Highlight
Effect of Alternative Incomes on Fishing and Human Welfare in the Republic of Kiribati
Map of Kiribati
Achievement/Results
IGERT Trainee Sheila Walsh conducted a household survey on nine islands in the Republic of Kiribati. The project demonstrates the need for linking natural and social sciences in a bio-economic analysis of marine resource use. And results challenge the assumptions about what levels of fishing are optimal, not only for reef health, but also for people’s well being.
The Republic of Kiribati is unique for being home to both some of the last remaining pristine coral reef ecosystems and traditional Pacific Island culture. Despite its isolation and immense ocean territory, Kiribati is not immune to the tragedies that plague many developing countries. Research shows the effects of a growing population and emerging cash economy on the health of the coral reef ecosystem. However, it is not only wildlife that has suffered; the local people have fallen into a poverty trap. The coral reef is their primary source of sustenance and income, yet they are unable to make choices to conserve it without jeopardizing their short-term health because degraded coral reefs barely provide enough food for people to feed their families. In order to pull these people out of the poverty trap and return these coral reefs to a more productive state, government and community action is needed.
Together with fish, copra (a coconut product) is the other main source of income in Kiribati. Following the crash in world prices of copra, the Government of Kiribati has been subsidizing copra. A significant increase in the subsidy in 2003 was thought by some in the Ministry of Fisheries as a way to draw labor away from the reef fisheries and into copra. In collaboration with the Ministry, Sheila conducted a national level household survey to determine whether the subsidy decreased fishing pressure and increased welfare. Preliminary findings suggest that the efficacy of the subsidy depends on the amount of capital people already have invested in the fishery and the current health of the coral reef on each island. For example, people who have already invested in boats or outboard motors or people on islands where the coral reefs are still relatively healthy will be more productive fishermen and will be less likely to switch into copra, despite the subsidy. Consequently, the subsidy is likely having a smaller effect than expected and has no preventative value: the subsidy may be most effective on islands where the coral reefs are already significantly degraded. The lack of a preventative effect is especially important because extensive research on coral reefs has shown that recovery from extreme degradation is very slow or sometimes irreversible. Response to the alternative income program varies with the allocation of human, natural or manufactured capital. Consequently the policy may be more or less successful for particular islands or villages depending on the health of the environment and the household wealth.
This research is continuing and will ultimately provide baseline data for the establishment of marine reserves combined with alternative income, conservation payment or penalty schemes. To complete the evaluation of this integrated conservation-development policy, she will assess reef health on an additional three islands where household surveys were conducted. The islands will be chosen to vary in their expected reef to agricultural productivity ratio. On each island, she will conduct quantitative surveys of the fish and benthic community using SCUBA in order to assess ecosystem structure. Data on numerical abundance and length of reef fish species will be collected by a pair of divers along three transects, separated by 10 m, along an isobath between 10-12 m depth at each site. Fishes greater than or equal to 20 cm total length will be counted in an 8-m wide strip as the transect is laid. Fishes smaller than 20 cm total length will be counted in a 4 m wide strip in the reverse direction along the transect. Fishes will be recorded to species of greatest taxonomic resolution. Counts will be binned by 5 cm total length classes. The total area surveyed per site for fishes great than or equal to 20 cm total length will be 600 m2 (3 × 25 × 8 m) and 300 m2 (3 × 25 × 4 m) for fishes less than 20 cm total length. Counts by size class will be converted into biomass density estimates by species using length weight regression parameters from various published, unpublished (JD Parrish, US Geological Survey, Hawaii Cooperative Fishery Research Unit) and web-based sources. Differences in ecosystem structure will be analyzed by comparing differences in each functional group, community, and the ecosystem. Differences in functional group fraction of cover or biomass will be tested using analysis of variance (ANOVA), with island as the factor. Differences in the benthic and fish community will be tested using multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA), with island as the factor. Differences across islands in all benthic and fish community functional groups together will be tested using principle components analysis. Principle component one will then be used as a metric of reef health. Reef health and copra health, determined previously, will be used together, with other fixed factors, to estimate the effect of the relative reef productivity on movement into copra and out of fishing using ordinary least squares.
This study will be the first to properly evaluate an integrated-conservation development program, while simultaneously considering the role of market and environmental conditions. The results will be important for informing strategies of both conservation and development practitioners locally and globally. The ecological results will further contribute to our understanding of how humans change ecosystem structure with increased population growth and economic development.
More information and photos are available:
http://cmbc.ucsd.edu/Gilbert_Islands/
Address Goals
This study will be the first to properly evaluate an integrated-conservation development program, while simultaneously considering the role of market and environmental conditions. The results will be important for informing strategies of both conservation and development practitioners locally and globally. The ecological results will further contribute to our understanding of how humans change ecosystem structure with increased population growth and economic development.
