RESTRICTING FISHING: A SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF ARTISANAL SHARK AND RAY FISHING IN CILACAP

Abstract

Catches of shark and ray are considered important in Indonesian fisheries. Anecdotal evidence suggests that these fisheries may be over-exploited, but catches of shark and ray may be critical to their economic viability and the welfare of fishing communities dependent on them. Through a case study in Cilacap, Central Java, this paper assesses the potential economic and social impact on fishers and their households of restrictions on shark and ray catch. It reveals that shark and ray rep resent a minor component of this fishery's total catch, so the likely impact on the cash profitability of individual boats and the cash flow of fishing households would be minimal. However, inclusion of non-monetary costs in the analysis reveals that net returns to boat owners are negative. Shark and ray catch reductions will add further losses, and downstream activities such as processing of shark and ray products could imply an amplified aggregate impact.

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to Ms Tenny Apriliani, Mr Dharmadi, Ms Jenny Giles, Dr Agus Heri Purnomo, Ms Tuti Susilowati and Dr William White for valuable assistance in the field.

Notes

¹Sourced from publicly available FAO data at <http://www.fao.org/fi/default.asp>, accessed 22 December 2006.

²This evaluation is part of a broader project funded by the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR), entitled ‘Artisanal shark and ray fisheries in Eastern Indonesia: their socio-economic and fisheries characteristics and relationship to Australian resources’. In this project the overall status of artisanal shark and ray fisheries in Indonesia was evaluated, and the extent to which shark and ray stocks are shared between Indonesia and Australia was assessed. The current paper contributes to the socio-economic objectives of the project.

³An earlier paper by the same authors (Dharmadi and White 2003) was less clear as to trip length, stating that vessels at a number of ports in Indonesia, including Cilacap, fished for between seven and 15 days.

⁴The region studied by White, Martosubroto and Sadorra (1989) is quite distinct from the more urbanised Cilacap port, and thus has limited relevance to the current analysis.

⁵Raw data were collected from the Cilacap fisheries office by members of the project researcher team; copies of the original data are held at Murdoch University, Perth.

⁶Collected with the assistance of Ms Tuti Susilowati, Indonesian Center for Agricultural Socio Economic Research and Development (ICASERD).

⁷The household poverty line was derived from a poverty line of Rp 1,200,132 per person per year (BPS-Statistics Indonesia 2003: 584) and a mean number of household members for Cilacap of four (BPS-Statistics Indonesia 2002: 56).

⁸In 2002 wallets made from ray skin sold in Cilacap for about A$18, compared with A$2 for those made from snake-skin (White 2002).