11,800 fishermen with a total population, including dependents, of 47,000 (Department of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources, 2015). These households are divided over 68 fishing villages, in which more than 48% of the population is involved in fishing. Matara District is divided into sixteen Divisional Secretariats (DS). The DS regions of Matara are then again split up into 650 Grama Niladhari (GN) Divisions that are focused on the village level. The GN divisions can be seen as the village administration system and are responsible for social services and development activities in the

(29)

rural village areas. This research has taken place in the Devinuwara DS and in the GN Divisions of Devinuwara and Gandara.

4.3 Fishing villages: Dondra, Gandara and Talalla

The town Dondra, sometimes referred to as Devinuwara, is located on the southernmost point of Sri Lanka and counted 12,568 inhabitants in 2012 (Department of Statistics, 2012). The harbor of Dondra is called Puranawella and plays an important role for the local economy. In this harbor the multi-day boat fishing fleet consisted of 644 registered boats in 2014 (Ministry of Fisheries and Aquatic Resource Development, 2015b). The fishing industry in Dondra is not only large in size; it is also the main source of income for many households (USAID, 2006).

Physical capital is the basic infrastructure that supports livelihoods. It is considered an important element because a lack of infrastructure influences poverty rates (DfID, 1999). Examples of physical capital are transport systems, shelter, water supply, and sanitation. Dondra has a town center with multiple small grocery shops, clothing shops, trading shops and pharmacies. Among other facilities are three different bank offices and ATMs, a post office, a fuel station and a market place where fresh fish and vegetables are sold on a daily basis. The two tourist attractions are the Hindu temple with a twenty meter high statue and the famous lighthouse that gives a stunning view of the southern coast. Even though the harbor is located in Dondra, many fisher households live outside this town. There is one road (A2) that runs along the southern coast and most of the fishing villages are located along this road. When driving down the road it seems there is nothing but wilderness behind the shops on the roadside. However, when one enters a badly paved path to the left or right side, sometimes a dirt road, one finds multiple villages on the hilly areas between the road and the ocean. For this research surveys were held in the villages of Gandara, Talalla and Dondra, as shown on map 3.

The village Gandara is located three km east of Dondra. The total population was 5,739 in 2012 (Department of Statistics, 2012). Gandara has a post office, a police station, several temples and shops. Apart from the shops and restaurants along the roadside there are not many facilities available in the village itself; only one or two shops selling cool drinks and basic needs like sugar, salt and tea. For other necessities as well as schools the villagers have to go to the main road or to surrounding villages. Houses in Dondra and Gandara look very much alike. They are generally built of large grey bricks, and the roofs are either tiled or made of corrugated sheets. When the building is finished the houses are painted in bright colors to give it a good look. The gardens are mostly fenced.

The village Talalla is different from the above two settlements in that it was built by the Red Cross after the tsunami of 2004. Several houses in Dondra that were located near the sea were destroyed and the government did not allow these people to rebuild their house on the same land. The village consists

(30)

of 28 houses and is located in the inlands up the hills from Talalla town. It takes about fifteen minutes to walk to town. There are no shops or facilities in the village and the houses are all the same size and include a living room, kitchen, and two bedrooms. Light in the evening hours is poor. Many of the people who lived here admitted that they would like to move back to Dondra where they came from since the village was much more isolated compared to where they used to live.

In all three villages electricity and water are both provided by the national government. As a household you can sign up for these schemes and a representative of the government will come by the house to install the systems. The transportation system is organized by the government and by private bus owners. The government has red buses running along the southern coast and private owners drive their own blue buses. In general, every five to ten minutes a bus will stop in the town centers. If people from Gandara or Dondra would like to visit bigger cities as Matara or Tangalle, they mostly do not have to wait more than ten minutes. Even on Sundays there is transportation available, though less than on weekdays. The Matara-Kataragama railroad extension is currently under construction. The construction of this 114 km railroad is done by a Chinese company. It started in 2010 and is expected to be finished in 2017. However, unfortunately the railway will be build few kilometers inland from the coast and will therefore not directly benefit the people who live near the coast.

The villages consist of self-built individual houses. Furniture is limited. Most houses have between five to ten plastic chairs in the living room, a big table that is most of the time covered by wedding pictures of family members, and a television. On the walls are big posters of people’s babies and children. In one upper corner of the living room most families have created some space for Buddha pictures and statues. In addition to that most houses have two or three bedrooms, partitioned of the common room by curtains. The bedrooms contain no more than a bed, sometimes two if the family had many children, and a wardrobe for clothes. The kitchen is almost always built outside the house and the toilet as well to prohibit smells from entering the house.

4.4 Summary

This chapter described the recent history and location sites of this research. The fieldwork was conducted in three villages: Dondra, Gandara and Talalla in Matara District, southern Sri Lanka. The villages are connected by a main road where the centers of the towns, including shops and restaurants, are located. Besides that, this chapter has provided a picture of what the villages and houses look like. In the next chapter the livelihoods of the fisher families who live in these villages will be discussed.

(31)

C

HAPTER

5:

L

IVELIHOODS OF FISHER HOUSEHOLDS

This chapter presents different aspects of fisher households according to the livelihood capitals that have been discussed in chapter 2. The first section gives an overview of everyday life in the fishing villages. Section two describes education levels of the respondents, which is part of human capital, and the section thereafter provides insight in the community loan systems that relates to financial capital. Section four describes the importance of social capital at the village level. Physical capital has already been discussed in the previous chapter and natural capital will be dealt with in the next chapter.

5.1 Everyday life of fisher households

According to fisher households, the Sri Lankan multi-day boat fishing sector requires a way of life that is not suitable for every individual because it requires hard work from the man and a high degree of independence from the woman. Many fisher households on the southern coast of Sri Lanka have been involved in deep sea and off shore fishing for many generations. Parents, grandparents and great-grandparents settled in the small villages near the coast and never moved to another place. According to my surveys, the average number of years that households have been involved in fishing is 20 years, with 5 as the lowest number of years and 42 years as the longest time that a man in the household has been fishing. These fishing households are normally characterized by the long-term absence of a male member. Besides that, there is much uncertainty whether the man will return in good health and does not suffer an accident or rough stormy weather at sea. Because of the tough working conditions at sea, the International Labor Organization (ILO) has designed the Work in Fishing Convention2 (2007) in which the rights of fishermen are protected. Even though this convention has not been ratified by Sri Lanka, it provides a good overview of basic rights of fishermen.

Within the local fisheries sector a distinction can be made between boat owners and their crew and skippers. This distinction is important because of the different responsibilities, social networks, and activities of both groups. In general, boat owners earn more money than crew members and from the appearance of their houses and clothing it can be seen that owners are able to invest more in their daily lives. However, this does not necessarily mean that owners carry fewer risks. The crew, including skipper, work for the boat owner. This creates a patron-client relationship (Scott, 1972). This relationship is “defined as a special case of dyadic (two-person) ties involving a largely instrumental friendship in which an individual of higher socioeconomic status (patron) uses his own influence and resources to provide protection or benefits for a person of lower status (client) who reciprocates by

2_{The Work in Fishing Convention (2007) of the International Labor Organization (ILO) includes rules and}

regulations regarding responsibilities of boat owners and skippers, work agreements, accommodation and food, social security and medical care, and minimum requirements for working on vessels, such as working at night, minimum age, availability of medical assistance and hours of rest.

Households under pressure : the impacts of the EU ban on fisher livelihoods, Sri Lanka