Coral Triangles coral reef degradation , poverty and employment in agriculture (by Edmundo Enderez July 2012) This

s short article is intended to share the result of the initial findings that are relevant to the current efforts of different stakeholders in fish conservation - particularly conserving the fish habitat (corals, seagrass and mangrove) and the fish stocks that include endangered species of turtles and mammals - through participatory governance and reduction of poverty. Fish conservation efforts starts from the village level through the community-based approach in coastal resource management (CRM). CRM of several villages are then integrated and consolidated at the municipal level which is followed by the intermunicipal level and finally there is the CRM at the national level. I. The Issue

1. Since it has been established through research that the coral ecosystems of the six countries: the Philippines, Indonesia, Timor Leste, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea and Solomon Islands are interrelated, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) has considered the region a top priority for marine conservation so in 2007 it started to address the threats to marine ecosystem through its Coral Triangle Program. Then the Coral Triangle became the subject of high-level conservation efforts by the regions governments, World Wide Fund for Nature, The Nature Conservancy and Conservation International and donor agencies such as the Asian Development Bank, the Global Environment Facility and USAID.

2. Recently, it has been much publicized that of the 6 countries that make up the Coral Triangle whose decline in coral reefs cover is greater than the global rate of 60 percent, the Philippines has the highest level of coral degradation due to pollution, coastal deforestation and reclamation, climate change and most of all high fishing pressure coupled with the use of destructive methods causing both overfishing and reduction of the sea's carrying capacity. 3. Recommendations on how to reverse the trend in the Coral Triangles coral degradation have been implemented by the concerned countries through technical services and financial support from abovementioned entities. But why is it that the Philippines has appeared to perform below par. II. Analysis

1. The possible reason could be identified by way of analyzing certain relevant economic data or indicators culled from the CIA World Factbook as shown in the following Table.

Population % share of agri sector to total poverty incidence employed labor force (E) (P) Philippines 4,100 26.5 33 Timor Leste 3,100 41 64 Papua New Guinea 2,500 37 85 Fiji 4,600 25.5 70 Indonesia 4,700 13.3 38.3 Solomon Island 3,300 22.5 75 Malaysia 15,600 3.8 13 NOTE: Fiji is not included in the Coral Triangle but considered for comparison

Countries

Per Capita GDP (US$)

2. By converting the above data into graphical form as presented in the Graph below, certain pattern could be observed, to wit: a. The higher is the per capita GDP, the lower is the poverty incidence and the lower is the % share of agriculture sector to total employed labor force.

b. The Philippines percentage share of agri sector to total employed labor force has the highest negative deviation from the average linear regression for the 7 seven countries, indicating that the Philippines is giving least priority to agricultural development. Fiji has the highest positive deviation followed by Solomon Island which indicates high priority is given to agricultural development. 3. It has been said that people are poor because they are fishers and that people are fishers because they are poor. This statement is a reflection of a situation characterized by high population incidence and lower participation of farmers and fishers to the total employed labor force (see Table below). Being poor and fishers, more people have to generate income from the sea which is easily accessible. Therefore, it

Countries

Philippines Timor Leste Papua New Guinea Fiji Indonesia Solomon Island Malaysia

Population poverty incidence (P) 26.5 41 37 25.5 13.3 22.5 3.8

% share of agri sector to total employed labor force (E) 33 64 85 70 38.3 75 13

Relative Fishing Pressure (FP) indicatore = P x E 80 64 44 36 35 30 29

\can be stated that fishing pressure is the product of the population poverty incidence (P) and the reciprocal of the percentage share of agri sector to total employed labor force (E). Based on said statement, the mathematical equation is formulated as follows: Fishing pressure (FP) = Population poverty incidence (P) x 1/percentage share of agri sector to total employed labor force (E). 4. Based on the 3 sets of data as presented in the above Table, a Graph (below) can be made which shows that: a. The Philippines has the highest fishing pressure indicator at 80 followed by Timor Leste 64, Papua New Guinea 44, Fiji 36, Indonesia 35, Solomon Island 30 and Malaysia 29.

b. Based on the linear regression on relative fishing pressure, Malaysia is creating the least threat to its coral resources, followed by Solomon Island and Indonesia. But Papua New Guinea and Fiji could

have relatively lower fishing pressure than expected which could be due to their successful implementation of coastal and fisheries resource management programs. III. Remark and Suggestion

1. Studies show that the two important coastal and fisheries resource management measures, namely: 1) protection of coral reefs and other fish habitat like seagrass beds and mangrove forests intended to lead to higher fish carrying capacity of the sea and 2) regulated or optimum fishing pressure intended to increase the fish stock biomass from the present overfished level up to the optimum level which is scientifically estimated at not less than 1/4 of the said carrying capacity. Thus, what can be provided is sustainable fish catch very much higher than what is being attained, therefore, securing fish food security and enhancing the economic well-being of coast and fishing communities. 2. The above scenario on the coastal and fisheries resource has now been attained in advanced countries like Japan where there is good governance and economic prosperity. This indicates that a countrys development pathway must be anchored on the principles such as participatory good governance with gender equality, equity, system-orientation and sustainability. The real situation in the world today is that poor governance and underdevelopment will inevitably lead to poor management of coastal and fisheries resources. 3. Another reality is that giving more emphasis to participatory and good governance will ensure the right direction and sustainability of inclusive economic growth that will likewise ensure the systemorientation and sustainability of the natural resources, particularly agriculture and fisheries. The poor performance of the Philippines relative to other countries falling under Coral Triangle in terms of protecting the corals and other fish habitat or reversing the trend of fish habitat degradation is reflected by the low level economic equity due to low level of good governance. 4. The above discussion point to a fact that political empowerment must precede (or be far more advanced than) economic empowerment and that economic empowerment must precede (or be far more advanced than) management of coastal and fisheries resources. The failure of the ecosystem-based approach that is being adopted by NGO-CRM practitioners in the Philippines and the Coral Triangle Initiative is due to the fact that the political economic development of the involved countries is assumed to be properly functioning or will function according to the needs of the coastal and marine resource management. 5. Since the political and economic development of the countries under the Coral Triangle and other developing countries in the western Pacific are directed by their governments within the framework set by trade liberalization and globalization, the extent of addressing the need of coastal and marine resource management depends on the extent of governance and economic equity that is being addressed by the corresponding governments. And that the extent of participation of the coastal communities and fisherfolk organizations will depend on the rate of poverty reduction and employment of the farmers and fishers in the total employed labor force. 6. Against the backdrop of globalization and trade liberalization, the Philippine NGO-CRM practitioners and partner-fisherfolk organizations can make their CRM programs attain significant level of success vis--vis their vision, mission and goals by consolidating all their efforts as well as the gains in the field of community organization, education & training, research & development, direct intervention on fish habitat and fish stocks, and advocacy that have been achieved in CRM into a vantage force and position to become legally, politically and environmentally recognized as influential institutional partners of the government in governance - from the village level up to the national level - for sustainable development.