by small
scale fisheries for a diversity of fish
speciesmakes the sector very difficult
to manage by a central authority. The
instruments used by developed
countries tomanage their fisheries are
not very useful.
Unfortunately, theories in fisheries
economics and fisheries management
are all developed in the developed
countries, especially in the West. The
developing countries have not
invested in developing alternate
theories that will suit them and
continue to be recipients of ideas from
the West. However, a combination of
western academics and local
practitioners from the civil society of
developing countries, are now talking
about "community-based resource
management" and "co-management"
as solutions to the problem
While community-based resource
management was, and is, a reality in
some of the small scale fisheries of the
world (in both developed and
developing countries), comanagement
is a concept being
developed in the west for
decentralized fisheries management.
Co-management is more or less the
equivalent of the Joint Forest
Management we have in India with
the tribes and government
cooperating to manage forest
resources.
However, actual application of the
theories of community based fisheries
and co-management is weak and still
evolving. Meanwhile, western
prescriptions of control on access are
being simultaneously pushed in a
manner that can be harmful to the
livelihood interests. There is
considerable confusion prevailing in
the fisheries management circles of
developing countries.
Still, one can say that some sort of
convergence is also emerging between
the developed countries and
developing countries with many in
the developed countries getting tired
of the "command and control" system
of management that uses scientific
information to manage fisheries.
There is also an increasing assertion
that decentralized co-management
systems will be more effective, even
in developed countries.
As far as India is concerned, while
we are in the same boat as other
developing countries, we also have
the additional complication of caste.
There are both negative and positive
factors emerging from caste. As far as
the negative factor is concerned,
fishermen from fishing castes have a
traditional right to fish and how this
can be reconciled with the modern
fisheries management of limited
access is a challenge. However, the
positive factor is that caste is an entry
barrier into fishing and also
represents a social system by which
collective management can be
developed. Unfortunately, this has
not been grasped by our
administrators and very little progress
has taken place. To work on this is
part of my current agenda.
-
Most of your contemporaries
shifted from one organization to
another seeking greener pastures,
whereas you continued working for
SIFFS in spite of it being a low
profile, low paid career option for
you. Is there any special reason for
that choice?
Development work cannot be just a
career; it also has to be a vocation.
However, this does not mean that one
sticks to the same organization or
even sector. I have done so because
SIFFS had provided, till now, a
platform for me to learn and try out
my ideas. That I entered a new
organization right at the top has also
meant that I did not have the luxury
of leaving whenever it suited me or
when the situation got tough.
I have always believed that good
quality human resources are needed
more at the grass roots than at the
apex of the pyramid. While you can
make useful contributions from different levels of the pyramid (as
donor organization representative or
consultant or policy maker), there
needs to be adequate capacity at the
base for these contributions to be
used or absorbed. Many feel satisfied
that they are making a contribution to
development by going into higher
levels of development work but this
is also one kind of brain drain.
I would have moved up the chain if I
had found that young professionals
are ready to come in and spend
adequate time at the grass roots and
then move up. Unfortunately, the
current market conditions do not
support this model. Many directly
end up in donor organizations or
development banks, etc. (Here I am
only talking of those who are still in
development and have not moved
into corporate jobs). So, in a way, you
can say that I also got stuck in SIFFS
for lack of adequate replacements.
Being long in any organization is not
necessarily a virtue. For the last five to
seven years, I have seen that my
continuance is unhealthy for both the
organization and myself. I have
therefore been working on
restructuring the organization that it
can continue without me and can
manage with human resources that
are available internally.Only timewill
tell whether I have been successful in
this. While I had a certain freedom in
leading SIFFS, I did not enjoy the
same freedomto restructure it as there
were too many entrenched interests
and conflicts.
Another point needs to be made
about the profile I enjoyed or
continue to enjoy. I think I have a
higher profile than many of those
who have gone for greener pastures.
Higher pay does not necessarilymean
higher profile or recognition or
respect.
