Economic Impacts of Artificial Reefs on Small-Scale Fishers in Peninsular Malaysia

Abstract

Artificial reefs (ARs) have been used by small-scale fishers for centuries to increase fish catches (Bohnsack and Sutherland 1985; Bohnsack 1991). The overexploitation of marine fisheries has drawn the attention of policymakers in several countries over the years. In Malaysia, the government has undertaken an AR development program over the last 30 years with the objective of improving the economic conditions of artisanal fishing communities. Most AR studies have focused on the biological aspects of fisheries. Some have concluded that ARs can be effective in increasing availability and accessibility of marine resources (White et al. 1990) by protecting fish habitat (Claudet and Pelletier 2004) and serving as anti-trawling devices to enhance juvenile fish survival thus generating benefits through wider fishery production (Whitmarsh et al. 2008), although several have noted the need to control activities around the ARs that could impact fish population and habitats (Rogers and Beets 2001; Salmona and Verardi 2001). However, there are substantial gaps and limitations in the research on the contributions of ARs to increasing the size of fish stock (Seaman and Sprague 1991; Chou 1997). Some authors argue that ARs may serve purely as an aggregating device, without any increase in fish biomass (Bohnsack 1989; Polovina 1994; Kerr 1992; Seaman 1996). And there remain uncertainties about the outcome of ARs (Grove and Sonu 1985; Mottet 1985; Bohnsack 1989; Garcia 1991; Grossman et al. 1997) that arise when their management is not consistent with fisheries management (Polovina 1991; Botsford et al. 2003; Denny and Babcock 2004). Pickering and Whitmarsh (1997) argue that while appropriate design of ARs may maximize productivity, there may remain serious problems of distribution of benefits in the absence of an effective management strategy. The economic literature on ARs provides limited empirical evidence about the socioeconomic benefits to fishers (Rey 1985; Crowder et al. 2000; Carter 2003). Studies show that there can be positive economic performance (Polovina and Sakai 1989; Johnson et al. 1994; Venkatasami and Mamode 1995; Yodee 1994), for example in southern Portugal (Whitmarsh et al. 2008). In Indonesia and the Philippines fish catches increased due to AR programs (Delmendo 1991) and in Japan octopus production increased (Polovina and Sakai 1989) . However, the contribution of ARs to fisheries and their socioeconomic impacts on poor fishers has not been well studied in Malaysia. 1 Over the past decades fisheries in Malaysia have been overexploited due to excessive trawl fishing (Jahara 1988). The inshore fisheries, which operate up to five miles from shore, are reserved for the artisanal fishers, although trawlers, which are prohibited from the inshore areas, have encroached and damaged inshore marine habitats, negatively impacting the livelihoods of small-scale artisanal fishers in Terengganu (Jahara 1988; Saharuddin et al. 2012). In order to enhance fisheries production, the Department of Fisheries Malaysia (DOFM) and the Fisheries Development Authority Malaysia (FDAM) introduced an AR program in 1975. The main objective of ARs deployed by DOFM (known as “tukun tiruan”) was to protect inshore fisheries habitat from trawlers, enhance the fisheries resources and promote resource conservation, while the Fisheries Development Authority installed ARs