Wastiaux, M. 10187871
UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM | SUPERVISORS: DRS, L. DE KLERK & DR. M. BAVINCKFoto 1: Karaikal Trawler Harbor (Wastiaux, 2015)
The adaptation of a fishing community
to changes in livelihood
A CASE STUDY OF KARAIKALMEDU, TAMIL NADU, INDIA
Bachelor Thesis: Human Geography, Faculty of Social and Behavioral Science 27-7-2015
1
Abstract
Karaikalmedu is a village in Tamil Nadu, India, that fully depends on fisheries. Current fish stocks are declining which is affecting the community. Globalization and modernization in fisheries during the last decades has resulted in changes in economic and social composition of the population. This research describes and explains the strategies implemented by the community to cope with the stresses by focusing on livelihood diversification. The fishing community of Karaikalmedu is not diversifying its sources of income to reduce risk and vulnerability. The livelihood strategies
implemented are aimed to increase income and are composed mainly of investing in education for the next generation, migrating, investing in technology in fisheries and changing the catchment area. This behavior is explained by using the sustainable livelihood theory which focusses mainly on access to assets of financial, physical, human, and social capital. Constraints in access to human and social capital seem to be of influence in the success of these strategies. A distinction in reasons to diversify is made between diversification for “survival” and for “accumulation. Financially the fishermen are in a reasonable position therefore diversification for survival does not apply for households in the community.
This case study was conducted in one month and the primary methods of data collection were semi-structured interviews and participatory observations. The perspective of open conversations has resulted in a broad view of how households react to stress.
2
Table of contents
Abstract ... 1 1. Introduction ... 3 2. Theoretical background ... 4 3. Methodology ... 9 4. Concerning Karaikalmedu... 13 4.1. The village ... 13 4.2. Fisheries ... 16 4.3. Culture ... 17 4.4. Stresses ... 19 5. Strategies ... 22 5.1 Education ... 22 5.2 Migration ... 25 5.3 Technology ... 265.4 Change of catchment area ... 27
6. Assets & Access ... 31
6.1 Access to financial capital ... 31
6.2 Social Capital ... 36 6.3 Human Capital ... 38 6.4 Additional constraints ... 39 7. Conclusion ... 41 8. Discussion ... 44 Bibliography ... 47 Appendix ... 48
3
1. Introduction
Recent studies show that marine fish stocks in the world are declining. Around half of the marine fish population is fully exploited and one quarter of the world wide resource is overexploited, depleted or recovering from depletion. Nowadays, Asia is one of the biggest producers and consumers of fish. (FAO, 2015). Due to its high population and the modernizations of the last 50 years India has become an important country in fisheries. The opening up of the global market resulted in an increasing demand from foreign countries for Indian fish. With around 1.05 million people engaged in fisheries, Tamil Nadu is a significant producer of Indian fish. This state has to deal with problems occurring in fisheries as well (Fisheries Department, 2015). Overcapacity and overexploitation of the fish stock affects fishing communities along the Tamil coast. Despite national and international focus on adapting to these stresses and enhancing livelihoods, adaptation is primarily implemented at the local level (Coulthard, 2007).
The “sustainable livelihood approach” suggests that essential parts of adaptation are shouldered by local communities themselves. This approach emphasizes on one strategy of livelihood adaptation, “livelihood diversification”. Diversifying is considered the universal strategy of risk mitigation.Due to political, socio-cultural and economic diversity, individuals react differently to changing
circumstances; hence they make different decisions (Allison & Ellis, 2001). Many countries in the global south do not have sufficient financial and human capacity to organize adaptation strategies and therefore fail to make rural communities resilient to stresses (Coulthard, 2007). A better
understanding of the local capacity of, and the reactions to human or natural stresses will help social safety and net poverty reduction. Governmental policy and measures can be adjusted to social needs on household and community level acquired by knowledge from research on livelihood
diversification.
This research aims to describe and analyze how households in a fishing community in Tamil Nadu, India, respond and adjust to change. It attempts to unravel the origin behind certain actions
undertaken by fisherman to improve their livelihoods by diversification. The focus is mainly based on the decline of fish stocks as the stress affecting the community.
First, the strategies undertaken by the community to deal with this “natural” stress will be described. Then, an attempt is made to explain the choices for certain strategies and which determinants are of importance. This is done by investigating the access to important assets, elaborating on, natural, human, social, financial and physical capital. Stresses, access and strategies are the core concepts in
4
this research. The research is build up around the interactions and interlinkages between these three pillars. Wherein access and contextual factors can be considered as the main determinants of
decisions made by the fishermen. Access can be seen as the very broad measure of social, economic and individual accessibility to livelihood improving solutions. By studying the access to assets of different households an explanation of their behavior is given. Lacking or having certain access to assets enables certain strategies and explains decisions that are made.
The research was conducted in Karaikalmedu a fishing village along the Coromandel coast. The village is fully dependent on fisheries and has a very homogeneous social and ethnic composition. Three types of fishermen can be identified. The mechanized boat users, who have good financial resources but are economically very dependent on fisheries; the fiber boat users, who are mainly concerned with small scale fisheries and experience most problems in accessing the bigger markets; and third the laborers, who can be hired to work on the fiber boat or mechanized boats. Obviously, the latter seems to be the most flexible in diversifying income resources. However, access to alternatives are required and found to be often lacking in this group. Laborers are heavily dependent on the
availability of work and therefore experience declining fish stock in a different way than boat owners. To have an overview on how the variables correlate to certain strategies or behavior this research is conducted on household level. According to the outcomes, assumptions can be made on how the community’s livelihood strategies can be explained and why there is a variety in coping with the stresses between the three categories of fishermen.
2. Theoretical background
Adaptation is a recognized response to the threat of natural hazards and stresses (Béné et al. 2000; Coulthard, 2007). Adaptation is illustrated as a race against the clock wherein the natural changes are unstoppable and politicians, civil society and scholars of adaptation constantly try to understand how adaptation can be sustained and risks may be reduced. The role and existing capacity of society to implement adaptation and mitigation strategies can be vital in understanding adaptation to natural hazards and changes (Coulthard, 2007). Communities are constantly adapting to stresses and changes therefore the level of adaptation at local scale by individuals, households and communities, has become essential in learning how adaptation works. This research attempts to clarify this part of adaptation in a rural fishing settlements in Tamil Nadu by emphasizing on diversification of
5
Diversification:
What is the importance of diversification in this particular case? Diversification is important for fishing communities because fishing is a high risk occupation. It is vulnerable to seasonal and cyclical fluctuations and stresses. Diversification of income sources spreads the risk over other sources of income and reduces the households vulnerability to stresses and shocks, hence it is a measure to reduce poverty.
Literature in development studies on rural diversification of livelihoods categorize two main
determinants of diversification. A distinction is made between diversifying by necessity or by choice. First, Béne et al (2000) and Coulthard (2007) discuss the determinant of choice as the concept of “diversifying for accumulation”. Here, a voluntarily chosen array of different sources of income and activities contributes to a sustainable management of the natural resource and reduces the risks and shocks and improves the resilience of the system. This is considered as the main trend in
diversification of livelihood. The second determinant, “diversification for survival”, is also discussed by Béné et al (2000) and refers to the involuntarily, coerced aspect of diversification out of, for instance, natural hazards or illnesses.
According to Béné et al (2000) livelihood diversification can be simultaneously a survival strategy or a strategy to enhance livelihood. This is compatible with Ellis’s (1998) nuanced perspective on reasons to diversify. He also presents the importance of implementing the considerations of diversification into policy making.
“…diversification obeys a continuum of causes and motivations that vary across families at a particular point in time, and for the same families at different point in time. (...) These distinctions reveal that policies aimed to achieve more resilient or more sustainable rural livelihoods need to recognize not just the positive attributes of diversity for achieving those ends, but also distinctions about the different nature of that diversity between individuals, households, and larger social or economic areas.”(Ellis 1998, p. 7).
Sustainable livelihood approach:
The ‘sustainable livelihood approach’, (Allison & Ellis, 2001) is an approach used to understand the strategies of rural households to cope with uncertainties and fluctuations in income resource and livelihoods. Its aim is to provide insights and explanations for management directives which are compatible with both resource conservation and the social economic goals of management. This approach leads to new insights in how structures of livelihood enhancing strategies are implemented by households.
6
The livelihood approach is concerned with the capabilities of fisher communities to deal with
stresses. According to this approach, the ability and the way households implement coping strategies depends on the access to assets.
According to Allison & Ellis (2001) “livelihood” is the combination of activities and access to assets such as human, physical, social, and financial capital together with the availability of institutions and social relations that determine the individuals or households life. The focus of Allison & Ellis’s (2001) approach is on sustainability. This research does not focus on this aspect, it will instead elaborate on livelihood enhancing strategies.
This framework is based on the assets owned, controlled, claimed, or by other means accessed by the household. These assets comprise physical capital (economic capital such as gear and
accommodation), natural capital (fish stocks), human capital (people, education and health), financial capital (savings, credits, income) and social capital (kinship, networks, associations). This is
demonstrated in box A of Allison & Ellis’s (2001) scheme in figure 1.
Box B indicates the institutional context of livelihoods including social relations, institutions and organizations that enable or hinder access to the assets or activities. The external factors, indicated by box C, sometimes referred to as the vulnerability context, are the trends or shock that are outside the control of the household.
This results in an array of activities and strategies that will have its impact on livelihood security and environmental sustainability indicated in in box E and F. This is based on the subjects from the framework for micro policy analysis of livelihoods by Allison & Ellis (2001) displayed in figure 1. In table 1 the operationalization of the data processing is displayed according to the three concepts of stress, strategy and access.
The explicated framework is not a unit to measure livelihood strategies, but rather is a tool to create understanding of the process. The process of adaptation is an unmeasurable concept therefore this research attempts to explain it instead. There are always strategies implemented to create an enhanced livelihood that need to be taken into account when in conducting development policies.
7
8
This research will use a simplified form of the framework. By classifying the access and stresses of the fishermen, diversification strategies will be explained. Examining these assets can be difficult in a short period of time. For example, it is very difficult to give a complete description of the social capital in the community. Investigating complex relationships and networks requires a lot of effort and time. Also verifiable figures of natural capital, on the fish stocks, are not available. Fish migrate and stocks are in constant fluctuation, also the lack of control on fish landings impede a
substantiated estimation on the stock situation. Therefore these subjects are speculatively
elaborated in this thesis. The other assets, physical capital, financial capital and human capital can be investigated in a more reliable way.
The framework by Allison & Ellis (2001) was a reaction to the (by then) conventional strategies of sustainable development which focused on direct income generation by increasing production and efficiency. The ability of rural communities to create a resilient system by diversifying their sources of income and develop alternative strategies to cope with stresses and shocks in the system were undermined. This framework emphasizes on this aspect of development. Therefore is expected that communities dealing with a decline of fish will use diversification to cope with the stress. However diversification is not the only activity to enhance livelihoods.
Assets
Coleman (1988) uses a definition of social capital that has similarities with Bourdieu’s approach. Bourdieu defines social capital as the resources derived from possessions of a durable network of institutionalized relationships. The members of the group are backed by the collectively owned capital. The distribution of capital is linked to economic and cultural capital which is used to reproduce relations and access to resources. Coleman’s approach overlaps with Bourdieu’s in the sense that social capital inheres in relationships. However Coleman states that social capital is
appropriable by individuals. “The social capital is understood as the norms, sanctions, obligations and expectations inhering in these relationships (Bebbington, 2009).” The individual will make use of this capital in accessing resources. Where in Bourdieu’s approach the institutional behavior is superior, Coleman emphasizes on the individual considerations in the way social capital is deployed
(Bebbington, 2009).
Human capital is created by changes that bring out skill and capabilities that make them able to act in new ways (Coleman, 1988). There consist a link between social and human capital that reinforce each other. A lack of human capital will have its negative impact on the effects of social capital.
9
Financial capital is denoted as all financial assets the household possesses. This consists of loans, savings, debts and earnings. In this study the status and access of the households to these financial assets is examined.
First the context of the village and community and related issues and stresses are explained.
Investigating adaptation strategies requires information about indigenous capacities, knowledge and practices of how to deal with natural stresses. Subsequently, the access of households to the mentioned assets will be elaborated on. Constraints in access to assets may result in certain activities related to livelihood diversification. Finally, the livelihood diversification strategies are demonstrated and will be analyzed.
3. Methodology
The fieldwork and data collection took place in April 2015. This period was during the governmental ban on trawler fishing. Therefore many fishermen were at home and approachable. A downside of doing research in this period was that the harbor was closed. Only one day of the fieldwork was spent in the harbor. Research methods used are participatory observations and interviews . In the first week participatory observations were done to gain knowledge on the life Karaikalmedu. Walking around and talking to one another about all kinds of topics created an image of what the village is concerned about. Discussions were held with villagers, people working in the ice factories and the panchayat (village council). A preliminary meeting with the panchayat was scheduled earlier to ask permission to conduct the research in their village. There was also room for some questions about the history and fisheries in the village. This was a very fruitful meeting however the panchayat did not adopt a very critical attitude towards problems in their village. Mainly primary data and the organizational structure of the village was derived from this meeting. To get a better understanding of the problems in the village, conversations with the villagers were held. Villagers were more open about happenings in the community than the panchayat due to its interests and responsibilities. At the start of the fieldwork a clear framework was not yet completed and the approach of the research was still very broad. Therefore a qualitative research method was chosen using semi structured interviews. A version of these semi structured interviews is included in the appendix. More information could be obtained in this manner within the short amount of time. 36 interviews were conducted which almost all resulted in long conversations. Half of the respondents lived in the tsunami village (constructed after the tsunami) and the other half lived in the old village. Heads of the households were interviewed, because they have the best insight in the economic status of the family and because they have the most influence in decision making. Younger members of the
10
household were interviewed because they could tell more about the aspirations of the future generations
Respondents were selected using a form of snowball selection. Respondents were asked if they knew other people available for interviews, who were subsequently approached. In advance, the number of trawler boat owners, fiber boat owners, and laborers had been determined. The aim was to interview around the same number of each group. Names of respondents used as reference for quotes are fictive.
Two respondents were not fishermen, but were students that did not participate in fisheries. However, interesting information was given by them about leaving the community.
The interviews were structured using open and closed questions. The closed questions were household and finance related. The open questions included topics such as education, migration, declining fish stocks, investments, future perspectives and backgrounds of decisions made in life. By asking open questions respondents came up with problems and stories themselves instead of leading the conversations to possibly prepared answers. In the appendix an indicative questionnaire is included
One constrain is the fact that returning to the village is not possible. Because of this it is not possible to collect additional data after analyzing the initial findings. Some subjects needed more elaboration to make decent and reliable assumptions. Due to this some assumptions are speculative.
A translator assisted in conducting the interviews with the respondents. Language is an important factor in qualitative research therefore constraints regarding language do often occur. The content of the interviews is translated two times and may therefore loose some of its reliability.
The data derived from the fieldwork is subsequently processed by using ATLAS.ti, a program to code qualitative data. All interviews and notes were coded in a number of subjects to create a clear overview of everything said about a certain topic.
The next table shows the topics elaborated on in the interviews. The topics are selected according to the content of the interviews. A distinction was made between stresses/problems, strategies and access in families, all mentioned as core concepts in the theories used.
11
Stresses/Probems Strategies Access
Changes in income Investing in technology Family abroad Decline of fish Migration to foreign countries Level of income Family responsibilities Migration of family members Indebtedness
Lack of education/money Palk bay Level of education
Job availability Continuing fishing Network inside fisheries
Social status Governmental education Organizational access
Number of income generating members
Migration of children Savings
Tsunami related stresses Education for children Social status
Working conditions Different sources of income Variety in network assets
Table 1: Coding the interviews
According to this operationalization the research was built up and the sub questions have been created. This creation of questions has been done after the operationalization and coding of the interviews because results of the interviews were decisive in determining the questions and finding a focus in research. A lack of data could result in the deletion of sub questions. Finally, the main question is phrased:
How can different livelihood diversification strategies (outside or inside the fishing sector) among fisher households in the community of Karaikalmedu be explained?
A certain amount of contextual information has to be gathered to create an overview of the situation in Karaikalmedu. Therefore the stresses and problems concerning income are to be investigated, resulted in the following sub questions:
What are the livelihood related stresses and problems fishermen have to deal with?
And:
What are the livelihood diversification strategies composed of?
This descriptive part was followed by an analytical part. To structure this analytical part the sub questions are derived from the theoretical background.
To what extent can the livelihood diversification strategies, found in Karaikalmedu ,be explained by access to assets of:
12 - Natural capital - Physical capital - Financial capital - Social Capital - Human Capital And:
What institutional and contextual aspects play a role in explaining livelihood diversification strategies?
13
4. Concerning Karaikalmedu
4.1. The village
Karaikalmedu is a fishing village along the Coromandel coast in Tamil Nadu in the south of India. It is located in Karaikal district which is one of the Pondicherry enclaves in India and therefore it has a separated government from Tamil Nadu. The Union Territory of Pondicherry consists of 15 enclaves located in Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Andra Pradesh. This special situation has its impact on several political, economic and social structures. Union Territory of India implies that governance and administration falls directly under federal authority. Pondicherry Union Territory has 27 marine fishing villages and 23 inland fishing villages. In Karaikal district there are 10 fishing hamlets, with around 3.499 households that accounts for a fishing population of around 18.500 (Fisheries Department, 2015).
In Karaikalmedu there are around 730 households and a population of around 2818 according to the 2010 census it is the largest fishing village in Karaikal district (Government of India, 2015). It is a homogeneous community. The village consists solely of fisher households which all have the Hindu religion. The village performs an important role as a religious center and contains four Hindu temples with another one under construction. Every household belongs to the Pattinavar caste, the most prevalent fishing caste of Tamil Nadu.
South of the city of Karaikal a trawler harbor is located which lies around 7 kilometers from
Karaikalmedu. Karaikalmedu controls this harbor where around 237 trawler boats are docked. More wooden trawlers than steel trawlers are docked. Wooden trawlers can sail for a maximum of 2 days whereas the average steel trawler can extend its trip to more than a week. Fishermen from
Karaikalmedu have 45 trawler boats placed in this harbor. Furthermore Karaikalmedu has 120 fiber boats which are almost all placed on the beach. Laborers on the trawler boats and fiber boats originate from Karaikalmedu or adjacent villages such as Kilinjalmedu.
14
15
Map 2: Region of Karaikal (Google Earth, 2015)
16
When the fish has landed it is sold almost immediately at the marketplace in the harbor. Wholesalers from fish industries or restaurants are buying fish in large quantities directly from the boat owners. Different types of fish are caught by the trawler boats. However the most abundant are oil sardines. Furthermore, depending on the season, shrimp and mackerel are caught. There are only a few boats that specify their catch such as tuna or rays. The fish is directly transported by trucks in iceboxes. The use of nets is very diverse. All boats use a variety of nets during one trip. The use of nets depends on the environment and situation. Recently introduced technologies are GPS, tracking systems, more powerful engines, bigger iceboxes on deck, and more advanced nets.
The fiber boats are located at the beach in the villages. The women from the village sell the fishes at the local market in the city of Karaikal. The market is mainly for local consumers. The fish price at this market is lower due to the smaller quantities. Fish is dried in the sun in the village. Drying fish is a method to conserve. Although the village also has its ice factory which is closed during the ban. The city of Karaikal is located just 3 kilometers from the village of Karaikalmedu. The city does not have direct entry to the sea. This means that the fishing hamlets along the coast have all the responsibility of fisheries in Karaikal district. It is one of the biggest cities in the area and with a population of more than 200.000 it plays a significant economic and political role. Karaikal provides higher education, institutions, market places and other facilities.
4.2. Fisheries
The Tamil Nadu fisheries contributes to a large part to India’s marine catches. It is one of the leading states of marine fisheries with a potential of an estimated 0.719 tonnes (0.369 million tons from less than 50mt. depth and 0.35 million tons beyond 50 mt. depth) a year (Fisheries Department, 2015). The mechanized sector – which contains all inboard engine craft of over 15 hp – covers half of the marine catch (Fisheries Department, 2015). There are approximately 11,000 mechanized boats, 25,000 motorized boats and 10,500 non-mechanized boats in Tamil Nadu. Between 1980-92 the amount of mechanized boats has increased by 50 percent (Johnson, 2013).
Tamil Nadu fisheries experienced the so called “blue revolution”. This was a time period of fast modernization that started in the 50s. The new developments went beyond the small scale fisheries and created a modern sub-sector based in the new exploited harbor locations. The new technologies in fisheries were associated with the opening up of the international markets. In particular the international popularity of shrimp have put its grip on Tamil Nadu fisheries. Due to the discovery of these new markets the mechanized sector experienced an enormous impulse and grew at rapid pace (Bavinck et al, 2007)
17
The trawler sector consists of two different types of boat. The steel trawler can stay on sea for more than week whereas the wooden trawlers mostly return after a day. There is a variety in types of boats from one harbor to another. Mechanized boats make use of different nets. The most relevant nets used are the trawler nets (61%) mainly used for shrimp, the minority has shifted to other types of nets such as gill net (Fisheries Department, 2015).
The accelerated expansion of the mechanized fleet threatened the health of the fish stock. According to the fishermen as well the fish stocks declined rapidly. To recover marine life, Indian government implemented an annual 45 days fishing ban of mechanized vessels. During this ban it is not allowed for trawler boats to fish, however the fiber boats are not restricted in their activities.
This period is an interesting period to investigate activities of trawler fishermen. During this research the ban was active and trawler fishermen were free of labor. Obviously this situation was taken into account and has been included in the questionnaires. The results were quite clear, during the ban the trawler fishermen do marginally participate in fisheries (fiber boats) and not in any other economic activities. They were maintaining their boats, gear and houses, took rest and took care of their families. Taking rest is possible because the government provides the fishermen allowances of 4000 rupees a month during the ban. The fiber boat owners and laborers are still fishing this period however employment in fisheries is limited during the ban.
4.3. Culture
The fishing population of the Coromandel coast is currently around 300.000 and belongs mainly to the Pattinavar fishing caste for many centuries. The social, technical and institutional uniformity and significant level of mutual interaction can be explained by the conditions of historical isolation of the fishing population from the agrarian hinterland. The villages are small and traditionally occupied by only fisher families. This resulted in a homogeneous community with a strong social cohesion. Kinship and marriages, together with inter village rivalries contribute to a spirit of community commitment. The village god is a religious illustration of this identity of the village (Bavinck, 2008). The Pattinavar fishing caste has been exposed to modernization and many of the fishermen made the transitions from traditional kattumaran to fiber boat and especially trawler boat use. Therefore many moved from their original homes to close to one of the trawler harbors. However the larger part preferred the rural lifestyle and stayed and continued beach-based fisheries (Bavinck, 2008). Decision making is generally done at local level by a village council or panchayat. This is a non-governmental traditional, caste-related body. This administration has authority over fishing activities in village waters. The Karaikalmedu village panchayat consists of 13 members and is considered as a strong body in the region. The panchayat solves problems by sorting out the responsibilities between
18
the relevant parties. It is also decisive in implementing government regulations and schemes. As well it represents the village outside the community and it guards the taxation regulations and the social practices such as jurisdiction and law. Due to its influence in local society, the panchayat is also relevant in fisheries developments.
The Karaikalmedu village panchayat plays an important role in regional politics. It has large influence in decision making for a lot of other villages. If there are conflicts between or in another village which cannot be solved reciprocally, the Karaikalmedu panchayat can give its final judgment.
The role of the panchayat in regulating fisheries is difficult to measure. According to the
19
4.4. Stresses
Modernization vs traditional or rich vs. poor?
After the “Blue revolution” conflicts in fisheries started to form. Different types of fisheries started to compete over space and fishing grounds. One of the conflicts is that the trawler boats are damaging ecological systems in the oceans. Trawling destroys breeding areas and bottom life in the oceans which results in decreasing catches. Fishing in Tamil Nadu is not organized on target groups or selective fishing. All types of fish are caught therefore quotas on specific types of fish are useless. Another problem is the large quantities of bycatch. Around 50 % of the sampled bycatch were immature fish that had no chance of sprawling even once. This form of mechanization or
modernization created a decrease in fish availability however the adapted, mechanized boats are still able to catch sufficient amounts. The small scale fisheries experiences a decline in fish and in fish value (Johnson, 2013).
Mapping the fish stock’s health is very difficult in Indian waters. Due to a large variety of species, and the highly fragmented dispersion of fishing communities calculating fish landings is very difficult. Different figures are available of which, some are demonstrating a decline, some show an increase. For this study it is not necessary to have the exact figures. What is necessary is what the fishermen are experiencing. In Karaikalmedu small scale fishermen face a decrease of their catch while the large scale fisherman are increasing their catches. Small scale fishermen are accusing the large scale fishermen of destroying ecology and habitats resulting in declining fish stocks. Technology on mechanized boats is that advanced that the declining fish stocks are compensated. This is visible to the fact that the variety of fish species landed is reduced. Nowadays, the low value oil sardines form the largest part of the landings while the landings of larger, more valuable predatory fish are
declining drastically (Government of Tamil Nadu, 2015). Overcapacity in the fishing sector can be considered as the core problem in this study. This over fishing is at first glance caused by an abundance of fishermen catching too less fish.
Modernization is of important influence on the depletion of fish in Tamil waters. The opening up of the global market resulted in an increase of national and international demand of fish. India could distribute its fish all over the planet and revenues from fish rocketed. Fish has now almost entirely become an export product while before it was a product for local use. Along with the demand technology developed at high pace. The introduction of the trawler boat resulted in an increase of the fish catch. However by using these vessels certain ecological constrains became to develop (Johnson, 2013).
20
In Karaikalmedu the largest group of small scale fishermen face a reduction of their income. While trawler boat users experience an increase of revenue. Increase or decrease, it can be assumed that all types of fishermen have to deal with an uncertain income. This is the most mentioned problem they have to face. Income uncertainty will have impact on other developments within the family. Due to the lack of a permanent income saving money for life enhancing purposes is difficult. Many
fishermen are borrowing money to finance children’s education. This is furtherly elaborated as solution to lower incomes.
Due to the increase of mechanization in fleet and gear, the gap between rich and poor is widening. Fishermen without any means in these methods of fishing are excluded from participation and benefitting from the fish stocks. The burden of the declining fish stocks are carried by the weak and therefore deteriorating the situation of them who are not able to adapt.
Surukkuvalai
An example of a modernization causes changes in the relations between rich and poor is the introduction of the surukkuvalai (English: ringnet).
After the Indian Ocean Tsunami in 2004 a large amount of materials and aid from NGO’s resulted in the introduction of a new type of net, surukkuvalai. This is much larger than traditional nets and its mesh size is much smaller. This unsustainable way of fishing caused a lot of changes in economic, social and gender relations among the fishermen in the same community (Barenstein, 2012).
The net is used around 5 kilometer from the coast. A shoal of fish gets surrounded by boats and then the net is thrown out. Due to the small meshes all fish are caught indiscriminately the type or age. The labor intensity of the net makes the net very popular among the fishermen. Hence laborers can earn a better income than fishing using traditional methods.
The economic consequences of this net is obviously the increase of income. But a negative aspect is that the surukkuvalai also increased the fish supply. This generally dropped the fish price also for the small scale fishermen for whom the impact is much larger.
The government acknowledged the damaging features of the surukkuvalai and imposed restrictions on the net. Only between March and May fishermen were allowed to use the net. After a while fishermen begun to neglect he restrictions and the government is now tolerating the nets again (Barenstein, 2012).
The surukku valai has a positive impact on the financial situations of the owner and the laborers but it causes also negative effects. For instance, the role of women has changed. Before women were
21
managing the financial affairs of the family. They sell the fish their men catch. With the use of the surukkuvalai, fish are sold in large quantities or bulk to the whole sellers by the net owners. Directly after the selling of the fish workers are paid. Therefore women are no longer in charge over financial expenditures of the families (Barenstein, 2012).
Resistance against the use of the surukkuvalai is large in Karaikalmedu. The fishermen not profiting from the net are complaining about overfishing problems and support restrictions from the
government on these nets. Even the fishermen who make use of the net acknowledge the ecological consequences but they also realize that this net provides them a more certain income. Many
fishermen consider this net as the cause of the declining fish availability.
In summary, the core problem according to the fishermen, is the unequal division of natural capital by the small scale and large scale fishermen. The large scale fisheries is able to technologically adapt to the declining fish availability and the small scale fishermen have limitations in technological manners. According to the local population the decline of fish availability is caused by certain fishing methods such as trawling and the use of surukkuvalai nets. This technological advantage of the large scale fisheries widens the gap between the two different sectors.
Now it is clear that changes and stresses regarding fisheries are present in the community. But how do the household react to this uncertainties and inequalities regarding their source of income? Do households attempt to find other sources of income to meet their family expenditures and is there a difference between the trawler boat users and the fiber boat users in dealing with the problem? In the next chapter an answer will be given to these questions.
22
5. Strategies
The fishery sector in Tamil Nadu is under constant pressure due to declining fish availability. This research tries to explain fisher households behavior regarding this problem. It analyses the activities fishermen undertake to diversify their income to overcome future uncertainties and stresses. In this research, methods to challenge these pressures are explained. Thus, what are fishermen doing to overcome pressure on livelihood and why are they doing this? This paragraph elaborates on the strategies fishermen use to challenge their financial problems. The strategies encountered during the fieldwork will be demonstrated. In this analyses a distinction between trawler boat owners, fiber boat owners and laborers is made to find a variety in strategies and explanations.
To start with, research confirmed the absence of concrete and direct diversification strategies. The community of fishermen is highly uniform in economic activity and it did not change sources of income. Almost no other economic activities than fishing are present in the village. It can be assumed that all households in Karaikalmedu, fully depend on fisheries. Although there is a mutual consensus on declining fish stocks, people do not directly seem to take measures.
Most households agree to the fact that they cannot change their source of income drastically and immediately. How do they adapt to the stresses previously explained? They rely on two aspects, technological innovation and the future generations. Technological innovation is a strategy which is focused on improving revenues inside fisheries. By using this strategy no diversification of income generating activities are undertaken. Although fishers depend highly on their sector, the commonly shared opinion is that fisheries does not secure and sustain a good livelihood. According to most fishermen next generation has to find a way to get out of fisheries this due to the income uncertainty but also due to the harmful working conditions of fishermen. Important pillars to get out of fisheries are education and migration. These two strategies are therefore the most mentioned during the interviews.
5.1 Education
Education is one strategy for households to move away from the dependency on fisheries. The providers of the family generally seem not to be able to change the track, they rather invest in the education of their children or younger generation in the hope for better jobs and prosperity. There seems to be no variety or correlation between owning a boat and having education.
23
popular is private education but this is expensive and not affordable for everyone. To overcome this problem many fishermen make use of the money lending facilities provided by local money lenders. According to the fishermen governmental education in India is free but of low quality, therefore private education is, despite the price tag, most preferred. Governmental education in Karaikal is based on Tamil language and private education is focused on English and therefore private education increases the opportunities to find jobs outside fisheries
“ …Our government does not appoint good teachers. Quality is bad. Therefore people want to put their children on a private school. I put my daughter on a private school”.(Muruviel, 47, fiberboat owner) .
Results of this research demonstrate no big differences in sending children to private schools between boat owner or laborer households, although private schools are more expensive. This can be explained by the fact that poorer households are more willing to send their children to private schools because they do not have other physical of financial means to improve their livelihood.
“I want to give education to my children when there will be no fishes in the ocean they have to search for new jobs.
English and private educations is expensive but of better quality. In government education not enough English is taught. In future they need English knowledge. Private education is requested.
Every year I pay 20.000 to give private education this is better quality. Or I give gold investment in children education. I am influenced by English education.”(Vijaykumar, laborer on both boats)
One reason of educating the children is of increasing their chances on the labor market. Actually the educated fishermen do not work out of the village in different sectors. The educated prefer to go abroad. In Singapore, and the Gulf states the availability of jobs and the wagers are higher.
Adolescents face problems in finding work in India. There are cases where young students got a job outside fisheries but they went back because of very low wages provided. They were better off in fishing than another sector. This consideration is made by some men who finished some education. For this particular group it is very difficult to find jobs outside fisheries related to their expertise. Then, the question rises if the poorer laborers are able to send their children to school. Already mentioned, also the laborers want to give their children private education, but is this accessible to them? The laborers or the poorer fishermen who do not have the financial means to send their children to private schools often have access to loans from local money lenders. This enables opportunities to send their children to the preferred education. Ramachinelam is able to send his
24
children to private schools despite the fact that he does not have sufficient financial means. However, his question will be furtherly answered in the next part on access to assets.
How do I manage to send my children to private schools? I am saving money and I am borrowing money from local money lenders.(Ramachinelam, laborer on trawler boats.)
Nivas, a young laborer on a fiber boat said he would like to give the opportunity to his brothers to study. He said that money is not an obstacle for many families to give education; it is the mentality that is the problem. Children are not eager and willing to improve themselves. They do not want to study. They like fishing more and want to manage their own expenditures.
The statement of Nivas returned a couple of times during the interviews. Apparently, the fishing occupation is attractive to young people because it entails certain aspects of freedom. Also a form of pride can influence the reason why young men choose for the fishing occupation. Nivas also
illustrated the liberty of how children are raised in the village. Many fathers wanted their children to have some basic education and they prefer their sons to continue studying, but he also emphasize the fact that the choices are made by the children themselves and not by the parents.
Subarmani, laborer on a trawler boat and father of a little girl, also emphasized on the mentality of the children. He mentioned the alcohol abuse among youngsters in the village.
“…money is not the problem. Many children are drinking and spending their money on alcohol. But I don’t like to spend my money on this. I save it. Drinking is limiting their educational opportunities. These kind of children don’t like education.” (Subarmani, laborer on a trawler boat)
Alcohol abuse is a recurrent problem in Karaikalmedu and fishing communities all over the world. Fishermen drink to soften the hard working conditions at sea and the mental stresses. This, either way, affects social order in the village.
The parents willingness to educate their children is large. However, it seems to be that it is
sometimes unilateral and not mutually shared by all the children. Social factors such as alcohol abuse and the attractiveness of the fisheries occupation do influence the role of education in the
diversification process.
The village is low educated and many parents did not have any education at all. The new generation is the first generation that has good access to education. It is difficult to say that education is a solution to escape fisheries. No examples of well-educated villagers that developed a life outside fisheries are available. The success factor of education is not yet noticeable in the village.
25
5.2 Migration
Another very commonly used strategy is migration. Migration can be a relevant option for leaving the current situation of fishermen. Many fishermen migrate to foreign countries because they face many obstacles in India. The various obstacles they face is related to access and will be elaborated further on in this research. Migration is a strategy which is used for a long period. It has been told that people from Karaikalmedu are living in Singapore for twenty years already. Therefore people have knowledge on the process and results of this strategy. Around a hundred household have a relative living abroad. Sometimes these people just live for a short time period abroad. They are working abroad to earn as much money as possible and invest in the village. Popular destinations are the Arab Gulf states and Singapore. Jobs they occupy are mainly ship painting, harbor construction works, fishing and some transportation jobs.
The general motivation of going abroad is higher wages. By gaining higher wages young men can help their families financially. With financial help families can send their other children to school.
Money from foreign countries is invested in the village. New nets, boats etc. are purchased from money from migrants. But there are also cases where people live permanently abroad. They started a life abroad, come back to the village to marry and leave again. These people do not provide their family because they are married.
According to the study a striking amount of laborers have relatives working abroad. This is striking because going abroad requires some amount of money, applications for visa and a working permit. The wealthier households have relatively less family members currently living abroad than the poorer ones. Although, if you look at the people who have lived in foreign countries and returned, a relatively large group of fishermen owning a trawler boat is part of it. This can be related to the invested money on new trawler boats by migrants.
In the group of laborers many are planning to go abroad. However, reasons of their stay is a lack of money or lack of education. In comparison to the boat owners, in this group more men succeed in going abroad. If they want to leave they normally have the possibility to leave due to more financial assets to leave.
Migration can be a successful livelihood strategy. Many fishermen are able to migrate and return with result. However, it is very hard to measure how successful they really are. Failed stories remain untold and the successful stories are emphasized. Information about life abroad is insufficient and contact with migrants is limited. But the overall impression obtained during the fieldwork is that migration is a successful livelihood strategy in financial perspective. This can be derived from the fact
26
that laborers go abroad and return and are able to buy a mechanized boat and provide the family a better livelihood. Andanel describes the success of migration and how he made the decision.
“ I went to Singapore before I bought the boat. I wanted to earn more money to start the business for 4 years. After the tsunami. I did ship work and painting oil platforms. My close friends were working in Singapore so I was influenced by them…. ” – (Andanel, 38, owner of a steel trawler boat and father of two little sons).
5.3 Technology
Gear improving expenditures are, better engines, new fishing nets, GPS, echolocation (fish trackers) devices, walky talkies and mobile phones etc. Recently a new net has been introduced that created a lot of commotion among fishermen. The trawler boats are currently using the surrukuvalai. This net allows trawler boats to catch every fish available. The improvements of gear resulted in an increase of income for many fishermen. In terms of technological investment there is an evident distinction among the different boat users.
The most wealthy fishermen believe that their revenues can be increased by investing more and more in technology. This is a clear example of an income increasing strategy that is intended to improve an already existing source of income, diversifying by accumulation. Frequently, trawler boat owners have already invested large amounts in their business. They cannot change their source of income easily. Boat owners are not as flexible in finding other sources of income as the laborers. Boat owners depend on their gear to generate income, the better the gear the higher the revenues. Therefore trawler boat owners search for livelihood enhancing strategies inside fisheries.
Fiber boat owners have limited opportunities to innovate their gear. They can purchase more powerful engines and better nets but they can never compete with the trawler boats. The fast innovations in fisheries causes also problems in ecological terms. For example the surukkuvalai is able to catch even immature fish, new fish generations cannot grow. Therefor the differences in revenues from catch are diverging more and more between the fishermen not able to implement certain innovations and fishermen able to do so.
This creates the widening gap between fiber boat users and trawler boat owners. Due to these technical opportunities and development laborers on fiber boats, will try to transfer to the trawler boats. Hence, the amount of fishermen working on trawler boats is increasing and fiber boat users are decreasing.
27
These technological advancements are beneficial in the short term, but consequences are already noticeable in the long term. The wealthy fishermen are capable of investing in catch improving gear whether the less wealthy get behind and catch less fish due to the use of technological
improvements. This will disorder internal relations and therefore also the role of the panchayat but this is food for further discussions in ongoing research.
“… my income is decreased in the last years. The fisheries is destroyed over here, shrimp fisheries gives no benefits any more. The main reason for this is the use of the surukkuvalai nets. Although the government is taking actions now.” – (Muruviel, 47 owner of a fiber boat.)
5.4 Change of catchment area
The pressure of improving the fish catch is high. Less and less fish is available while demand is rising. Therefore prices are climbing simultaneously. Due to technological improvements trawlers can navigate further and further from the coast. This enables new strategies of increasing revenues. New fishing areas can be exploited by these advanced boats.
This strategy is used among the trawler boat users in Karaikalmedu. Young men are exploring new areas to fish including Palk Bay in Sri Lankan waters. These waters are richer of fish than the
overexploited Indian waters because Sri Lanka is not using trawler boats, however, safety is at stake. Sri Lankan navy does not allow Tamil ships fishing in their waters. Trawler boats and their crew are attacked or arrested by Sri Lankan navy. Several young trawler boat laborers were speaking of Sri Lankan attacks while crossing the border. This resulted in a complex conflict between India and Sri Lanka on which will not be elaborated on further in this research. However this conflict illustrates perfectly the problem in fisheries in Tamil Nadu. Due to a lack of alternative options in enhancing the livelihood fishermen are forced to find other ways of “survival” and will cross the border.
“I have two persons in my family who went to Singapore as ship painters etc. The reason why they went? Presently, Sri Lankan Navy stole their boats and arrested the fishermen. There is no more fish. That is why they go.” –(Muruviel, fiber boat owner).
Muruviel describes the consequences of crossing the border. These activities can be dangerous and the risks are high. The decision to cross the border may be a decision of survival. A fisherman can lose everything when he got arrested by Lankan navy. This is a sign of the magnitude of the problem and maybe also of the despair fishermen are dealing with when they take such risks.
28
“In the last five years our income is decreased. If we go beyond the Sri Lankan sea we can earn more money” – (Navaj, trawler boat owner)
“Income is decreased the last 5 years because the trawler boats are using Surukkuvalai nets. That’s why I am going beyond the Sri Lankan borders to catch fish” (Chendru, trawlerboat owner)
“ In the future we will continuing in fisheries. We will go to Sri Lankan waters. However this is dangerous and causes damage to boats and people get arrested and there are shootings by drunk Navy. Our income is decreasing therefore we hope we find more luck beyond the borders.” – (Three young boys at sea shore, laborers on trawler boats).
These boys were young (19-23) and working as laborers on a trawler boat. They said that
mechanized boats only cross Sri Lankan borders when the owners of the boats are not coming with them to fish.
“Income is decreased in the last 5 years. This is due to the lack of fish. Therefore our fisheries cross Sri Lankan borders. Most trawlers use Surrukuvalai nets nowadays. Therefore fish is reduced drastically”. – ( Kartikeshan, laborer on fiber boat.)
Another example of altering catching areas is the transfer of a lot of fiber boat laborers to trawler boats. In a certain sense, they change their catchment area. Due to a lack of available fish in shallow waters the laborers move to the more advances boats in the trawler harbor. The laborers are
expanding their expertise to work on trawler boats as well. However, in this case access to trawlers is necessary to generate work on a trawler. The availability of work on trawler boats is limited and therefore laborers try to find work on both boats.
“I am going to trawler boats to manage the low income. The problem is that only trawler boats can sell to the wholesaler. Wholesalers want large quantities of fish and only trawler boats can fulfill their demands. Fiber boats are too small” – (Respondent 9, fiber boat owner)
“My income is increased because before I was working on a fiber boat and now I am also working on a trawler boat.” (Senjiwel, laborer both boats)
The problem in Karaikalmedu is the overexploitation of fish stocks. Almost all fishermen seem to acknowledge this problem although not everyone is suffering from it. Other stresses such as the income uncertainty and the working conditions are also decisive in the choice of giving the next generations the opportunity to escape from fishing occupations. Fishermen in Karaikalmedu seem to consider providing education to their children one of the major escape routes from fisheries.
29
popular among the households however not every family can afford to pay extra money on education. A variety of solutions such as loans and savings are available for and used by a lot of fishermen to finance educations. These families hope to find livelihood enhancing opportunities outside the fishing industry by providing education to their children.
Continuing this line of thought migration is also seen as another opportunity to leave fisheries and improve livelihood. A large amount of men has already moved to foreign countries and a large amount is planning to move. Men in the village are influenced by relatives and friends who have returned with money that is invested in the village to build houses and buy boats. Singapore, and the Gulf states are popular destinations for young men.
Internal strategies to improve livelihoods are implemented by investing in gear and technology and by changing the catching areas. Merely boat owners are the ones investing in technology. By
investing in technology they believe that their catch will increase despite the over exploitation of fish available. Fishermen are also crossing Sri Lankan borders due to the lack of fish in Tamil waters and the availability in Sri Lankan waters. This is not without any risk. Sri Lankan navy is protecting its areas with violence. These activities by Tamil fishermen resulted in a complex conflict.
A striking finding is the lack of diversification. The strategies used are all livelihood strategies that are all focused on or the next generation or improving fisheries itself. Risk mitigation and reducing vulnerability strategies are not developed in this community. The next chapter explains this behavior. The access to assets combined with contextual features of the community are determinants of the fishers behavior to stresses.
30
Figuur 2: Relative figures of strategies (Wastiaux, 2015)
Figuur 3: Absolute figures of strategies (Wastiaux, 2015)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Trawler Fiber
Labor on both boats
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Trawler Fiber
31
6. Assets & Access
The strategies implemented to enhance livelihood by the fishermen are not completely voluntarily and arbitrary. Their behavior is influenced by a variety of aspects. Access to certain assets are important in making decisions on which strategy to follow. But not of less importance is the lack of access to resources fishermen want to exploit.
In this research different forms of access are explained. Income can be seen as one of the most important determinants of access to resources. But income depends on a lot of other aspects such as the possibility to sell fish for a good price, education, social networks etc. Subsequently, social status and networks are determining the possibilities to enhance livelihoods. Together with cognitive capacity and institutional constraints the concept of access is covered.
This chapter will focus on the access to the three main assets consisting of financial, social, and human capital. These variables influence the livelihood enhancing strategies implemented by the fishermen.
6.1
Access to financial capital
The wealthier the family the more opportunities it has. In the study of livelihood diversification strategies income is a key determinant in the choice of strategies. A higher income generates more opportunities to diversify the sources of income. Therefore the expectation is that richer fishermen will diversify more that poorer fishermen. In fact this is more nuanced. The five richest respondents do have better access to education indeed however their future perspective is more focused on fisheries. The richest are the trawler boat owners who improve their income by investing in new gear. For the richer group money is not limiting their attempt in sending their children to school. Although the willingness of the poorer group to give private education is significant as well. Money is a more limiting factor in providing education for them. But they seem to be more outspoken about private education. This can be explained by the necessity of the poorer people to implement changes in their livelihood. The wealthier have more certainty in future income. They are also more
successful in fisheries and therefore do not need to change their sources of income. The richer depend maybe more on fisheries but their financial pressures are less.
The before mentioned gap between rich and poor makes the impact of overfishing more severe for the poorer fishermen. This gap, created by technological development, appeared in several
32 capacity in their technological opportunities.
Ten out of fourteen respondents working on a trawler boat have seen their income increasing in the last five years. This is mostly due to a rise of the fish price and the technological improvements. The fiber boat users experience harder times. Only two fiber boat users confirmed an increase of income. This is also due to technological developments. For the rest of the fiber boat user’s income decreased in the last five years. Main reason for this is the use of the surukkuvalai nets by trawler boats. In this case laborers are better off than fiber boat owners because laborers can change from type of boat. Normally a fiber boat owner does not work on trawler boats. The laborers are therefore more flexible in choosing their source of income.
Figuur 4: Changes in income in the last five years
0 5 10 15 20 Trawler Owners Fiber boat owners Laborers R e sp o n d e n ts
Changes in Income
decrease of income Increase of income33
Figuur 5: Changes in income in the last five years between different laborer groups.
Figure 4 and 5 demonstrate the differences in how changes of income are experienced among the respondents. These figures suggest that trawler boat owners do not face the problems of a declining income and that the fiber boat owners and the laborers do experience a decline in income. Figure 5 is placed to show if there is a mutual difference between laborers in changes of income. It is to be expected that laborers working on trawler boats would experience an increase in income however the opposite is true. This can be explained by the fact that when less fish is caught work will be scares and laborers, even on the trawler boats, will have less work.. Owners of trawler boats do not sail out if revenue is expected to be low to reduce losses whereas labors have to bear the burden of no job. In that case laborers on both boats experience more flexibility and perhaps therefore less income reduction. They can shift to fiber boats when trawler boats wont sail out and therefore secure an income.
“During the ban period I work with the fiber boats because there is no other work. Only half of the people go on the fiber boat during the ban, the others take rest.” (Sevlakumar 44, laborer on a trawler boat).
Here, Sevlakumar explains the shifts laborers can make to fiber boats when work trawler boats is not available. Most of the trawler owners take rest during the ban wile laborers try to find some work to do and earn a small amount extra.
Another essential factor in examining the access to financial capital is the variety in access to significant markets to sell the fish. Women, and in particular elder women, are very important in
0 2 4 6 8 10 Laborers on trawlers laborers on fiber laborers both R e sp o n d e n ts
Changes in Income
Decrease of income Increse of income34
generating money from fish in Tamil Nadu. These women take care of selling the fish caught by their husbands. The family depends on the mother’s marketing powers. The trawler harbor in the city of Karailkal simultaneously is the market place where women are challenging for the best-selling spots to sell their fish. Large baskets of all kinds of fish species and bycatch are emptied and sorted by the women and subsequently sold under hard bargaining. The most valuable species are sold in the center and the least valuable, small fishes, are sold on the dirty edges of the marketplace. There is also a roofed places where the large barracuda’s and tuna fish are sold. The buyers come from different places over town and district. Restaurant owners from Karaikal and cities more land
inwards looking for the best fish for their restaurant. There are also wholesalers who are buying large quantities of fish intended for food processing industries. These wholesalers are important business partners in the trawler harbor. They demand large quantities of fish for the best prices. They want bulk goods and do not want to buy from many different small scale sellers. They demand quantity, certainty and convenience for their good price. These criteria can only be succeeded by the largest and most advanced boats because they can guarantee the same amount of fish every time. These observations illustrate the accessibility of the market for the different groups of fishermen. Only the large trawler boat owner can meet the demand of the wholesalers and make lucrative deals and contracts. The small scale fisherman are coerced to sell their fish in the villages or local markets for local market prices. The ability to enter the larger markets is limited for the small scale fishermen. Respondent 9, explains the situation of the fiber boat owners compared to the trawler boat owners.
“The problem in fishing is that only trawler boat owners are able to sell the fish to wholesalers. Wholesalers want to have large quantities. Fiber boats are too small to meet that demand.”- (Respondent 9, Fiber boat owner).
Money lending
Borrowing money can be a considerable solution when times are bad and income is uncertain. Investing in money generating businesses can ensure an income in the future. But what if there is no money available in the family or from savings? Therefore, fishermen commonly borrow money from local money lenders to manage all kinds of expenditures. Generally, fishermen make use of local moneylenders to meet their financial requirements instead of formal alternatives. Local
moneylending can be seen as the informal alternative of moneylending from banks. Local people, mostly employers, provide loans to their employees. Advantages to this system are that they can provide short-term small loans. This is ideal for low-income groups, that cannot manage larger loans and long-term commitments. The process of moneylending is also more flexible and easier than its formal counterparts. They have less official requirements and less amount of paperwork, plus, loans can be provided immediately and in an easier manner. Another positive aspect of this kind of
35
moneylending is that they function in close physical proximity to the borrower, enabling frequent contact and thus dispensing the need for collateral requirements.
Although the requirements are less strict, the risks for local moneylenders are higher and therefore at higher interest rates. But due to this system more people have access to money lending.
Lending money can open up certain opportunities in stabilizing and ensuring future income. Investing in business and children’s education will help achieving this. Therefore limited access to this service is considered as a constraint in developing livelihood enhancing strategies.
In all layers of the village, fishermen make use of the service of money lending, however there can be a difference for what purpose loans are used. Among the trawler boat owners loans are more often used as investments. Trawler boat owners borrow money to finance the expenses of new boats, nets, engine and technology. The less wealthy fishermen, fiber boat owners and laborers, borrow money for educatingvoornamelijk the children and household related purposes. They do this because they want to invest in the future of the family especially because their income is uncertain and they do not catch enough fish to save a sufficient amount for the future.
“Yes I am in debt to local money lenders to pay back the investment of the boat” Andanel 38, owner of a trawler boat.
“I am in debt with local money lenders because I am not able to get a loan from the bank. I am borrowing money to finance my children’s education (…I am not educated…) and for house related functions…” Ramachinelam, laborer on a trawler boat and father of two kids.
In the poorest category, people are not able to apply for a loan. Although higher risks are taken by the local money lenders than by the formal banks, the poorest do not have the means to assure repay of their loans and therefore their access to these services are limited. Awareness of the
downsides of borrowing money is slightly present. A few, mostly laborers refuse to borrow money on purpose because of the high interest rates.
Thus, the answer to the question to what extent financial capital is decisive in choosing livelihood enhancing strategies is quite contradicting. On the one hand higher income enables more
opportunities to improve life and expands the amount of choices to make. Money is no longer an obstacle in sending children to the preferred education or the possibility to move abroad is much easier. On the other hand a higher income also means that the urge to improve and diverse
livelihood is less. This can be derived from the attitude towards diversification strategies from trawler boat owners. These fishermen prefer to continue their current fishing activities because they
