DEVELOPING SUSTAINABLE FISHERY MANAGEMENT STRATEGY IN SURINAME

(1)

DEVELOPING SUSTAINABLE FISHERY MANAGEMENT STRATEGY IN SURINAME

A COMPARATIVE STUDY FOR MARINE SHRIMP

By

Rigillio Bansie

__________________________

Supervisor: Dr. David Dingli

Maastricht School of Management F.H.R. Lim A Po Institute of Social Studies

Suriname July, 2010

"This thesis was submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Masters of Business Administration (MBA) degree at the Maastricht School of Management (MSM), Maastricht, the Netherlands, July, 2010."

(2)

<This page is intentionally left blank>

(3)

This thesis is displayed at the library of the F.H.R. Lim A Po Institute of Social Studies, Paramaribo, Suriname, to optimize added value to the reader and to leverage his/her knowledge in the subject covered. For further information about the thesis, the contents, value, grade and overall quality, you are advised to contact the Academic Degrees Program Manager¹

All rights reserved. This thesis may not be reproduced in whole or in part, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, by photocopy, recording or other means, without permission in writing of the author.

(4)

Acknowledgements

I would like to take this opportunity to thank my thesis advisor, Dr. David Dingli, for his guidance and support.

Thanks to my employer and staff of the F.H.R. Lim A Po Institute for Social Studies for their support and making all this possible.

I would also like to thank my interviewees who gave their time for me and a very special appreciation to my wife Momita, my daughter Iraina, our parents and my two younger brothers for their support, patience and encouragement all the time.

All these people and others whom I did not mention here have contributed to achieving my MBA degree and making my period at the F.H.R. Lim A Po Institute an unforgettable learning experience.

Rigillio Bansie

Paramaribo, June 30, 2010

(5)

Abstract

The Suriname fishing industry faces a drastic decline in marine shrimp catches while it provides the largest contribution to the agricultural sector which is the second to largest in exports. Mitigation efforts so far were unsuccessful to achieve the desired regeneration of the shrimp stock. It is questionable whether the supply will meet (growing) future demand. This thesis is therefore aimed to develop sustainable fishery management strategy for the marine shrimp industry. The secondary objective was a comparison with the French Guiana fisheries from 1993 to 2008, and translates the aspects that led to success to the situation in Suriname.

The strategy concept of Hambrick and Fredrickson was used to analyze a similar industry by observation and apply it to Suriname by reflecting on learning and adapting. As described by Wireman, sector benchmarking was furthermore applied by an analysis of congruency relating to practical aspects. Primary fisheries data was used from the statistics division of the Fisheries Department and IFREMER (Institut Français de Recherche pour l'Exploitation de la Mer - French Research Institute for Exploitation of the Sea). Also a twelve question survey was administered in Suriname and French Guiana. Experts that represented different stakeholder organizations were invited in support of a more comprehensive as possible view on the issue. Secondary data was obtained from the library at the F.H.R. Lim A Po Institute of Social Studies, the internet, the archives at the Fisheries Department, the electronic database of IFREMER and through article requests from colleagues by email.

The applied homological transfer method resulted in the three primary principles:

monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS), protecting spawning and breeding areas and a regional approach reflecting accountability to all nations involved. Based on the findings a model is designed that represents a sustainable fishery management strategy for Suriname. That model accounts for a resource based view of the fishing sector and the research that supports management.

The suggested strategic direction consists of protecting the areas where the resources spawn and breed while strictly enforcing the relevant management measures by MCS.

This must be done from a regional point of view which is supported by uniform protocols and procedures to collect and analyze data and perform research. The role of research is to monitor the health of the stock by considering the ecosystem based perspective for the Brazil-Guiana’s Shelf.

(6)

Abbreviations

BRD Bycatch Reduction Device

CEVIHAS Centrale Visserijhaven Suriname (Central Fisheries Port Suriname) CRFM Caribbean Regional Fisheries Mechanism

EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone ENSO El Niño Southern Oscillation

ETP Endangered, Threatened and Protected

EU European Union

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations GAP Good Aquaculture Practice

GDP Gross Domestic Product HOLSU Holland Suriname

IMF International Monetary Fund

IFREMER Institut français de recherche pour l'exploitation de la mer (French Research Institute for Exploitation of the Sea)

MCS Monitoring, Control and Surveillance MEY Maximum Economic Yield

MPA Marine Protected Area MSC Marine Stewardship Council MSY Maximum Sustainable Yield

SAIL Suriname American Industries Limited SSA Suriname Seafood Association

SUGAM Surinaamse Garnalenvangst Maatschappij (Suriname Shrimp Company) SUJAFI Suriname Japan Fisheries

TAC Total Allowable Catch TED Turtle Excluding Device

TTED Thrash and Turtle Excluder Device VMS Vessel Monitoring System

WECAFC Western Central Atlantic Fisheries Commission

(7)

List of Tables

Page

Table 3-1: Overview of processing companies in Suriname ... 33

Table 5-1: Research disciplines in French Guiana by increasing importance from left to right ... 43

Table 5-2: Management measures that could improve fishery management in Suriname grouped by categories and the corresponding frequencies (n=7) ... 48

Table 5-3: Priorities regarding activities that could improve the marine shrimp industry in Suriname (n=8) ... 49

Table 5-4: Pre selected themes ranked by importance from 1 to 8, where 1= most important (n=8), for Suriname ... 50

Table 5-5: Pre selected themes ranked by importance from 1 to 8, where 1= most important (n=4), for French Guiana ... 51

Table 5-6: Pre selected themes ranked by decreasing importance ... 52

Table 5-7: The licensing system as a good management measure (n=6) ... 53

Table 5-8: The management goals of Suriname and French Guiana ... 68

Table 5-9: Management measures in Suriname and French Guiana from 1993 - 2008 ... 73

Table E-1: Annual number of boats in Suriname and French Guiana from 1993 - 2008 ... 112

Table E-2: Annual landed catch (tons) in Suriname and French Guiana from 1993 - 2008 ... 113

Table E-3: Annual average fishing day per boat in Suriname and French Guiana from 1993 – 2008... 114

Table E-4: Annual average fishing effort related to landed catch in Suriname and French Guiana from 1993 - 2008 ... 115

Table E-5: Annual average fishing effort related to number of boats in Suriname and French Guiana from 1993 - 2008 ... 116

(8)

List of Figures

Page

Figure 1. Research model of the study ... 6

Figure 2. The placement of strategy in support of the mission and objectives ... 9

Figure 3. The five elements of strategy ... 10

Figure 4. Kaiser Associates benchmarking methodology ... 14

Figure 5. Schematic representation of the tasks of fishery management and their interrelationships ... 15

Figure 6. Schematic presentation of management strategy – the hierarchical levels of intentions (policy, goals and objectives), standards (reference points and indicators) and actions (management measures) ... 16

Figure 7. Conceptual view of the theory ‘fishing down food webs’ ... 18

Figure 8. A fisheries development and management approach ... 25

Figure 9. Revised research model of the study... 74

(9)

PART ONE

Chapter I: Introduction

1.1 General Introduction

Fishing is an activity that people have been doing since early civilization. It evolved from a social need to currently also one of commercial interest². As Cochrane and Garcia (2009) describe it so nicely:

“…the commoditization of nature in the service of industrialization.”

After years of perceived growth, it is now evident that globally countries suffer from the negative effects that we people have ourselves helped create. The introduction starts with a background and relates the complexity of fisheries management from a global level to Suriname. Also the benefits that fisheries provide for Suriname will be mentioned. Following the problem statement and the objective of the study, the research model is presented. The introduction concludes with a short methodology and the limitations to the study.

1.2 Background

Fishing is one of the main contributors to the global food production, but 60% of the stocks are fully exploited or over exploited. Even with the formation of the 200 nautical miles Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) in 1977, which brings one third of the oceans under the jurisdiction of coastal states, fisheries management plans have not reached the goal of maintaining sustainable fisheries. The question now is whether supply will meet the growing demand in the future (Roheim, 2004). The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) (as cited in Valdimarsson, 2007) elaborates that concern. The international state of fish stocks is quite variable so far. When looking at the state of the fish stocks of which information is available, confirmed that the proportion of overexploited, depleted and recovering stocks have remained relatively stable over the last 10-15 years, after the observed upward trend of operating in the 1970s and 1980s. It is estimated that in 2007 52% of the fish are fully exploited, meaning that the catches are close to their maximum permissible limit for sustainable operation and that there was no scope for further expansion (Valdimarsson, 2007).

2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fishing accessed March 30, 2010

(12)

This upward trend internationally, especially in the 1970s and 1980s, has influenced Suriname. Since 1979 fisheries in Suriname went through various developments that have a perceptible upward trend. These developments characterize diversification of the fishing fleet, the commercial marketing of previously unknown species, improvement of facilities and major expansion of the fleet. From that year, the Surinamese government had several collaborations with Belgium, Japan, the FAO and the European Union (EU) and there is much work done in the field of fisheries development, policy, research, data collection and processing, quality management and support in the form of input, terminal facilities and other amenities.

Some of these efforts today expanded or developed, but many efforts have also deteriorated.

What makes fishery management so complex? Cochrane and Doulman (as cited in Valdimarsson, 2007) identify that mainly international analysis show that the world opts for a method of management that is largely ineffective in curbing the increasing fishing effort. Above all, as many authors point out, its current management objectives are often unclear or inconsistent. Furthermore, when cultural values and socio-economic objectives are considered, it is indeed a complicated fisheries compared to other production systems aimed at producing goods for which the market requires competitive prices.

Depending on the circumstances that change with time, there is no flexibility in the fisheries and there is no appropriate adaptation to current conditions instead. Eventually (critical) situations do not get the necessary attention. At some point, this proves that governments do insufficient with its management activities to perform optimally such as data collection and processing, control, initiate or continue research programs.

International developments have impact on the fisheries in Suriname, which as a result make the markets for the industry uncertain. Suriname cannot immediately anticipate on the developments and stakeholders have difficulty in finding measures how to adopt and adapt.

Thereby this creates a backlog in the update of fishery management. Moreover, many of the recommendations from existing reports are not realized, which means that there are fishing activities undertaken in the wrong places, with the wrong methods and without optimal control leading to a decrease in profitability of the industry. On the contrary, however in the waters of French Guiana there is hardly a decline in the fish and shrimp stock relative to Suriname. The coastal waters of Suriname and French Guiana on the continental shelf are part of the Amazon basin and the adjacent estuarine zone on both coasts creates optimal opportunities for spawning,

(13)

growth and maintenance of various fish and shrimp species. Given the positive result of the impact of sustainable management in French Guyana, Suriname has the potential to develop a management system that ensures sustainability of the resources.

Corrective action is necessary because the fishing industry in Suriname accounts for 6.8 % of the GDP (Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries, 2008) and according to latest statistics published by the ministry of Agriculture, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries in 2005 the total number of fishermen are 5,000 (Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries, 2004). The International Monetary Fund (IMF) also emphasizes the importance of the agricultural sector of which fisheries is an important part in their statistical appendix. In the list of exports, the agricultural sector occupies the second position with a contribution of 8.6% (International Monetary Fund, 2008). Moreover, within the agricultural sector, fisheries (fish and shrimp) provide the largest contribution in exports, followed by bananas (Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries, 2007). According to the ministry of Agriculture, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries and the ministry of Planning and Development the contribution of fisheries to the Surinamese economy is noticeable in the following areas (Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries, 2001; Planning Foundation Suriname, 2008):

• Food security – providing affordable fish protein to the local population;

• Contribution to the Gross Domestic Product;

• Creating primary and secondary employment;

• Stimulating national entrepreneurship;

• Influence on the balance of payments through export of fish and shrimp; and

• Contribution to the state budget.

The shrimp resources of the Brazil-Guiana’s Shelf are the basis of an important international fishery. For the Guiana’s-Brazil prawn fishery, the species of commercial importance are:

1. pink-spotted shrimp, Penaeus brasiliensis;

2. brown shrimp, P. subtilis;

3. pink shrimp, P. notialis; and 4. white shrimp, P. schmitti.

(14)

Mostly pink-spotted shrimp occur in the areas off Suriname and western French Guiana while brown shrimp is widespread in the areas off eastern French Guiana (Jones and Dragovich, 1977).

1.3 Statement of the Problem

The constraints regarding the availability of wild caught prawns, which the fishing industry in Suriname faces, are very complex. Solutions for these constraints have been tried in the past, but these have not led to the desired results by fishery managers. However, in the neighboring country French Guyana the results achieved by management are good and implies in the authors view proper sustainability of the resources. In particular, the undertaken efforts in order to identify and protect the spawning area for control of a sustainable supply of the commercial shrimp stock on open sea. These steps keep the industry profitable, even within the range of natural fluctuations. Given the positive result of the impact of sustainable management in French Guyana, Suriname has the potential to develop a management system that ensures sustainability of the resources.

Within this context sustainability is referred to as the challenge that human actions do not cause the stocks and the ecosystem to fluctuate beyond natural ranges. This involves maintaining the spawning shrimp stock so that they are able to regenerate for the long- term.

The problem to be addressed in this thesis is:

• Despite the evident drastic decline in catches, the efforts done so far in Suriname do not lead to the desired regeneration of the shrimp stock to safeguard the exploitation. This leads to a decrease in the profitability of the industry.

1.4 Objective of the Study

The primary objective in this thesis is as follows:

• This study aims to develop a management strategy to achieve control of a sustainable commercial prawn stock within the fishing industry of Suriname.

The secondary objective in this thesis is:

• Compare the fisheries management system between French Guiana and Suriname over the period 1993 – 2008.

(15)

With this study the author expects to make a contribution to improve fisheries management in Suriname by providing an impulse to the Fisheries Department for the implementation of management measures that reflect sustainability of the fishery resources more comprehensively.

The focus is placed on the output of production and the research that supports management measures for keeping the spawning stock stable and protecting the nurseries. The way the fishery management in French Guiana takes place has to date not been fully known and understood by many in Suriname. By comparing both fisheries, the aspects that led to success in French Guiana shall be translated to the situation in Suriname.

1.5 The Model of the Study

The research model that is applied in this study is shown in Figure 1 and is developed by the author. The constructs in the model are regional research, the prawn fishing industry and management measures. The word prawn is often used for marine shrimp. The independent variables are fishing effort (landed catches), Total Allowable Catch (TAC) and marine sanctuary (spawning area). The dependent variables are management strategy, catch level and shrimp landings whereas fishing area is the moderating variable. The results from this study should indicate if the identified constructs and variables are extensive.

1.6 Research Questions

This study consists of one research question and two secondary research questions. The main research question is the following:

Which management strategy is feasible in Suriname in order to safeguard a sustainable supply of prawns in the face of increased demand?

The secondary research questions are:

1. What is the function of regional research for the control of a sustainable commercial shrimp stock within the prawn fishing industry in Suriname?

2. What are the management measures in Suriname and French Guiana in the period 1993 – 2008?

(16)

Figure 1. Research model of the study

Source: developed by author

1.7 Short Methodology

Fisheries and its management is government controlled in Suriname. The Fisheries Department of Suriname is a public body and the fisheries authority when it comes to planning, administration, licensing, monitoring and research. The study was done from this perspective. This study was not meant to implement a benchmarking process, but rather an analysis of congruency in practice within the context. This study followed an inductive research approach and the research strategy was a case study. The data collection method was through documentary analysis, open-ended questionnaires and review of catch and effort data.

1.8 Limitations of the Study

The limitation in this study is that factors like technology, finance, human resources, subsidies, infrastructure and utilities and policy were not considered. Also the correctness of formulated objectives are not discussed. This is because there tends to be a debate among objectives referring to conservation and sustainable utilization against maximizing

(17)

employment and revenue generation, but also to what extent governments balance this mix.

Investigating that aspect was not part of the study. The focus is placed on:

The output of production; a resource based view of the fishing sector.

The research that supports management measures for keeping the spawning stock stable and protecting the nurseries on which the fishing industry strongly depends for their supply.

1.9 Summary

After indicating the underlying background of the issues, the problem statement was mentioned. Despite the evident drastic decline in catches, the efforts done so far in Suriname do not lead to the desired regeneration of the shrimp stock to safeguard the exploitation. This leads to a decrease in the profitability of the industry. The objective therefore is aimed to develop sustainable fishery management strategy for the marine shrimp industry. In this study, it is expected that by comparing both fisheries, the aspects that led to success in French Guiana can translate to the situation in Suriname. The main research question in this qualitative study is: “which management strategy is feasible in Suriname in order to safeguard a sustainable supply of prawns in the face of increased demand?” One or more answers to this question will be suggested limited to the output of production and the research that supports management measures.

Having said this, literature will be reviewed in chapter two followed by a detailed analysis. The Suriname fishing industry shall be described in chapter three. The methodology behind the study shall be highlighted in chapter four, whereas chapter five will cover the findings and analysis. Thereafter the conclusions and recommendations will be discussed in chapter six.

(18)

PART TWO

Chapter II: Literature Review 2.1 Introduction

This literature review illustrates what different authors have already highlighted in relation to the subject. First I will present a general background on theory and the subject, followed by an in depth analysis. Before ending with the summary of this chapter, the author shall draw conclusions from the literature reviewed.

2.2 Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework of the study was grounded in strategy and benchmarking. The strategy part was the design of Hambrick and Fredrickson (2005), because of the sound connectivity of the elements which could be tested by criteria. Although not explicitly mentioned, these were reflected on a public organization. The strategy concept was not used from a perspective of developing competitive advantage, but rather analysis of a similar industry by observation and application to Suriname by reflection on learning and adapting.

The benchmarking part covered that of sector benchmarking by Wireman (2004), because this best reflected the perspective from a public organization. Fisheries and its management is namely government controlled in Suriname. The Fisheries Department of Suriname is a public body and the fisheries authority when it comes to planning, administration, licensing, monitoring and research. The study was done from this perspective. This study was not meant to implement a benchmarking process, but rather an analysis within the context if there was congruency in practice.

On the theory of strategy, Pumelt (2000) writes that strategy evaluation precedes formulation or adjustment to circumstances. The process is meant to evaluate the performance of a business for example if it has grown or if it has a better profit rate. If these are affirmative, then the strategy is sound. This directs immediately to question whether the objectives were sound, the policy and plans, etc. As Hambrick and Fredrickson (2005) have pointed out in their study, the mission and objectives guide the strategy (Figure 2).

(19)

Figure 2. The placement of strategy in support of the mission and objectives

Source: Hambrick and Fredrickson, 2005

The authors purposely left out feedback arrows and other indications to reinforce their view of a solid connection between the elements of strategy. These are depicted in Figure 3, which represents their framework for strategy design. The focus in this framework does not lie in the input side (see top box in Figure 2), but on the strategy itself. The elements provide answers to five questions which are:

1. Arenas: where will we be active?

Besides the questions mentioned in Figure 3, a strategy can be focused on one product category.

2. Vehicles: how will we get there?

3. Differentiators: how will we win in the marketplace?

This is a matter of differentiation, but importantly it requires upfront choices to induce growth.

4. Staging: what will be our speed and sequence of moves?

This is the planning-to-do part, also called the substance of a strategy.

5. Economic logic: how will we obtain our returns?

(20)

It’s having a clear idea how the profits are to be generated and that is in most cases obtaining premium prices for a difficult to match product.

Figure 3. The five elements of strategy

Source: Hambrick and Fredrickson, 2005

Figure 3 is also called the strategy diamond and provides clarity of the vision³.

The purpose of Hambrick and Fredrickson (2005) was to identify what constitutes a sound strategy and it is not just simply making five sets of choices, but to test them according to evaluation criteria. These criteria are:

1. The strategy fit with what’s going on in the environment

A healthy profit potential from where you’re headed. Alignment of strategy with the key success factors of your chosen environment.

2. The strategy exploits your key resources.

With your particular mix of resources, the strategy gives you a good head start on competitors. Pursue the strategy more economically than competitors.

3 http://sourcesofinsight.com/2010/02/18/strategy-diamond/ accessed March 7, 2010

(21)

3. Envisioned differentiators are sustainable.

Competitors have difficulty matching you. If not, include in the strategy explicitly a ceaseless regimen of innovation and opportunity creation.

4. The elements of your strategy are internally consistent.

A logical choice of arenas, vehicles, differentiators, staging and economic logic that all fit and mutually reinforce each other.

5. Enough resources to pursue this strategy.

The money, managerial time and talent, and other capabilities available to do all you envision. See to it that you’re not spreading your resources too thinly, only to be left with a collection of feeble positions.

6. The strategy must be implementable.

The key constituencies allow you to pursue this strategy. Your organization can make it through the transition. You and your management team must be able and willing to lead the required changes.

Strategy evaluation criteria have also been formulated by Pumelt (2000). The principles of strategy evaluation are that it must meet one or more of the following criteria in order for a business to survive. These are (Pumelt, 2000):

Consistency: the strategy must present mutually consistent goals and policies

Consonance: the strategy must represent adaptation to changes in the external environment

Advantage: the strategy must provide competitive advantage in the selected area of activity

Feasibility: the strategy must be possible with available resources and must not create unsolvable additional secondary problems.

In order to elaborate further on the theory of benchmarking, it is necessary what is understood by benchmarking. First some definitions are provided. In the Nova Scotia Department of Housing and Municipal Affairs’ Local Government Resource Handbook (2002)⁴, benchmarking was simply defined as a standard of performance. In operational terms looking

4 http://www.gov.ns.ca/snsmr/muns/manuals/PDF/LGRH/LocalGovernmentResourceHandbook_6.5.pdf accessed

(22)

how others did the same activity. The process of benchmarking can be used in about every facet in daily life.

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defined benchmarking as follows:

“To study (as a competitor's product or business practices) in order to improve the performance of one's own company”⁵.

Wireman (2004) gave the following definition on benchmarking:

"Benchmarking is the process of measuring an organization's internal processes then identifying, understanding, and adapting outstanding practices from other organizations considered to be best-in-class”.

While Wireman (2004) was more focused on the private sector, the Nova Scotia Handbook specifically refers to municipalities, which are public sector organizations, in establishing a benchmarking process and which can allow them to set goals, define what to accomplish and plan to attain those goals. Contrary to the private sector, a municipality does not have to deal with competition, growth, profit and losses. Instead, the voting public and the political system expect quality service. In this case benchmarking became a superb tool for municipalities. For municipalities, the following types of benchmarking are applicable:

1. Internal Benchmarking compares performance and practices within the organization between different departments.

2. Process Benchmarking compares the process or how things are done to achieve an end product. It seeks to identify the best practice for processes.

3. Performance Benchmarking compares the performance or how well the process is done.

Generally, this type of benchmarking compares a number of indicators.

4. Sector Benchmarking involves making comparisons with organizations in the same industry. This form of benchmarking is particularly relevant for municipalities as it allows local public bodies to network to determine what the best practices are at other localities.

5. Generic Benchmarking or “best in class” benchmarking compares practices that are independent of the industry. This type of benchmarking has been identified as the one which can result in a paradigm shift leading to innovation and creativity in the function or process.

6. Strategic Benchmarking, which looks at the organization, identifies the long term strategies, and the needs served. Finally, strategic benchmarking identifies the resources and

5 http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/benchmarking, accessed 9 March 2010

(23)

the skills required to fulfill those needs. This may involve consideration of core competencies, and skills development. This type of benchmarking can be most relevant combined with a review of the mission and mandate of an organization.

7. Informal Benchmarking is the practice of comparing the own performance with the performance of other similar organizations.

The type of benchmarking used is dependent on the following considerations:

Time available

Required resources

Experience level of the organization

The selected benchmarking partner

Circumstances will enforce which type to select. The decision what to benchmark can result from an identified problem area or a change in strategic initiatives. The focus could be for example support functions or work processes. An important consideration when selecting the benchmark partner is not to limit the choice within the public sector, but to include the private sector. This is what Wireman (2004) mentioned in his book.

There is no single best benchmarking process adopted. One of the earliest books on benchmarking was probably written by Camp in 1989 in which he developed a 12 stage methodology⁶. This is as follows:

1. Select subject ahead 2. Define the process

3. Identify potential partners 4. Identify data sources

5. Collect data and select partners 6. Determine the gap

7. Establish process differences 8. Target future performance 9. Communicate

10. Adjust goal 11. Implement

12. Review/recalibrate.

(24)

The first book on benchmarking was written by Kaiser Associates in 1988.

However, a novel way of benchmarking methodology was developed by Boxwell in 1994⁷. Kaiser's benchmarking methodology provides structure and analytical rigor to benchmarking.

The methodology is depicted in Figure 4.

Figure 4. Kaiser Associates benchmarking methodology

Source: http://www.kaiserassociates.com/cs/benchmarking_process accessed March 7, 2010

Benchmarking is a matter of looking outward (from a business, an organization, industry, a region or a country perspective) and examines how others excel at their activity⁸.

7 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benchmarking, accessed March 7, 2010

8 http://www.tutor2u.net/business/strategy/benchmarking.htm accessed March 7, 2010

(25)

2.3 Background

Fishery management shall be described first. Notably there is no accepted definition for fishery management and authors (Bodiguel et al, 2009; Cochrane and Garcia, 2009) have used the working definition provided by the FAO. This is as follows:

“the integrated process of information gathering, analysis, planning, consultation, decision-making, allocation of resources and formulation and implementation, with enforcement as necessary, of regulations or rules which govern fisheries activities in order to ensure the continued productivity of the resources and accomplishment of other fisheries objectives” (FAO, 1997).

The tasks of fishery management that follow from this description were presented as in Figure 5.

Figure 5. Schematic representation of the tasks of fishery management and their interrelationships

Feedback

Source: Cochrane, 2002

Cochrane and Garcia (2009) mentioned that effective fisheries management requires strategic- and tactical planning. The strategic part is the long term view and is linked to

(26)

selection and implementation of actions. They continued that the first step for optimal long term use of the resources starts by identifying the objectives resulting from the goals that are stated in policy. These are translated further downwards to operational levels as shown in Figure 6 and the combination of these hierarchical levels is called management strategy.

Figure 6. Schematic presentation of management strategy – the hierarchical levels of intentions (policy, goals and objectives), standards (reference points and indicators) and actions (management measures)

Source: Cochrane and Garcia, 2009

The issue of management and strategy became current well after authors like Botsford, Castilla and Peterson (1997) publicized a warning that catches have reached their upper limit. On a global level, this was evidence that countries failed to achieve sustainability in managing fisheries because there is overfishing and indirect effects on the marine ecosystem.

On an operational level, this was visible by increased harvest rates as a result of sociopolitical pressure and uncertainty about which harvest limit could make the resources collapse. Altering

(27)

the structure of the habitat in the marine ecosystem by fishing was an indirect effect. A structured habitat was important for recruitment of species, protection against prey and sustaining the stock. However, physical changes to the marine environment are also induced by nature, for example by means of temporary climate phenomena like ENSO (El Niño Southern Oscillation). Botsford et al. (1997) argued for a more holistic approach to achieve sustainability because the whole system includes also non-target species and the environment. But changed management with the goal of reducing pressure directly raised expectations. Existing institutional structures were inadequate to overcome short-term gains and in societies where there was no tradition of cooperation.

Lane and Stephenson (1999) also support the holistic view for resource sustainability like Botsford et al. (1997), but elaborated further on the concept of changed management by focusing on the problem-oriented nature of fisheries management and management by objectives.

2.4 Analysis

The results from Pauly, Christensen, Dalsgaard, Froese and Torres (1998) showed the utilization of the fisheries resources leading up to 1998 was not sustainable. In addition, Pauly et al. (1998) also found that there was a shift in landings from long-lived species that are higher in the food chain to short-lived species that are lower in the food chain, which effect was more evident in the Northern Hemisphere. He called this theory fishing down food webs and was characterized as a shift in the landings form large piscivorous fishes to smaller invertebrates and planktivorous fishes. Figure 7 provides a conceptual view of that theory.

(28)

Figure 7. Conceptual view of the theory ‘fishing down food webs’

Source:http://wpcontent.answers.com/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a2/Fishing_down_the_food_

web.jpg/350px-Fishing_down_the_food_web.jpg accessed March 16, 2010

Basically, first catches increase, but move at a later phase to stagnating or declining. He quantified the rate of decrease at about 0.1 per decade and suggested that future management must rebuild stocks by means of large “no-take” marine protected areas.

It was at the turn of the century when also Caddy (1999) stressed the urgency of improving management frameworks. He did this by describing various paradigms that exist in fisheries management. Various types of quota schemes (output control) form the dominant frame of reference in fisheries management, followed closely by constant exploitation rate strategies through effort control, but besides these technical measures, there are also area closures. Within the dominant paradigm, reliance on technical measures as supplements is strong. Too much emphasis was placed on biological research while the classic age-based models for stock assessment phased out with the improvements in computing power. This new paradigm evolved with the shift in technology and Caddy believed that future paradigms will evolve in the same manner. However, overfishing still took place because of poor data, superficial analysis and too optimistic interpretation of results. Caddy argued that perhaps it was better to return to the basics and see what other options were possible to make fisheries

(29)

management work effectively. An example of a technology shift was the introduction of transponders to improve the control of fishing and made fisheries management more effective when supported by for instance closed areas and seasons. The transponders are based on a satellite surveillance system and this control measure is regarded as the only measure that can provide long-term effective management. The developing countries are the major supplier of aquatic marine products and rebuilding depleted stocks and restoring habitats deserve attention first.

From the work of Greboval (2002) there were four dimensions assigned to sustainability, but most importantly was the feature of time coupled to these. This raised the question whether an unwanted situation was reversible or similarly the adaptation rate to changing conditions. Factors contributing to unsustainability and overfishing were identified as being effectiveness of management control, fleet capacity and overcapitalization, internal threats to the ecosystem and uncertainty. Greboval also explained the total allowable catch (TAC) by example of a management scenario of a large-scale industrial fishery, single species with limited or open access and identified three triggers to induce sustainability and prevent overfishing (Number 1, 2 & 3 in appendix G). Greboval noted that Pauly’s theory of fishing down the food web lead to an inferior mix in the landed catch.

Pauly, Alder, Bennett, Christensen, Tyedmers and Watson (2003) mentioned that global fisheries declined since the mid 1980s as a result of continued overfishing and habitat degradation. These were the main factors that hinder keeping global fisheries healthy and as this phenomenon is likely to continue, Pauly et al. (2003) looked at the future of fisheries by means of identifying trends, extrapolating them and developing possible futures based on 4 scenarios set by the United Nations Environment Programme. The scenarios were markets first, security first, policy first or sustainability first. Presently, the shrimp fisheries operate under the market first scenario, having a large impact on the bottom habitat.

Charles (2004) found it time to widely recognize that sustainability must follow a broad approach; one that is integrated. One consideration was uncertainty which is much discussed and never left out in natural resource systems and stated that the need to live with uncertainty was there.

The issue of uncertainty was viewed as an allegory by Garcia (2007). He began his argument by referring to fisheries as “soft watches” meaning that it was not as robust as

(30)

previously assumed and referred to as “clockworks” in the past. Fisheries have developed unpredictably and integrating available research findings into day-to-day management has been slow and fragmented. Decades ago this was predicted and warnings have been issued, and the many articles published about the failure of management speak volumes.

Having said this, the sustainability scenario from Pauly et al. (2003) was the most plausible to safeguard future benefit to society. This implied that governments would have to look beyond their borders and support international agreements and bottom-up local resources governance in their effort to rebuild stocks. Needless to say this will require meticulous monitoring (Pauly et al., 2003). The same can be withdrawn from Greboval’s management scenario in appendix G if it was effectively implemented. Notwithstanding the scenarios from Pauly et al. (2003), the authors argued that there will be a radical trend change needed to return 20% of the easier accessible waters (up to 100 m depth) back to the state of the 1970s. It will require a 20 to 30% reduction of the current fishing effort and a redistribution of the remaining effort across the different stocks.

Beddington, Agnew and Clark (2007) can be added to the series of publications amongst which Botsford et al. (1997); Pauly et al. (1998 & 2003) and Greboval (2002) have pointed out the failure of fisheries management evident as overcapacity in fishing fleets and failures to reduce fishing effort. Beddington et al. (2007) put forward that overcapacity was widely accepted to be a major problem and with its socio-economic virtues and distress, through the political process, could lead to the erosion of management supervision. Success has been limited and analysis suggested that management could utilize a dual approach to attain greater success. One was public research, monitoring and administrative oversight and required a good understanding of the stocks, setting output controls such as TACs or input controls such as number of vessels, closed seasons, closed areas. If this was done correctly through enforcement and tested harvest strategies, it could lead to keeping a sustainable stock. However, output controls were more difficult to monitor. The other approach was incentive based that reflects proper community and individual harvest rights. The management process was better understood when the incentives of the authority and the fishing community are analyzed.

Following Pauly et al (2003), still 63% of fish stocks required rebuilding (Worm, Hilborn, Baum, Branch, Collie, Costello, Fogarty, Fulton, Hutchings, Jennings, Jensen, Lotze, Mace, McClanahan, Minto, Palumbi, Parma, Ricard, Rosenberg, Watson and Zeller, 2009).

(31)

Having identified overexploitation as the main constraint from keeping the stocks healthy, efforts were undertaken to rebuild fisheries. Worm et al. (2009) had analyzed exploitation rate on a global level and researched solutions that might be successful to keep the stocks from declining.

At that point one might consider it logical to lower the exploitation rate, yet, an even lower exploitation rate than that to which it had been reduced already would be necessary for this. A series of management actions being catch restrictions (fishing effort reduction), closed areas (marine sanctuaries) and fishing gear restrictions could help achieve this. Fishing effort can be expressed for example in terms of days at sea, total allowable catch (TAC) or hours fished. A definition for closed areas is as stated,

“Closed areas are either a fully protected marine reserve …or are designed to exclude specific fisheries from certain areas. They can initiate recovery by providing refuge for overfished stocks, restoring community structure and biodiversity, protecting important habitat features, and increasing ecosystem resilience” (Worm et al., 2009, p. 583).

The importance of a closed area was among many others further substantiated by Lhomme and Vendeville (1997); Artigas, Vendeville, Leopold, Guiral and Ternon (2003);

Dumas (2006) and Nagelkerken, Blaber, Bouillon, Green, Haywood, Kirton, Meynecke, Pawlik, Penrose, Sasekumar and Somerfield (2007). Juvenile shrimps migrate from the deeper marine waters to the coastal estuaries during their life cycle and emigrate after some time to integrate into offshore stocks. There the stock is harvested by the commercial shrimp fisheries. In French Guiana, it was very controversial whether the shrimp make use of the mangroves present in the coastal estuaries, but Dumas (2006) examined this by focusing on their migration pattern. While Lhomme and Vendeville (1997) posit a continuous coastal nursery area along the shoreline, Dumas concluded that juvenile shrimp make use of the mangroves at least as feeding grounds and enter them on a cyclical, tidal-dominated rhythm.

Nagelkerken et al. (2007) elaborated further in his review explaining that shrimp make widespread use of mangroves during high tides, but also that, in areas with seasonal rainfall, rain explained 70% of emigration, distribution and size. One of the most important findings was the positive correlation between catch and mangrove presence; the catch is influenced by the relative abundance in the mangroves. It was pointed out that research should focus on such connectivity and should make use of standardized data.

(32)

The standardization that Nagelkerken refers to is particularly useful especially if research is extended regionally to the neighbouring countries of the Brazil-Guiana’s Shelf, whereby Artigas et al. (2003) pointed out that on such a larger scale this would provide a more accurate estimate of the stocks present. This conclusion was drawn from a review of present knowledge in French Guiana with the objective of assessing the local and regional stocks.

French Guiana had rich history of research cooperation through different projects dating back after the Second World War at the end of the 1940s. This allowed a build up of an extensive knowledge base about the stocks, their biology, their life cycle, the climatic conditions, geographic conditions and so forth. Perhaps one other important finding in Artigas et al. (2003) was the confirmation of what was already known which is that principally areas were distinguished by water depth and structured the physical occurrence and distribution of the different types of fisheries resources.

Such was confirmed by Power (2000) and moreover, he mentioned the serious steady decline in shrimp catches in Suriname and the question whether this was caused by overfishing or lack of a protected spawning area, which left the door open for fishing activities that are destructive to the stock. In that regard he pointed out some serious shortcomings that inhibit action to protect the stock in Suriname waters. These are:

1. lack of knowledge about shrimp growth, life cycle, distribution, size, age, etc 2. lack of accurate quantities of target stock harvested

On the one hand this is in general contrary to the work already done by FAO/

Western Central Atlantic Fishery Commission (1999, 2000); Garcia et al. (1985); Gilly and Cochet (1987); Garcia (1988, 1989, and 1996); Lhomme and Vendeville (1997). On the other hand that is true when focusing on specific commercial shrimp species.

A significant outcome from these studies was the Prefectoral order (Regional Direction of Maritime Affaires, 1999). This was a clear management measure that realized the creation of a nursery area restricted for shrimp trawling. Important here was that the authorities took into account the opinion of science (IFREMER – French Research Institute for Exploitation of the Sea). Actually, since 1985 there existed a prohibition of trawling in depths lower than 30 m. Taking into account further research, of mainly IFREMER, and the fact that the prawn trawl fishery was the only type of trawl fishery in French Guiana, the restricted area was lowered to about 28 m depth in 1999, as referred to in the year 2000 implemented FAO/Norway Programme

(33)

of Assistance to Developing Countries for the Implementation of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (FISHCODE). The creation of a marine sanctuary is a space restriction.

In 2000, a follow up of the first national fisheries seminar from 1998 was held (FAO/FISHCODE, 2000b). The objectives were:

1. present results from research in the Brazil-Guiana’s Shelf done by the Western Central Atlantic Fisheries Commission (WECAFC) working group of shrimp and groundfish which started in the mid 1990s;

2. stimulate participation of the stakeholders and cooperation with the public sector

In essence, this FAO/Norway funded programme was intended to assist developing countries to improve scientific advice for fisheries management. Since 1996, there was a significant decline in shrimp catches and production per boat; production dropped 50% over the past 15 to 20 years.

Worth mentioning was that in the 1970s Suriname had the best yields in the region. Possible causes were: too much fishing effort, destructive fishing practices by other fishery types in nursery areas, climate change (not proven) and deterioration of the seabed due to extensive trawling the past years (not proven). Research would have to indicate which the causes are. The creation of the marine sanctuary in French Guiana was mentioned as being a realized management measure and violations was strictly monitored.

This was an important momentum, because the first draft fishery management plan was presented. Despite that it was no formal document yet, pending the passing of the new Fisheries Act, it served as a guideline for the ministry of Agriculture, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries, provided that it was updated continually. Stakeholders acknowledged that there was local as well as regional data and scientific information available.

In his report, Spaargaren (2001) analyzed the shrimp industry of Suriname by looking among others at the problems of the declining catches and the fishing effort. It was difficult to place a single cause for the declining catches, but there was a clear correlation with destructive fishing practices in the spawning area and accordingly advised the creation of a marine sanctuary, a closed season and referred to the draft fisheries management plan which was presented in 2000 (FAO/FISHCODE, 2000b). Due to their important value, the stocks need to be monitored and Spaargaren remarked that during that time the Fisheries Department of Suriname did an excellent task at relatively low cost. A decline in catches normally would

(34)

reduce the fishing effort, but this was not the case during the 1990s despite the decrease in number of vessels.

Another significant momentum was in 2002, when the first regional conference on the sustainability of fisheries resources in the Brazil-Guiana’s Shelf was held in Suriname (FAO/WECAFC, 2002). The identified declining trends in shrimp catches were confirmed by the Conference. Concerns were put forward and what the socio-economic impacts would be resulting from poor fisheries management. Non-sustainable fisheries had effects on income, employment, food security and deterioration of stocks. That meeting was intended to share information about the stocks and evaluate management recommendations for the region and the conference agreed that meetings of that nature were essential and should be continued regularly.

It was the nature of the resources in the Brazil-Guiana’s Shelf that indisputably implied a regional approach to management for sustained fisheries production. The starting point of this approach should be long-term conservation of the stocks and optimization of economic benefits.

The knowledge generated must provide a strong science base that can be used in this regional approach to management.

While many authors have put forward views which they think could contribute to rebuild stocks, Caddy (2005) was of the opinion that this will be very difficult to achieve and will ultimately leave mankind with harvesting stocks low in the food web once the system has been fundamentally overfished; explained in Pauly’s theory (Pauly et al. 1998). Furthermore, Caddy mentioned that exploitation does not mean that a stock is kept sustainable, because despite quotas, stocks depleted. Too much attention was given to harvest continuity. Instead, attention must be given on safeguarding the resource for continuity by keeping the spawning biomass high. An important condition was that not all of the stock should be available for production during a year. This was consistent with that which others have researched on the creation of marine sanctuaries or closed areas among which Lhomme and Vendeville (1997);

Artigas et al. (2003); Dumas (2006) and Nagelkerken et al. (2007), but as Caddy mentioned, finding the proper management strategy was no simple task.

Nevertheless, similar to the findings of FAO/WECAFC (2002), Blanchard (2009) advocated an urgent need to move towards a regional approach of research to properly manage and sustain stocks. His paper might be regarded as evidence that after 2002 a collaboration gap originated within the regional framework. He touched the issue of standardization of data,

(35)

methods and procedures by calling for common rules applied for efficient management and sustainability. Following a fisheries development and management approach, Blanchard introduced the following model for the Brazil-Guiana’s Shelf (Figure 8).

Figure 8. A fisheries development and management approach

Source: Blanchard, 2009

This was very much common ground as the integrated approach mentioned in Botsford et al. (1997); Caddy (1999); Lane and Stephenson (1999); Pauly et al. (2003) and Charles (2004).

Remarkably, recommendations like research, regional integration, improving data collection and distribution were already considered in 1945. This was described by Garcia (as cited in Cochrane and Doulman, 2005) and he went further in mentioning that technical measures, closed areas and seasons were ineffective if expansion of fishing effort, caused by expansion in the number of vessels fishing was not controlled. The recommendations were very much similar to what Blanchard (2009) and many others recommended throughout at least the last 15 years. This implied yet another example of the failure of fisheries management.

One of the conclusions mentioned in Bodiguel (2009) was that despite the incomplete scientific knowledge so far, knowledge allowed for certain management decisions to

(36)

be made. Bodiguel had touched an element that was part of the precautionary approach as recommended in the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries.

A word of caution was previously provided by Caddy (2005), mentioning that this approach reflected beliefs about the current perceptions of a situation. Moreover, in light of sustainability, the focus of research and management had mostly been one-sided on the bio- ecological component e.g. the control of harvest rates. As already known, harvest rates exceeded limits and stocks declined. This one-sided focus probably contributed to the limited success of fisheries management. Conventional research methods that evaluate the state of a single stock were no longer valid because they evidently did not work for medium or long term strategies.

Natural changes were unaccounted for in those calculations and fishery data managed in the interest of a TAC is of questionable reliability. Bodiguel undoubtedly highlighted aspects which were a typical characteristic of tropical multispecies fisheries like that of Suriname and the other countries in the Brazil-Guiana’s Shelf.

Just like Bodiguel, few single species production systems were stable (Caddy, 2005). Caddy elaborated on the concept of sustainability by describing what was understood by development in that context and that was what has kept especially developing countries with the idea of receiving a series of benefits sustained over time.

It was unknown whether implemented corrective management measures have been effective in light of efforts to improve management and deter overexploitation (Mora, Myers, Coll, Libralato, Pitcher, Sumaila, Zeller, Watson, Gaston and Worm, 2009). Mora et al.

(2009) researched management effectiveness and concluded that using scientific advice to make policy through a process of participation and transparency lies at the very center in order to achieve fisheries sustainability. The demand for fisheries product was likely to increase with 43% of the maximum reported catch of the late 1980s. This was contrary to the effort reduction mentioned by Pauly et al. (2003), which was estimated to rebuild stocks.

Receiving benefits as society and stakeholders in the framework of rebuilding efforts was discussed by Worm et al. (2009) where he mentioned economic incentives for improved management practices (effort reduction, reduction of exploitation rate, compliance improvement, participation in the management process) and assigning dedicated access privileges such as catch shares or territorial fishing rights to individual fishers or fishing communities.

(37)

As stated

“Realigning economic incentives with resource conservation (rather than overexploitation) is increasingly recognized as a critical component of successful rebuilding efforts” (Worm et al., 2009, p. 583).

However, in poorer regions it was a more complicated process to rebuild stocks (because of the impact of foreign (multi-national) fleets and lack of alternatives to fishing), thereby stressing the need for an international perspective very similar to that of FAO/WECAFC (2002) and Blanchard (2009) for the Brazil-Guiana’s Shelf. Finding and implementing the best management actions depend on the local context which also required exhaustive experimentation, but not without short term social and economic costs. According to Worm et al (2009) this was a very complicated issue, but there was no other better option.

2.5 Conclusions

The author supports the holistic approach from Botsford et al. (1997) and Lane and Stephenson (1999). That approach is necessary, but the ingredients thereto were not yet operationalized. The concept was not brought on tactical level. But even so, by directly raising expectations by change management, the author is inclined to state that over the short-term it seemed unlikely that the holistic approach would be widely accepted.

Caddy (1999) stressed the improvement of management frameworks. This argument is supported when he stated that it was required to go back to the basics and see what other options are available. One angle was to start with the developing countries, because of their important supply function. However, in doing this, there was still the problem of overfishing and how to reduce it. This implied to the author curbing the supply and leaving the question open how then the existing demand would be met.

The two shortcomings mentioned by Power (2000) were in general contrary to the work already done by several authors before, but the author agrees that the shortcomings are valid if the focus lies on specific commercial shrimp species.

Given the factors that contribute to unsustainability and overfishing in Greboval (2002), noticeable is that most, if not almost all, are human induced. Therefore unwanted situations could be reversed. To the author it was not a question whether to reverse or to adapt

DEVELOPING SUSTAINABLE FISHERY MANAGEMENT STRATEGY IN SURINAME