Você está na página 1de 7

See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281672996

Validating RAPFISH sustainability indicators:


Focus on multi-disciplinary aspects of Indian
marine fisheries

Article in Marine Policy October 2015


DOI: 10.1016/j.marpol.2015.06.032

CITATIONS READS

2 185

4 authors, including:

Ananthan Ps V. Ramasubramanian
Central Institute of Fisheries Education Central Institute of Fisheries Education
41 PUBLICATIONS 23 CITATIONS 43 PUBLICATIONS 43 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Assessment of extent of Community Dependence on the coastal ecologically sensitive areas in Achra-
Ratnagiri, Maharashtra View project

Gear-wise composition, distribution, status and trade of elasmobranchs in Maharashtra, India View
project

All content following this page was uploaded by V. Ramasubramanian on 02 June 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.


Marine Policy 60 (2015) 202207

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Marine Policy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/marpol

Validating RAPFISH sustainability indicators: Focus on


multi-disciplinary aspects of Indian marine sheries
M. Suresha Adiga a,n, P.S. Ananthan b, V. Ramasubramanian b, H.V. Divya Kumari c
a
Fisheries Resource Harvest and Post Harvest Management Division, Central Institute of Fisheries Education, Fisheries University Road, 7-Bunglows, Versova,
Andheri (W), Mumbai 400061, Maharashtra, India
b
Fisheries Economics Extension and Statistics, Division, Central Institute of Fisheries Education, Fisheries University Road, 7-Bunglows, Versova, Andheri (W),
Mumbai 400061, Maharashtra, India
C
Department of Aquaculture, College of Fisheries, Mangalore 575002, Karnataka, India

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In determining the importance of sheries sustainability indicators, stakeholders interest plays a de-
Received 22 April 2015 ning role in the sheries management practices. The indicator based tools such as RAPFISH have been
Received in revised form available for sustainability assessment of shery resources. In the present study, procedures to validate
30 June 2015
the pre-selected RAPFISH, which is a multidisciplinary indicator based evaluation tool for measuring the
Accepted 30 June 2015
sustainability of shery resources, are applied. The sustainability indicators were subjected to validation
process based on feedback from resource owners, users and experts, using Multi-Criteria Analyses such
Keywords: as Weighted Sum Model and Analytic Hierarchy Process. Based on the validation results, suggestions
Analytic Hierarchy Process have been made to improve methodology and its effective application in practice. This paper demon-
Indian sheries
strates RAPFISH as a potentially effective multidisciplinary tool for evaluation of sustainability of shery
RAPFISH
resources.
Sustainability indicators
Weighted Sum Model & 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction analyzing and evaluating shery sustainability, such as RAPFISH


[6], FAO Code of Conduct Compliance [7,8]. RAPFISH is a novel
According to KEI [1], indicators and composite indicators are multidisciplinary rapid appraisal technique, which employs sim-
increasingly recognized as a useful tool for policy making and ple, easy to score attributes to provide cost effective technique for
public communication in conveying information on countrys evaluating the comparative sustainability of sheries and the
performance in elds such as environment, economy, society, or sustainability is described quantitatively by a set of dened criteria
technological development. Meadows [2] more aptly describes represented in a numerical analysis by a set of scored attributes
their importance as: indicators arise from values (we measure what [9].
we care about), and they create values (we care about what we In the Indian context, so far no such comprehensive assess-
measure). Jennings [3] reviewed a recent work on the develop- ments consisting of ecological, technological, social, economic,
ment, selection and application of indicators (ecological, economic policy and governance aspects, using a unied methodological
and social) and observed how indicators might support an eco- tool, have been attempted. Only Alder et al. [10] has used a multi-
system approach to sheries (EAF) and stated that indicators indicator approach, which consisted 14 indicators (predominantly
ecological with a few economic and policy related indicators), to
should guide the management of shing activities that have led to,
assess the aggregate performance of marine ecosystems of 53
or are most likely to lead to, unsustainable impacts on ecosystem
countries including India. As a tool of research, the selection of
components or attributes.
indicators/attributes must be subjected to the measures of relia-
Over the last two years, the Sea Around Us Project has sup-
bility and validity. However, identied RAPFISH indicators need to
ported a number of initiatives that are now contributing to broad-
be validated in the Indian context to achieve greater efciency of
based assessments of the performance of a number of countries in
the methodology. Generally, validation of indicators determines
managing marine resources [4]. As discussed briey in Chuen-
the extent to which the developed indicators meet the anticipated
pagdee and Alder [5], there are some methods available for criteria. However, less effort goes to validation of these indicator
based assessment tools [11]. In this regard, there is a need for the
n
Correspondence to: College of Fisheries, Mangalore 575002, Karnataka, India. development of distinctive criteria to evaluate the success in
E-mail address: suresha1947@gmail.com (M. Suresha Adiga). construction and use of decision support system in agricultural

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2015.06.032
0308-597X/& 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M. Suresha Adiga et al. / Marine Policy 60 (2015) 202207 203

management [12]. Preikshot [6] the ethical dimension was replaced with a new
In the present study, identied RAPFISH indicators are required management dimension for a better reection of the Indian
to be validated by major stakeholders in marine sheries sector so context. Out of 72 indicators, some were modied, some omitted
that the outcome remains relevant and would be utilized by policy and few added in the nal instrument. This exercise was carried
makers and shers. As stakeholders preferences in the decision- out by taking into account both the availability of data and the
making process are very important [13], the opinion and per- ease of scoring of the chosen attribute objectively by the stake-
spective of resource users (shers), resource managers and ex- holders with respect to each of the shery systems. Thus the im-
perts were obtained to make the methodology of assessment portant indicators in Indian context were identied with the help
more meaningful. The aim of the present study is to validate of expert judgment and literature review. Based on this, a total of
RAPFISH sustainability indicators in the Indian context and to 60 attributes corresponding to 5 dimensions (ecological, eco-
make suggestions for improving the credibility of RAPFISH based nomic, social, technological and management) were pre-selected.
on validation results. For this purpose, Weighted Sum Model Under ecological dimension, indicators such as migratory range,
(WSM) and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) were used to validate primary production and environmental degradation etc. were
RAPFISH sustainability indicators in the Indian marine sheries. removed because of limited availability of quantitative information
of these attributes for individual shery. Some new attributes were
added under management eld such as monsoon shing ban,
2. Materials and methods mesh size regulation, registration of shing vessel, shers
willingness for adoption of management measures and com-
2.1. RAPFISH pliance of Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (CCRF) for
assessing the marine sheries management. However, scoring
RAPFISH, a handy, multidisciplinary rapid appraisal technique criteria for most of the attributes were modied keeping in mind
to determine the sustainability status of sheries, has been con- the nature of data availability. For e.g. scoring criteria given by FAO
sidered as an important shery management toolbox for 12 years for exploitation status was changed as abundant, less abundant,
[6,9]. RAPFISH evaluates the sustainability of sheries under declining, depleted and collapsed categories as mentioned by
multiple dimensions to assess the status of small scale sheries Mohamed et al. [30].
[1421] and some industrial sheries [22]. It is also used to track To make the methodology of assessment more meaningful, the
changes in shery status with time and under alternative man- opinion and perspective of resource users (shers), resource
agement scenarios [23,24]. The technique simultaneously evalu- managers and experts were obtained. A 5 point Likert scale (5
ates the status of sheries in different elds by considering eco- highly important, 4important, 3undecided, 2less important
logical and human dimensions (ecological, technological, eco- and 1not important) was used to collect the experts and shers
nomic, social and ethical in the original RAPFISH, along with in- opinion. Experts were chosen based on their experience and
stitutional in the updated version). Under each evaluation eld 6 publications, while the leaders and members of shermen co-
12 attributes are scored on simple semi-quantitative scale. operatives available in the identied landing centers constituted
the primary resource users. Ofcers of State Government Fisheries
2.2. Application of RAPFISH for Indian marine sheries Department were also interviewed (resource managers) (Table 1).
Even though the interview schedules were mailed to around 40
The set of indicators/attributes in RAPFISH method used in the experts (working or retired from different sheries organizations)
present study have been identied mainly based on an in depth across the country, only 12 responded. Among the shers, 35
search of published papers, reports and statistics. The attributes participants in each Fishermen Co-operatives were interviewed
were chosen based on the criteria that they are easily and objec- and often the consensus view of the respective society was taken
tively scored and extreme values can be easily ascribed to good or as feedback. Representatives of 6 shermen Co-operatives from
bad in relation to sustainability [6]. The RAPFISH attributes de- both coasts were interviewed. Direct observation and triangulation
veloped through continuous interaction with experts are con- methods helped to cross-check and verify the collected responses
sidered to be the best measure of sustainability [25]. For an ef- and account for the overt biases. The scores thus obtained were
fective and efcient sustainable shery management, Leadbitter
and Ward [26] derived three main attributes namely comprehen- Table 1
siveness, transparency and accountability, and the nature and quality Sampling details used for validation.
of data and information.
Experts Number of participants
The original RAPFISH method [6] contains 51 indicators/attri-
butes distributed among ve evaluation elds viz. ecological, CMFRI, Kochi 5
economical, technological, social and ethical. To adapt RAPFISH CMFRI, Mangalore 2
analysis for the present study, attributes were chosen from dif- CMFRI, Mumbai 1
CoF, Mangalore 1
ferent sources [6,14,18,19,27,28]. It has to be noted that though a
CIFE, Mumbai 1
recent version of RAPFISH methodology1 is available [29], the DoF, Karnataka 1
present study used an older version [6] of RAPFISH. The attributes DoF, Maharashtra 1
in the study have been chosen in such a manner that they capture
the reality of all the essential aspects of complex marine sheries State No. of shers cooperatives/
management in India. associations
In all, a total 72 attributes/indictors were pre-selected amongst
Gujarat 1
the ve evaluation elds namely ecological, economic, technolo-
Maharashtra 1
gical, social and management. In concordance with Pitcher and Goa 1
Karnataka 1
Kerala 1
1
Note that recent works using Rapsh methodology (R software) use a score Tamil Nadu 1
range from 0 to 10. As the new R software for RAPFISH analysis was not working Total 18
properly during the study period, the older version was used here.
204 M. Suresha Adiga et al. / Marine Policy 60 (2015) 202207

subjected to further statistical procedures in order to identify the components by successive grouping of components within levels
most important attributes among the pre-selected ones so that of hierarchy leading to distinction among levels of complexity
only the priority attributes were selected. This was done using the between these hierarchies. Thus, an AHP tree is built by devel-
Weighted Sum Model and the Analytic Hierarchy Process techni- opment of a hierarchy of decision criteria leading to alternative
que (elaborated below). courses of actions/factors. The comparative judgments are based
on a pair of factors. Thus, it synthesizes the information by nding
2.3. Weighted Sum Model (WSM) relations through experts opinions in order to infer how strongly
components at various levels of the hierarchy inuence the goal by
In decision theory, WSM is the best known and simplest multi- nding intensities (priorities) at various levels. Thus AHP algo-
criteria decision analysis (MCDA)/multi-criteria decision making rithm is basically composed of determining the relative weights of
method for evaluating a number of alternatives in terms of a the decision criteria and also determining the relative rankings
number of decision criteria. It is the simplest and the most com- (priorities) of alternatives. Qualitative information using in-
monly used method when all criteria are measured on cardinal formed judgments is utilized to derive these weights and rankings
scales, expressed in comparable units, and weights are assigned and prioritization of the alternatives is done based on the rankings
per criterion. This method is discussed in detail in Hwang and obtained [36].
Yoon [31], Nijkamp et al. [32] and Triantaphyllou and Lin [33]. The
criterion scores are standardized or normalized to be comparable
and these normalized criterion scores are multiplied by their re- 3. Results and discussion
spective weights. The products are called weighted scores and
they are summed up to over all criteria yielding a total weighted 3.1. Validation of RAPFISH indicators through Weighted Sum Model
score or priority score for each choice possibility [34]. (WSM)
n
AiWSM score = The results of WSM contain scores arranged in descending or-
w j aij, for i = 1, 2, 3, , m.
j=1 (1) der for each of the 60 attributes under ve dimensions of sus-
tainability (see Fig. 1). The higher value of attributes indicates
where, wj denotes the relative weight of importance of the cri- stakeholders perceived importance of the corresponding attribute
terion; Cj and aij are the performance value of alternative Ai when for assessing the marine sheries management. According to the
it is evaluated in terms of criterion Cj. stakeholders perception under ecological dimension, the catch
before maturity (5.7), vulnerability (5.2), exploitation status (5.1),
2.4. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) discards (5.1) and growth rate (5) were the top ve RAPFISH in-
dicators for evaluating the sustainability of Indian marine sheries.
Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is a multi-criteria decision Similarly, top ve attributes under economic dimension were the
technique proposed in the area of Operations Research by Thomas price (6.3), market (6.1), landings (6), income (6) and alternative
Saaty [35]. AHP produces a priority list of items considered ac- livelihood (5.8). The results under social dimension revealed that
cording to a decision criterion based on a pair wise comparison of residence quality, environmental knowledge, educational level,
all items with the purpose of helping to arrive at better decisions. shing community growth and socialization of shing were the
It consists of studying a complex system of interrelated top attributes with the scores ranging from 5.8 to 6.3. Similarly,

Fig. 1. Validation of RAPFISH sustainability indicators using Weighted Sum Model.


M. Suresha Adiga et al. / Marine Policy 60 (2015) 202207 205

Fig.2. Priority weights of RAPFISH sustainability indicators for Indian marine sheries based on AHP.

technological evaluation eld of RAPFISH ordination indicated that impact of juvenile shing, where intra- and inter-sectoral conicts
safety devices, selective gear, catching power, gear side effects and exist [38].
onboard handling were top ve attributes as a measure of sus- It is interesting to note that under the economic dimension, the
tainability. Finally, under the management dimension the top ve stakeholders indicated a higher priority for price of sh, market
attributes contributing to sustainability measurement were access and income than the rest of the indicators. A variation in the
regulation, willingness, traditional management, monsoon shing average price of sh over a period of time is used as a measure of
ban and mesh size regulation. sustainability of a particular shery. Even though there is a steady
Based on the results obtained from WSM, the bottom three and continuous increase in sh prices owing to the growing con-
attributes with low weighted scores were eliminated from each sumer demand, its benets are often not transferred to the shing
dimension in order to reduce the number of attributes from each community [39]. Major markets for the target shery like local,
dimension. After this exercise, 45 attributes under ve dimen- national or international determine the sustainability of particular
sions-ecological (9), economic (9), technological (9), social (8) and shery. Under the social dimension, the stakeholders rated re-
management (10)were retained for eld testing. Analytic Hier- sidence quality the highest (4.16), followed by environmental
archy Process (AHP) was used to understand the perceived im- knowledge (3.95) and educational level (3.43). Education and lit-
portance/priority of the ve dimensions/elds in relation to each eracy of shing community can play a major role in ensuring and
other and the relative standing of attributes within each dimen- sustaining livelihoods of shers [40].
sion/led in a more quantitative fashion. Similarly, safety devices, selective gear and landing sites in
technological and traditional management, monsoon shing ban
3.2. Validation of RAPFISH sustainability indicators using Analytic and mesh size regulation under management dimension were
Hierarchy Process (AHP) found as the major attributes perceived to be contributing to
sustainability. There is recognition for the valuable role that tra-
Stakeholders elicited preferences based on AHP are presented ditional knowledge can play in the contemporary management of
(see Fig. 2). The stakeholders expressed strong preferences for natural resources [41]. However, the monsoon shing ban, which
ecological dimension (27.33%) of RAPFISH method followed by is considered to be the breeding and pre-recruitment period of
technological, social (20.67%), economic (15.67%) and management most of the commercially important species, is a powerful reg-
(14.93%). It conrms that all the dimensions of RAPFISH method as ulatory measure to enhance marine sh production [42]. Mean-
measures of multidisciplinary sustainability were more or less while, effective enforcement and adoption of mesh size regulation
equally important since there were only minor score differences as a management measure to avoid the juvenile and by-catch
among the dimensions. Similarly, an exercise was carried out to shing is very important to sustain the marine shery resources.
prioritize each of the attributes under ve dimensions of the This study was taken up with the primary objective of devel-
modied RAPFISH methodology. The results indicate that ex- oping and validating a modied RAPFISH methodology for asses-
ploitation status, catch before maturity and vulnerability were the sing the sustainability of marine sheries in Indian states. Five
main attributes under the ecological dimension. Leung et al. [37] sustainability dimensions under RAPFISH method are essential for
evaluated sheries management options in Hawaii using AHP and achieving the sustainability of Indian marine sheries: ecology;
the results revealed the importance of biological factors in shery economic; social; technology and management. The validation of
management where overshing ranks the highest priority. Catch modied RAPFISH sustainability indicators for Indian marine
before maturity refers to the percentage of sh caught that are sheries demonstrates an application of AHP as a decision-support
smaller or younger than the size or age of maturity. Multi-gear technique in sheries management and this validating technique
multi-species nature of Indian marine sheries is facing a severe is appropriate for developing countries [43]. The outcome of the
206 M. Suresha Adiga et al. / Marine Policy 60 (2015) 202207

Table 2
Validated RAPFISH indicators (RAPFISH-India) under different dimensions for Indian marine sheries.

Good Bad Notes

A. Ecological
Exploitation level 0 4 Abundant (0); less abundant (1); declining (2); depleted (3); collapsed (4)
Recruitment variability 0 4 COV during recent decade: low o25% (0); medium 25% to o 50% (1); high 50% to o 75% (2); very high 75% to
o100% (3); 4100% (4)
Trophic level High Low Average trophic level of species in catch
Growth rate 0 4 Increased (0); decreased with positive trend (1); increased with negative trend (2); decreased with negative trend
(3); decreased with negative in both the decade (4)
Life cycle 0 4 o 2 year (4); 2 to o 4 year (3); 4 to o 6 year (2); 6 to o8 year (1); 48 year (0)
Size of sh 0 5 Mean size over the year: rapid increased (0); little increase (1); no change (2); uctuating (3); little decrease (4);
rapid decrease (5)
Catch before maturity 0 3 None (0); 1% to o 25% (1); 25% to o 50% (2); 50% to o 75% (3); 4 75% (4)
Vulnerability 0 4 0 to o20 (0); 20 to o 40 (1); 40 to o 60 (2); 60 to o 80 (3); 480 (4)
Discards 0 4 Very low 0% to o 10% (0); low 10% to o 20% (1); medium 20% to o40% (2); high 440% (3); very high 4 100% (4)

B. Economic
Price 0 3 Very high than average (0); high than average (1); equal to average (2); less than average (3)
Subsidy 0 4 No (0); somewhat (1); large subsidies (2); heavily reliant (3); almost completely reliant on subsidies (4)
Fishing income 0 3 Fishing income as % of total family income: o10% (3); 1050% (2); 5080% (1); 4 80% (0)
Market 0 3 Market is principally: local (0); regional (1); national (2); international (3)
Landings 0 3 Much more than average (0); more than average (1); equal to average (2); less than average (3)
Fisheries GDP 0 3 Very high (0); high (1); medium (2); low (3)
Average wage 0 4 Much more (0); more (1); the same (2); less (3); much less (4)
Alternative livelihood 0 3 Many other source of livelihood (0); some source (1); few source (2); very few source (3); none (4)
Sector employment 0 3 o 10% (0); 1020% (1); 2030% (2); 430% (3)

C. Social
Socialization of shing 0 2 Fishers work as: individual (2); families (1); community groups (0)
Fishing community growth 0 3 Growth of local community over past 10 years: o 10% (0); 107 20% (1); 20-30% (2); 430% (3)
Education level 0 2 Below (2); same (1); above (0)
Conict status 0 3 Almost none 010% (0); some 1140% (1); lots 4160% (2); a great amount 61100% (3)
Environmental knowledge 0 3 None (3); some (2); a lot (1); a great deal (0)
Fisher inuence 0 3 A great deal (0); a lot (1); some (2); none (3)
Residence quality 0 3 Excellent (0); good (1); average (2); poor (3)
Kin participation 0 3 Almost none (3); very few relatives (2); some relatives (1); shery is mainly kin (0)

D. Technological
Trip length 0 4 1 or less (0); 24 days (1); 58 days (2); 810 days (3); 4 10 days (4)
Landing sites 0 3 Landing sites are: dispersed (0); somewhat centralized (1); heavily centralized (2); distant water eet with little or
no local landings (3)
Pre-sale processing 0 3 Great deal (0); a lot (1); some (2); none (3)
Onboard handling 0 3 A great amount such as live tank (0); sophisticated (freezing/usage of ice) (1); some like salting (2); none (3)
Selective gear 0 4 A great amount (0); a lot (1); some (2); very little (3); none (4)
Vessel size 0 4 o 5 m (0); 510 m (1); 1015 m (2); 15-20 m (3); 420 m (4)
Onboard safety devices 0 3 Completely reliant on safety devices (0), some reliance (1); little or very few (2); not used (3)
Change in catching power 0 4 Not much (0); a small amount (1); somewhat (2); a lot (3); a great amount, rapid increase (4)
Gear side effect 0 3 Very few (0); some (1); a lot (2); shery dominated by destructive shing practices (3)

E. Management
Access regulation 0 2 Effective measures to access restriction (0); not very effective measures (1); free access or anyone can access (2)
Willingness 0 3 High willingness (0); some willingness (1); little willingness (2); no willingness (3)
Traditional management 0 2 Many (0); some (1); no (2)
Monsoon shing ban 0 3 Highly effective and fully practicing (0); effective and somewhat practicing (1); little effective and little practicing
(2); not effective and not practicing (3)
Mesh size regulation 0 3 Highly effective and fully practicing (0); effective and somewhat practicing (1); little effective and little practicing
(2); not effective and not practicing (3)
Vessel registration 0 3 Highly effective (0); effective averagely (1); little effective (2), not effective/no registration (3)
Stakeholder participation 0 2 All the stakeholders are participated (0); some stakeholders are participated (1); no stakeholder participation (2)
Conict resolution mechanism 0 2 Very effective mechanism exists (0); exists, but not very effective (1); no mechanism exists (2)
R&D support for sheries 0 2 Effective and highly utilized (0); effective but not utilized (1); does not exist (2)
management
Compliance of CCRF 0 3 Effectively implemented (0); somewhat effective (1); not effective (2); does not implemented (3)

analysis shows that modied RAPFISH (RAPFISH-India) is a suc- that has social, technological and ethical implications [44] and the
cessful way to handle multiple objectives, facilitate stakeholder AHP results indicate that all the dimensions under RAPFISH-India
participation and incorporate both qualitative and quantitative are crucial for sustainability assessment. For an objective decision
data. This multiple criteria analysis helped to us have a greater making, assessment of marine sheries management encompass-
understanding of how the stakeholders wanted their marine ing these multiple dimensions in an integrated fashion is sine qua
non.
shery resources to achieve sustainability. The RAPFISH-India
(Table 2) can provide a structured and systematic assessment of 4. Conclusion
marine sheries sustainability which is valuable for decision ma-
kers. In reality, sheries are multidisciplinary human endeavor Application of validation procedure for the modied RAPFISH
M. Suresha Adiga et al. / Marine Policy 60 (2015) 202207 207

method (RAPFISH-India), a multidisciplinary tool for sustainability [19] R.P. Lessa, A. Monteiro, P.J. DuarteNeto, A.C. Vieira, Multidimensional analysis
monitoring of Indian marine sheries was undertaken here. RAP- of shery production systems in the state of Pernambuco, Brazil, J. Appl.
Ichthyol. 25 (3) (2009) 256268.
FISH-India has been validated as an appropriate and useful tool for [20] M.S. Allahyari, Fisheries sustainability assessment in Guilan province, Iran, J.
assessing marine sheries sustainability in tropical multi-species Food Agric. Environ. 8 (34) (2010) 13001304.
and the complex developing country context. Based on the end- [21] M.S. Allahyari, Social sustainability assessment of shery cooperatives in
Guilan Province, Iran, J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 5 (3) (2010) 216222.
use validation, it could be concluded that RAPFISH-India is an ef- [22] A. Murillas, R. Prellezo, E. Garmendia, M. Escapa, C. Gallastegui, A. Ansuategi,
fective tool for a rapid assessment of sustainability of Indian Multidimensional and intertemporal sustainability assessment: a case study of
marine shery resources. the Basque trawl sheries, Fish. Res. 91 (2) (2008) 222238.
[23] T.J. Pitcher, S. Mackinson, V. Vasconcellos, L. Nttestad, D. Preikshot, Rapid
appraisal of the status of sheries for small pelagics using multivariate,
multidisciplinary ordination, in: T.J. Quinn, F. Funk, J. Heifetz, J.N. Ianelli, J.
Acknowledgment E. Powers, J.F. Schweigert, P.J. Sullivan, C.I. Zhang (Eds.), Fishery Stock As-
sessment Models, Alaska Sea Grant, Fairbanks, 1999, pp. 759782.
[24] D. Pauly, R. Chuenpagdee, Development of sheries in the Gulf of Thailand
The authors would like to thank Dr. WS Lakra, Director, Central Large Marine Ecosystem: analysis of an unplanned experiment, in: G. Hempel,
Institute of Fisheries Education, Mumbai, India for all his support. K. Sherman (Eds.), Large Marine Ecosystems of the World: Trends in Ex-
ploitation, Protection, and Research, Elsevier, Holland, 2003, pp. 337354.
The authors express heartfelt gratitude to shers cooperatives/
[25] J. Alder, T.J. Pitcher, D. Preikshot, K. Kaschner, B. Ferriss, How Good is Good?: A
associations and experts for their valuable suggestions. This study Rapid Appraisal Technique for Evaluation of the Sustainability Status of Fish-
was carried out with the nancial support from Central Institute of eries of the North Atlantic, Fisheries Centre Research Report, 8 (2), 2000, pp.
136182.
Fisheries Education (Indian Council of Agricultural Research),
[26] D. Leadbitter, T.J. Ward, An evaluation of systems for the integrated assess-
India. ment of capture sheries, Mar. Policy 31 (2007) 458469.
[27] J.P. Castello, P.S. Sunye, M. Haimovici, D. Hellebrandt, Fisheries in southern
Brazil: a comparison of their management and sustainability, J. Appl. Ichthyol.
25 (3) (2009) 287293.
References [28] J.M. AndriguettoFilho, R. Krul, S. Feitosa, Analysis of natural and social dy-
namics of shery production systems in Paran, Brazil: implications for
[1] KEI, Knowledge Economy Indicators, Work Package 7, State of the Art Report management and sustainability, J. Appl. Ichthyol. 25 (3) (2009) 277286.
on Simulation and Indicators, 2005, 30 p. [29] T.J. Pitcher, M.E. Lam, C. Ainsworth, A. Martindale, K. Nakamura, R.I. Perry,
[2] D. Meadows, Indicators and Information Systems for Sustainable Develop- T. Ward, Improvements to Rapsh: a rapid evaluation technique for sheries
ment, The Sustainability Institute, Hartland Four Corners, VT (1998), p. 78 p. integrating ecological and human dimensions, J. Fish Biol. 83 (4) (2013)
[3] S. Jennings, Indicators to support an ecosystem approach to sheries, Fish Fish. 865889.
6 (3) (2005) 212232. [30] K.S. Mohamed, T.V. Sathianandan, P.U. Zacharia, P.K. Asokan, P.
[4] D. Pauly, The Sea around us project: documenting and communicating global K. Krishnakumar, K.P. Abdurahiman, Shettigar Veena, Durgekar N. Raveendra,
sheries impacts on marine ecosystems, AMBIO: A J. Hum. Environ. 34 (4) Depleted and collapsed marine sh stocks along southwest coast of Indiaa
(2007) 290295. simple criterion to assess the status, in: B. Meenakumari, M.R. Boopendranath,
[5] R. Chuenpagdee, J. Alder, Sustainability ranking of North Atlantic sheries, Sea Edwin Leela, T.V. Sankar, Nikita Gopal, George Ninan (Eds.), Coastal Fishery
Around Us: North Atlantic Fisheries Centre Research Reports, 9 (5), 1999, pp. Resources of India; Conservation and Sustainable Utilization, Society of Fish-
149. eries Technologists, Cochin, 2010, pp. 6776.
[6] T.J. Pitcher, Preikshot D. RAPFISH, a rapid appraisal technique to evaluate the [31] C.L. Hwang, K. Yoon, Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Ap-
sustainability status of sheries, Fish. Res. 49 (3) (2001) 255270. plication (A State of the Art Survey), Springer-Verlag, New York, 1981.
[7] T.J. Pitcher, Rapsh a Rapid Appraisal Technique for Fisheries, and Its Appli- [32] P. Nijkamp, P. Rietveld, H. Voogd, Multicriteria Evaluation in Physical Planning,
cation to the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, FAO Fisheries Circular North-Holland, Amsterdam (1990), p. 65100.
No. 947, Rome, 1999, 47 p. [33] E. Triantaphyllou, C.T. Lin, Development and evaluation of ve fuzzy multi
[8] S.M. Garcia, K. Cochrane, G. Van Santen, F. Christy, Towards sustainable sh- attribute decision making methods, Int. J. Approx. Reason. 14 (4) (1996)
eries: a strategy for FAO and the World Bank, Ocean Coast. Manag. 42 (5) 281310.
(1999) 369398. [34] P.G.R. Smith, J.B. Theberge, Evaluating natural areas using multiple criteria:
[9] T.J. Pitcher, A. Bundy, D. Preikshot, T. Hutton, D. Pauly, Measuring the un- theory and practice, Environ. Manag. 11 (4) (1987) 445460.
measurable: a multivariate and interdisciplinary method for rapid appraisal of [35] T.L. Saaty, Multi-criteria Decision MakingThe Analytic Hierarchy Process:
the health of sheries, in: T.J. Pitcher, P.J.B. Hart, D. Pauly (Eds.), Reinventing Planning, Priority, Setting, Resource Allocation, University of Pittsburgh, USA,
Fisheries Management, Fish and Fisheries, 23, Kluwer, Academic Publishers, 1988.
Dordrecht, 1998, pp. 3154. [36] V. Ramasubramanian, A. Kumar, P. Bishop, P. Ramasundaram, C.J. Jeeva, Ap-
[10] J. Alder, S. Cullis-Suzuki, V. Karpouzi, K. Kaschner, S. Mondoux, W. Swartz, plications of quantitative techniques in technology forecasting: some case
P. Trjillo, R. Watson, D. Pauly, Aggregate performance in managing marine studies, in: H. Chandra, G. Chandra (Eds.), Role of Applied Statistics in Forestry
ecosystems of 53 maritime countries, Mar. Policy 34 (2010) 468476. Research, Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education, Dehradun, 2014.
[11] D. Rigby, P. Woodhouse, T. Young, M. Burton, Constructing a farm level in- [37] P. Leung, J. Muraoka, S.T. Nakamoto, S. Pooley, Evaluating sheries manage-
dicator of sustainable agricultural practice, Ecol. Econ. 39 (2001) 463478. ment options in Hawaii using analytic hierarchy process (AHP), Fish. Res. 36
[12] P.G. Cox, Some issues in the design of agricultural decision support systems, (2) (1998) 171183.
Agric. Syst. 52 (1996) 355381. [38] T.M. Najmudeen, R. Sathiadhas, Economic impact of juvenile shing in a tro-
[13] S. Mardle, S. Pascoe, I. Herrero, Management objective importance in sheries: pical multi-gear multi-species shery, Fish. Res. 92 (2) (2008) 322332.
an evaluation using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), Environ. Manag. 33 [39] R. Sathiadhas, R. Narayanakumar, N. Aswathy, Marine Fish Marketing in India,
(1) (2004) 111. CMFRI Kochi, Ernakulam, 2012.
[14] D. Preikshot, E. Nsiku, T. Pitcher, D. Pauly, An interdisciplinary evaluation of [40] M. Maddox, Literacy in Fishing Communities, Sustainable Fisheries Livelihoods
the status and health of African lake sheries using a rapid appraisal techni- Programme, School of Development Studies and Overseas Development
que, J. Fish Biol. 53 (sA) (1998) 381393. Group, University of East Anglia, UK, Norwich NR4 7TJ, 2007 (20 p.).
[15] D.B. Preikshot, D. Pauly, A multivariate interdisciplinary assessment of small- [41] J.R.A. Butler, T. Tawake, L. Skewes, Mc.Grath V. Tawake, Integrating traditional
scale tropical sheries, in: T.J. Quinn, F. Funk, J. Heifetz, J.N. Ianelli, J.E. Powers, ecological knowledge and sheries management in the Torres Strait, Australia:
J.F. Schweigert, P.J. Sullivan, C.I. Zhang (Eds.), Fishery Stock Assessment Mod- the catalytic role of turtles and dugong as cultural keystone species, Ecol. Soc.
els, Alaska Sea Grant, Fairbanks, 1998, pp. 803814. 17 (2012) 34, http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-05165-170434.
[16] F. Baeta, A. Pinheiro, M. Corte-Real, J.L. Costa, P.R. De Almeida, H. Cabral, M. [42] S.S. Shyam, Monsoon trawl ban and its effects on the livelihood of trawl la-
J. Costa, Are the sheries in the Tagus estuary sustainable? Fish. Res. 76 (2) bourers: the case with Versova shing village in Maharashtra, J. Indian Fish.
(2005) 243251. Assoc. 34 (2007) 115122.
[17] D. Tesfamichael, T.J. Pitcher, Multidisciplinary evaluation of the sustainability [43] K. Soma, How to involve stakeholders in sheries managementa country
of Red Sea sheries using Rapsh, Fish. Res. 78 (2) (2006) 227235. case study in Trinidad and Tobago, Mar. Policy 27 (1) (2003) 4758.
[18] V.J. Isaac, R.V.E. Santo, B. Bentes, F.L. Frdou, K.R.M. Mourao, T. Frdou, An [44] J.R. McGoodwin, Crisis in the Worlds Fisheries: People, Problems, and Policies,
interdisciplinary evaluation of shery production systems off the State of Par Standford University Press, Standford, USA (1990), p. 235.
in North Brazil, J. Appl. Ichthyol. 25 (3) (2009) 244255.

View publication stats

Você também pode gostar