Fishers´ migration along the Kenyan coast: Implications for management. Policy Brief.
Average rating
Cast your vote
You can rate an item by clicking the amount of stars they wish to award to this item.
When enough users have cast their vote on this item, the average rating will also be shown.
Star rating
Your vote was cast
Thank you for your feedback
Thank you for your feedback
Date
2010
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Despite the preliminary nature of data presented in this brief it is evident that information is lacking in several areas of direct relevance for policy development aimed at dealing with issues of migrating fishers. Below we list a number of pressing issues that deserve the attention of policy and research in the near future to address the issue of fisher’s migration and fisheries management. 1. Better monitoring of migrant fishers (both Kenyan and non-Kenyan) at landing sites is a prerequisite for improved understanding of fishers’ movements and the effects of such mobility on coastal resources. 2. Significant gaps in the information about the status of many coastal and marine resources limits the ability of both BMUs and the Fisheries Authorities to make informed decisions about the number of fishers, types of gears and catches to allow into any given area. 3. The type of systematically collected information required would include recording of all fishers and crews not members of local BMUs, their origin, time of arrival, gears used, species and quantities landed. This could be collected by BMUs in collaboration with, and with the support from, the Fisheries Department. 4. Collection of such information would constitute a first step towards forming a solid base in which to ground more informed recommendations on restrictions of migrant fishing operations. It would also allow local management institutions (BMUs and Fisheries Department Offices) to better anticipate and plan for influx of non-local fishers into their management area. 5. Given the conflictual issue over use of ring nets, this issue would benefit from a thorough investigation into who is involved in such fishing practices. A working group should be convened to address this issue. 6. The invisibility of fishers’ mobility in policy means that institutions developed to deal with coastal management at the community level may not have sufficient support from legal and policy documents, and may not be developed or equipped to handle the possible conflicts and difficult trade-offs that need to be addressed as a result of fishers’ mobility. 7. Any policy decision needs to consider the trade-offs between both benefits and negative effects as perceived by members of communities hosting migrant fishers.Pages
10pp.Publisher or University
Stockholm Resilience CentreCollections