INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR CONSERVATION OF NATURE

Socio-economic survey on the importance of seagrass beds to coastal communities in Kampot Province, Cambodia

Building Resilience to Climate Change Impacts in Coastal Southeast Asia (BCR)

Agne Kaarlep

Ria

The designation of geographical entities in this

book, and the presentation of the material, do not

imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever

on the part of IUCN or the European Union

concerning the legal status of any country,

territory, or area, or of its authorities, or

concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or

boundaries. The views expressed in this

publication do not necessarily reflect those of

IUCN, the European Union or any other

participating organizations.

This publication has been made possible by

funding from the European Union.

Published by: IUCN Asia in Bangkok, Thailand

Copyright: © 2014 IUCN, International Union for

Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources

Reproduction of this publication for educational or

other non-commercial purposes is authorized

without prior written permission from the copyright

holder provided the source is fully acknowledged.

Reproduction of this publication for resale or other

commercial purposes is prohibited without prior

written permission of the copyright holder.

Citation: Kaarlep, A. (2014). Socio-

economic survey on the importance of

seagrass beds to coastal communities in

Kampot Province. Thailand: IUCN. 46 pp.

Cover photo: © IUCN/Agne Kaarlep

Edited by: Ria Sen

Layout by: Ria Sen/Nguyen Thuy Anh

Produced by: IUCN Southeast Asia Group

Available from: IUCN Asia Regional Office,

63 Soi Prompong, Sukhumvit 39, Wattana

10110 Bangkok, Thailand

Tel: +66 2 662 4029

www.iucn.org/building-coastal-resilience

Acknowledgements

Sincere gratitude goes out to the research team members Mr Vanny Lou from IUCN Cambodia,

Mr Seila Voen from the Fisheries Administration Cantonment, and Ms Soriya Minhchan from the

Department of Environment of Cambodia; whose contribution and dedication were integral for

the success of the entire research process.

The author would particularly like to thank Mr Sar Sorin, Head of the Kampot Fisheries

Administration Cantonment; Mr Suy Thea, Director of the Department of Environment; and H.E.

Mr Saut Yea, Deputy Governor of Kampot Province; whose support and expertise were so vital

for carrying out this study.

Most importantly, the research could have not been successful without the support and active

participation of village chiefs, community fishery chiefs, and inhabitants of the studied villages in

Kampot Province.

Foreword

Sea-grass meadows are incredibly important coastal ecosystems. They provide spawning and

nursery areas for many species, sequester large amounts of carbon and provide significant

support to local livelihoods. The coastline of Kampot Province in Cambodia hosts one of the

most important seagrass areas in Southeast Asia, but so far is relatively unknown and has not

been subject to any in-depth study. Its importance and value to local livelihoods, and its

significance in terms of climate change mitigation and adaptation are not properly understood,

and are consequently not sufficiently taken into account in development planning. Large scale

development projects with direct impacts on sea-grass such as port and harbor construction are

already underway and are rapidly destroying and degrading significant areas of this precious

resource before its real value to the people of Kampot Province and the rest of Cambodia are

fully understood.

Kampot is one of eight Provinces in three countries selected for pilot activities in the “Building

Resilience to Climate Change – Coastal Southeast Asia” Project (BCR) funded by the EU and

implemented by IUCN and partners.

This report is the second in a series of linked reports looking at the biological condition, socio-

economic importance and conservation management priorities for Kampot sea-grass, in the

broader context of overall coastal spatial planning of Kampot Province.

Table of contents

Executive summary ................................................................................................................11

I. Introduction ..................................................................................................................12

II. Objectives of the study ................................................................................................12

III. Methodology .................................................................................................................13

3.1 Study design and data collection .................................................................................13

3.1.1 Participatory Rural Appraisal ................................................................................13

3.1.2 Household survey ................................................................................................15

3.2 Data analysis ..............................................................................................................15

3.3 Limitations ..................................................................................................................15

IV. Study area .....................................................................................................................16

4.1 Kampot Province ........................................................................................................16

4.2 The seagrass ecosystem ............................................................................................17

4.3 Management of seagrass and fishery resources .........................................................18

4.4 Village profiles ............................................................................................................20

4.4.1 Chang Houn Village .............................................................................................21

4.4.2 Rolous Village ......................................................................................................22

4.4.3 Trapeang Sangke Village .....................................................................................22

4.4.4 Koh Kreusna Village ............................................................................................22

V. Results of the study .....................................................................................................23

5.1 Demographic indicators of the respondents ................................................................23

5.1.1 Age ......................................................................................................................23

5.1.2 Marital status .......................................................................................................23

5.1.3 Religious affiliation ...............................................................................................24

5.1.4 Education .............................................................................................................24

5.1.5 Family size ...........................................................................................................24

5.1.6 State of settlements and land ownership ..............................................................25

5.1.7 Livestock ownership .............................................................................................25

5.1.8 Monthly income and expenditure .........................................................................26

5.1.9 Loans ...................................................................................................................26

5.2 Occupational distribution .............................................................................................27

5.3 Dependence on seagrass ...........................................................................................28

1

5.3.1 Fishing practices ..................................................................................................28

5.3.2 Fishing grounds by importance ............................................................................31

5.3.3 Main income generating species ..........................................................................32

5.3.4 Perceptions of the value of seagrass ...................................................................34

5.4 State and changes in fishery resources ......................................................................35

5.5 Drivers of change and proposed solutions ..................................................................37

5.5.1 Development activities, loss and degradation of habitat .......................................37

5.5.2 Disputes over fishing areas ..................................................................................39

5.5.3 Use of illegal fishing devices ................................................................................39

5.5.4 Increase in fishermen ...........................................................................................39

5.5.5 Low capital and increasing costs ..........................................................................40

5.5.6 Climate change ....................................................................................................40

5.6 Future outlook .............................................................................................................40

VI. Findings ........................................................................................................................42

VII. Recommendations .......................................................................................................44

VIII. References ....................................................................................................................45

List of abbreviations

ACLEDA Association of Cambodian Local Economic Development Agencies

AmK Angkor Microfinance Kampuchea

BCR Building Coastal Resilience

CDC Council for Development of Cambodia

CwDCC Child and Women’s Development Center of Cambodia

CFi Community Fishery

DANIDA Danish International Development Agency

DFID UK Department for International Development

DoE Department of Environment

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

FGD Focus Group Discussion

FACT Fisheries Action Coalition Team

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

FiA Fisheries Administration Cantonment

IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature

MAFF Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries

MIME Ministry of Industry, Mines and Energy

MLMUPC Ministry of Land Management, Urban Planning and Construction

MoE Ministry of Environment

MPWT Ministry of Public Works and Transport

MRD Ministry of Rural Development

MoT Ministry of Tourism

NTF Non-Timber Forest Product

PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal

RFLP Regional Fisheries and Livelihoods Programme

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNEP United Nations Environment Programme

List of figures and tables

Figure 1: Participatory Rural Appraisal with Rolous village community members ......................14

Figure 2: Map of Cambodia…………………………………………………………………………….16

Figure 3: Distribution of seagrass in coastal Cambodia .............................................................18

Figure 4: Location of villages, Community Fisheries and the port development area…………...21

Figure 5: Middlemen waiting to buy blue-swimming crabs in an unofficial landing site ..............37

Figure 6: Map indicating location of port development...............................................................38

Table 1: Focus Group Discussion respondents .........................................................................14

Table 2: Seagrass and mangrove areas in Cambodia ...............................................................17

Table 3: Community Fisheries in Kampot Province ...................................................................20

Table 4: Household survey respondents ...................................................................................23

Table 5: Age distribution ...........................................................................................................23

Table 6: Marital status ...............................................................................................................24

Table 7: Religious affiliation ......................................................................................................24

Table 8: Education ....................................................................................................................24

Table 9: Family size ..................................................................................................................25

Table 10: Land ownership .........................................................................................................25

Table 11: Livestock ownership ..................................................................................................26

Table 12: Average monthly income ...........................................................................................26

Table 13: Average monthly expenditure ....................................................................................26

Table 14: Reasons of expenditure.............................................................................................26

Table 15: Loans ........................................................................................................................27

Table 16: Reasons for borrowing money ...................................................................................27

Table 17: Seasonal Calendar ....................................................................................................28

1

Table 18: Types of fishing gears ...............................................................................................29

Table 19: Types of boats ...........................................................................................................30

Table 20: Hours per day spent fishing .......................................................................................30

Table 21: Importance of fishing grounds ...................................................................................31

Table 22: Main species caught by fishermen ............................................................................33

Table 24: Perceptions of indirect values of seagrass ................................................................34

Table 25: Total marine catch in Kampot Province .....................................................................35

Table 26: Perceptions of fish catch ...........................................................................................36

Table 27: Perceptions of size of fish ..........................................................................................36

Table 28: Condition of seagrass in the future ............................................................................42

Table 29: Perceptions of the sustainability of a career in fishing ...............................................42

11

Executive summary

This report documents the socio-economic importance of seagrass beds to fishery communities

in Kampot Province. The research was carried out under the umbrella of the European Union

funded project “Building Resilience to Climate Change Impacts – Coastal Southeast Asia”.

The aim of the report is to analyze local perceptions on the current state of fishery resources

and seagrass habitats, to examine the drivers of change, and explore their possible

management solutions. The presented analysis is based on a field study conducted from August

to October in 2013. During this time, both quantitative and qualitative data was collected from

four villages spanning the entire coastline of Kampot Province.

Findings indicate high economic dependence of coastal fishermen on the seagrass ecosystem.

The collected data shows that 89% of the income generating species caught are dependent on

seagrasses in their life-cycle. Official statistics on catch volumes, obtained from the Fisheries

Administration Cantonment, show an overall increase in catch during the last three years while

fishermen are reporting a decrease in individual catch volumes, indicating increasing pressure

on coastal resources.

The perceived drivers for this change include an increase in fishermen accompanied by a lack

of skills and a shortage of alternative livelihood options. Further problems were seen in illegal

fishing gear usage and foreign vessels operating unlawfully in Cambodian waters. The most

pervasive pressure is exerted via coastal development projects, particularly the construction of

the Kampot Special Economic Zone, which includes a deep sea international port. As a result of

dredging and land filling, 8% of the seagrass in Kampot Province have been destroyed.

The data clearly shows high economic dependency and increased pressure on seagrass from

multiple sources, making proper management and protection of the remaining ecosystem

imperative. There are management mechanisms in place at the community level which seem to

be effective, with 90% membership rates amongst fishermen and the increasing health of

seagrass being reported in these areas. However, it is still clear that there is a need for a large

scale, long term coastal management plan to ensure future development activities are planned

in appropriate areas.

It is one of the recommendations of this report that a provincial level Coastal Zoning Plan be

fully implemented in order to designate proper areas for development and conservation in close

cooperation with fishery communities. This would be a significant step to ensure the long-term

health of seagrasses and continuing profits from the ecosystem, which is currently producing

economic benefits valued at around US$ 30 million per year.

12

I. Introduction

The “Building Coastal Resilience to Climate Change Impacts – Coastal Southeast Asia” project

is working in eight target provinces in three countries; namely Thailand, Viet Nam and

Cambodia. One of these target provinces is Kampot, located in the southwest of Cambodia, with

a coastline of 66.5 km and a known seagrass area of approximately 25,000 ha. Seagrass beds

are increasingly recognized as a highly productive and important ecosystem, contributing

significantly to economic and food security in coastal communities.

The coast of Kampot Province is comprised of two interrelated systems; with the ecological

system providing life-support functions for living organisms and also significantly producing

goods and services for socio-economic development. The increasing number of stakeholders

and conflicting demands on the coastal environment have brought about the need to closely

examine the relationships between ecological habitat and the socio-economic system that

governs it. This will ensure best management practices are adopted, thereby allowing both

systems to thrive.

A previous Vulnerability and Capacity Assessment of Kampot Province conducted by IUCN in

2011 found that the subsistence fisher communities are threatened by the degradation of

coastal habitats and increasing pressure from development projects. Deterioration of the coastal

ecosystem is the result of land development, agricultural run-off, lack of an effective waste

management system, the use of illegal and destructive fishing gear; all of which are contributing

to pollution and the decreased productive quality of the coastal habitat. Further pressure is

imposed on the coastal areas through land reclamation, sand dredging and mining; resulting in

habitat destruction and fish stock depletion.

Therefore, it is of increasing importance to understand the health of the ecosystem and the

extent of the dependence of coastal communities on the services provided by seagrasses. An

assessment of the socio-economic importance of seagrass was undertaken through this study,

to be able to adequately assess the impacts of current development plans on the future food

and economic security of the province’s coastal inhabitants.

II. Objectives of the study

This is the first assessment documenting the extent of dependence of coastal communities on

the seagrass ecosystem in Kampot Province. Given the very large seagrass area and the

pressure it is currently under, it is important to understand the patterns of usage and the socio-

economic benefits derived from this ecosystem.

Overall objective:

To assess the extent of dependence of coastal fishermen on the seagrass ecosystem.

13

Specific objectives:

1. To document the local perceptions on the current state and changes in the coastal

fishery resources and seagrass habitats;

2. To examine the drivers of change in seagrass coverage and livelihood strategies;

3. To explore possible management solutions from the perspectives of local communities

and relevant government officials.

III. Methodology

3.1 Study design and data collection

The study was conducted over a span of six weeks; between August and October in 2013. The

team comprised of four researchers, two IUCN staff members, an employee of the Kampot

Department of Environment, and an employee from the Fisheries Administration Cantonment of

Kampot Province. The team was composed with the aim to include local expertise in the study’s

design and data collection.

The research was carried out in a total of four villages spanning the entire coastline of 66.5 km

in Kampot Province. Target villages were selected to represent each of the three main seagrass

patches in the coastal area. Data collection was completed in two phases. Firstly, a set of

Participatory Rural Appraisal tools were implemented to explore the perceptions of local

villagers on their livelihoods and the ecosystem. Secondly, a household survey was conducted

to collect statistical data on coastal fishermen.

In addition to these methods, in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with the Head

of the Kampot Fisheries Administration Cantonment, the Director of the Department of

Environment, the Deputy Governor of Kampot Province, four village chiefs, three Community

Fishery Chiefs, and one former Community Fishery Chief.

The research team was provided training in the research approach and methodologies used for

this study. All data was recorded in Khmer and then translated by the Cambodian research

team members to English, after which the analysis was conducted.

3.1.1 Participatory Rural Appraisal

The first part of the study, spanning three weeks, implemented a set of Participatory Rural

Appraisal (PRA) tools in all the four target villages. PRA is a qualitative approach to

collaboratively explore the perceptions of local villagers about their livelihoods and the

surrounding ecosystem.

The particular methods were chosen in accordance with the study objectives. A total of six PRA

tools were applied: (1) resource mapping; (2) stakeholder analysis; (3) market flow analysis; (4)

seasonal calendar; (5) timeline; (6) problem matrix and solution analysis. The PRA tools were

14

implemented through Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) over the span of two days in each of

the four villages.

Figure 1: Participatory Rural Appraisal with Rolous village community members

The participants of the FGDs were invited on the principal of including a diverse set of villagers:

village chiefs, community fishery chiefs, fishermen, middlemen and farmers. Altogether, 72

people were involved in the FGDs.

Table 1: Focus Group Discussion respondents

Respondents Target Villages

Occupation

Chang

Houn

Koh

Kreusna

Trapeang

Sangke Rolous

Fishermen 8 9 7 3

Middlemen 1 1 2 0

Farmers 6 6 5 13

Village Chiefs 1 1 1 1

Community Fishery Chiefs 1 1 1 0

Deputy Village Chiefs 1 0 0 0

Deputy Community Fishery

Chiefs 1 0 2 0

Gender of respondents

Men 12 12 15 10

Women 7 6 3 7

Total 19 18 18 17

15

3.1.2 Household survey

The second phase of the study, spanning another three weeks, involved a household survey in

all the four target villages. Due to the specific focus of the study, the sample size was calculated

from the number of known fishermen in all the villages. The statistics obtained from the Village

Chiefs showed that there are 1087 fishermen distributed as follows: 275 in Chang Houn, 77 in

Rolous, 305 in Trapeang Sangke, and 430 in Koh Kreusna. The sample size was then

calculated using the Taro Yamane formula: . This method gave the final sample size

of 91 when a confidence level of 90% was applied.

A structured questionnaire was used to interview respondents. A pre-test on the survey was

conducted and improvements were made before the final version was implemented.

Respondent households were selected at random in each village. A map was used to first

indicate all the households which had fishing as a primary occupation. Depending on the

number of households identified in each villages, every seventh to tenth household was chosen

to be interviewed.

3.2 Data analysis

The PRA data was analyzed using content analysis and the results were used to improve the

household questionnaire implemented in the second phase of the study. The data received from

the interviewers were checked every evening to ensure the accurate completion of all the

undertaken surveys and this also allowed for any misunderstandings or errors to be corrected

by the interviewers during the next day. All data from the household surveys was entered into

Microsoft Excel which was the primary tool of analysis.

3.3 Limitations

The study aimed to collect both quantitative and qualitative data to ensure a good depth of

understanding regarding the coastal situation of Kampot Province. A slight limitation emerged

from the different nature of the data collected. The statistics obtained from the household survey

can be used to characterize the situation of fishermen across all villages, as the fishermen from

all target areas were treated as belonging to the same sample population. Comparisons

between the villages are therefore based on qualitative data obtained from the PRA study.

Due to the limited time-frame of this study, a complete valuation of the seagrass beds was not

possible, as any such estimation would have resulted in a gross undervaluation of the economic

benefit of this ecosystem. Therefore, the dependence was measured as a percentage and not in

actual monetary terms.

Furthermore, it should be noted that the results may exhibit a seasonal bias as the study was

conducted between August and October in 2013. The degree and direction of the bias is difficult

to estimate, as in August and September strong winds and heavy rains are still prevalent. This

might have resulted in an underreporting of the overall catch. However, the peak fishing season

16

generally starts in October, which may have resulted in a positive bias for reporting fishing catch

volumes.

IV. Study area

4.1 Kampot Province

Cambodia’s coastline covers 435 km; covering two provinces Kampot and Koh Kong, and two

municipalities Kep and Sihanoukville.

Kampot Province in itself covers an area of 4,873 km². It has a population of 585,850 (Rizvi &

Singer, 2011). Between 1998 and 2008, the population in Kampot declined. However, the high

growth rate of 1.67% (The World Factbook, 2013) in the entire country is an indication of a

possible future increase in the population of the province. Furthermore, the 2008 government

census found that 3% of the inhabitants in Kampot Province were migrants from other

provinces, indicating a modest in-migration pattern for coastal areas (Rizvi & Singer, 2011).

Figure 2: Map of Cambodia

Source: Department of Fisheries (2005)

17

The coast of Kampot is comprised of three districts, nine communes and 31 villages. The

majority of the population lives in rural areas and is heavily dependent on the exploitation of

natural resources, with one of the main occupations being fishing. Most fish production in

Cambodia derives from freshwater fisheries, with marine fisheries accounting for only about

30% of the total. However, marine capture fisheries are highly valued, as their contribution to

the national economy is about 40% of the total production (UNEP, 2007a). In 2006, the revenue

from exports was an estimated US$ 63.5 million (The Learning Institute, 2010). However, this is

possibly a considerable underestimation of the actual economic contribution of the marine

fisheries sector, because the statistics do not include illegal sales to adjacent countries. Illegal

fishing in Cambodian waters undermines the potential additional contribution marine fisheries

could make to the economy of Cambodia.

Cambodia has been experiencing rapid economic growth in the last decade, with Kampot

Province being no exception. The province has been a target for various developmental

projects, with both direct and indirect impacts on coastal ecosystems and on the socio-

economic conditions of the general population. The main areas of interest for development in

the province are the marine product export sector and tourism. The Kampot International Port is

currently under construction, adjacent to which is the Kampot Special Economic Zone (SEZ).

The international port is meant to increase tourism and facilitate export and import, while the

Kampot SEZ will include the establishment of processing and manufacturing facilities (Council

for the Development of Cambodia, 2013). The expected completion of these projects has been

significantly delayed, and they remain in the early construction phase, with ongoing sand

dredging for land filling.

4.2 The seagrass ecosystem

Ecologically, seagrasses and mangroves play a critical role in the marine environment, as they

are nursery grounds for various commercially important fish species. Degradation of this

ecosystem will have significant effects on offshore fish production (Osborne, 2012). However,

the importance of seagrasses has only been recognized relatively recently and, as a result, they

have received much less national and international attention than mangroves.

In the case of Kampot Province, it is especially important to recognize the value of seagrasses

due to the sheer expanse of the ecosystem. Kampot Province has the largest seagrass area in

Cambodia and possibly in the whole of Southeast Asia covering an area of 25,240 ha. Table 2

below provides a comparison amongst the coastal provinces of Cambodia in terms of the

seagrass and mangrove areas, while the location of seagrass beds is depicted in Figure 2 (page

14).

Table 2: Seagrass and mangrove areas in Cambodia

Resource Kampot Koh Kong Sihanoukville Kep

Seagrasses 25240 ha 3993 ha 164 ha 3095 ha

Mangroves 1900 ha 62000 ha 13500 ha 1005 ha

Source: Department of Fisheries (2005); Mangroves for the Future (2013)

18

Figure 3: Distribution of seagrass in coastal Cambodia

Source: Department of Fisheries (2004)

The annual economic value of seagrasses in Cambodia has been estimated to be around US$

1,186 per hectare. However, this value is most likely a gross undervaluation of the actual benefit

provided by seagrasses, as it only takes into account captured fish, shrimp, crabs,

shellfish/molluscs and seaweed production. It does not account for the values of beach

protection, nursery functions, carbon sequestration, oxygen release and nutrient removal etc. It

is therefore highly probable that the actual monetary value of the area is double the current

estimation (UNEP, 2007b).

4.3 Management of seagrass and fishery resources

Numerous government bodies have an influence in the planning and management of the

coastal areas of Cambodia. These include the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries

19

(MAFF), the Ministry of Environment, the Ministry of Land Management, Urban Planning and

Construction (MLMUPC), the Ministry of Industry, Mines and Energy (MIME), the Ministry of

Tourism (MoT), the Ministry of Public Works and Transport (MPWT), the Ministry of Rural

Development (MRD), and the Ministry of Women's Affairs and the Ministry of Planning (DoF,

2005).

The day-to-day management of seagrass beds and fisheries resources in Kampot Province is

under the jurisdiction of the Deputy Provincial Governor of the Department of Environment and

the Fisheries Administration Cantonment. The former is legally responsible for the ecosystem

itself, whereas the latter is responsible for the products it provides. Despite the legally

overlapping roles of these institutions, problems on ground-level are rare. However, the number

of stakeholders does complicate the efforts for mitigation against possible threats, such as

excess sediment and nutrients from development activities both in the coast and upstream

(Morgan, 2011). Conflicting interests arise in the same space with MIME, MRD, MoT and

MPWD being responsible for developing the coastal area; and DoE and FiA for management

and protection.

Relatively recently, another level of management was added to the administrative system of

coastal areas. In an effort to decentralize the administration of natural resources, the Royal

Government of Cambodia made a significant shift towards promoting community-based

management of fishing areas through the establishment of Community Fisheries (CFis) in 2000.

A CFi is defined as a group of Khmer citizens living in one or more villages who voluntarily

agree to cooperate for the purpose of participating in sustainable management and use of

fisheries resources in their local area (The Learning Institute, 2010).

Chapter 11 from Cambodia’s Fisheries Law outlines the relationship between the FiA and CFis.

According to this, all Cambodian citizens have the right to form CFis in their own areas on a

voluntary basis, and MAFF is entitled to allocate a part of the fishery domain to the CFi that lives

inside or nearby the fishery domain. The CFis need to be continuously managed by the fishing

communities in accordance with the management plan which is approved by relevant

authorities. The FiA will provide technical support at the request of local communities and

monitor the implementation of individual CFi management plans (Law on Fisheries, 2007).

Table 3 (on the following page) shows all ten of the legally established CFis in Kampot Province

and the areas allocated to them, including a separate conservation area to ensure the

sustainability of resource usage.

20

Table 3: Community Fisheries in Kampot Province

CFi

name

Year of

creation Members

Size of

fishing

domain

(ha)

Conser-

vation

site

Crab

bank

Develop-

ment

partner

Number of

conser-

vation poles

Sign-

board

Trapeang

Ropov 2002 155 1251 2 1

UNDP

390

7

Prek

Thnoat 2000 248 702 1 1 DANIDA/FIA

205

5

Chang

Houn 2002 411 1504 1 1 DFID/FIA

241

4

Kep

Thmey 2005 124 804 1 1 DFID/ FIA

15

2

Toteung

Thangai 2005 132 600 0 0 -

0

2

Chum

Kriel 2013 262 650 1 0 -

9

0

Trapeang

Sanke 2009 734 337 2 0 DFID/FIA

46

6

Kampong

Samaki 2006 396 537 1 1

UNDP

335

5

Koh

Kreusna 2003 245 235 2 1 Corin/UNDP

90

7

Lork

2004 347 330 1 0 Corin

0

5

Source: Fisheries Administration Cantonment (2013)

4.4 Village profiles

The survey targeted four villages representing the whole coastline of Kampot and the three

main seagrass patches along the coastline. Two villages, Rolous and Trapeang Sangke, were

selected to represent the biggest seagrass area.

The main occupations in all villages are fishing and farming, with the exception of Rolous Village

in Teuk Chhou District, which has recently undergone a shift from fishing to wage labour due to

coastal development projects. All the villages have a CFi, except for Rolous Village, where it

was abolished in 2008 due to the beginning of port construction.

21

All villages have a similar internal structure; with main administrative positions being the Village

Chief, Community Fishery Chief, Commune Chief, the Commune Policeman, and middlemen.

Further importance was given to Patrolling Units in Chang Houn, Trapeang Sangke and Koh

Kreusna villages. Their role is to prevent and report illegal fishing activities to the relevant

institutions.

Figure 4: Location of villages, Community Fisheries and the port development area

Source: Ministry of Land Management, Urban Planning and Construction (2012)

4.4.1 Chang Houn Village

Chang Houn Village is located in the western part of Koh Kong Province in Prek Thnoat

commune, Teuk Chhou district. The village has a population of 1,826 people, comprising 362

families, out of which 65 are headed by women. The population is primarily Buddhist and the

village has a pagoda.

The infrastructure in the village is poor. While there is no health centre directly in the village, the

nearest one is located 8 km away. However, a pharmacy is in the village. There is an uneven

distribution of water from the existent water system. Households by the main road are able to

access tap water, while people in the middle of the village buy water or use wells with pumps.

Around 90% of the village homes are connected to the electric grid. However, the high per unit

price of electricity at 0.3 US$/kWh is significantly limiting its consumption.

The primary school is located inside the village area, while the secondary school is 4 km away

and the high school is at a distance of 7 km. According to the Village Chief, about 95% of the

22

children study until the end of secondary school, after which many leave due to monetary

constraints and the long travel time to the high school.

4.4.2 Rolous Village

Rolous village is located in Boeung Touk commune in Teuk Chhou district. The village has a

population of 1,694, comprising 355 families, with 105 headed by women. The population is

mainly Buddhist, with a small number of Muslim households. The village has a pagoda.

The nearest health centre is 5 km away. Water is mainly accessed using wells and people have

an adequate access to water resources. About 70% of the village is connected to the electric

grid; the rest lack the funds to pay for the one-time connection fee which is around US$ 93.

There is a primary and secondary school located inside the village. According to the Village

Chief, around 95% of the children proceed to high school, which is located outside the village.

4.4.3 Trapeang Sangke Village

Trapeang Sangke is located closest to Kampot town in Trapeang Sangkae commune, Teuk

Chhou district. The village has a population of 2,631 people, comprising 446 families, out of

which 67 are headed by women. The majority of the population is Muslim with a strong Buddhist

minority. There are two mosques and one pagoda in the village.

The village has a health centre and four pharmacies. The one-time connection fee to the water

system is relatively high, costing US$ 60, and many people resort to using ponds, wells and

rainwater instead. About 90% of the village is connected to the electric grid, but as with the

other villages, the connection fee and electricity price per kWh are high.

The village has a primary school, but for secondary and high schooling, the children need to

commute. According to the Village Chief, almost all children finish secondary school, after which

many stop due to monetary constraints.

4.4.4 Koh Kreusna Village

Koh Kreusna is located near the border of Viet Nam in Russey Srok Khang Lech commune,

Kampong Trach district. The village has a population of 1,240 people, comprising 233

households, with 55 of them headed by women. The majority of the population is Buddhist and

the village has one pagoda.

The village has a health centre and there is a private clinic nearby. Some of the wealthier

families are connected to the water system, but most people collect rainwater and use ponds

and wells for their water needs. Only around 50% of the village is connected to the electric grid

due to the high connection fees and the per unit price of electricity.

23

There is a primary and secondary school in the village, and most children go to both. There is a

high school 13 km away, but as in the other villages, many children are unable to attend it due

to financial constraints.

V. Results of the study

5.1 Demographic indicators of the respondents

According to the village data books from 2012, there are 1,396 households and a total of 7,391

people in all the villages, out of which 1,087 people are fishermen. The household survey that

was conducted targeted 91 households for data collection.

Out of all the respondents interviewed, 67 were heads of their households. When the male head

of the household was not available, the spouse was interviewed. All the households interviewed

were headed by men.

Table 4: Household survey respondents

Respondent Frequency Percentage

Head of household 67 74%

Spouse of head of household 24 26%

Total 91 100%

5.1.1 Age

The age was recorded for both the head of the household and the spouse. The distribution was

calculated amongst all recorded answers. Majority of the respondents were mature adults in

their 30s and 40s, with these categories representing 64% of the total answers recorded.

Table 5: Age distribution

Age Frequency Percentage

20 - 29 26 15%

30 - 39 53 30%

40 - 49 60 34%

50 + 38 21%

Total 177 100%

5.1.2 Marital status

Majority of the respondents interviewed were married, while four were single due to their young

age, and one was a divorcee.

24

Table 6: Marital status

Marital status Frequency Percentage

Married 86 95%

Single 4 4%

Divorced 1 1%

Total 91 100%

5.1.3 Religious affiliation

The predominant religion in Cambodia is Buddhism, which is practiced by more than 95% of the

population and there is a Muslim minority of 2% (The World Factbook, 2013). Out of the 91

households interviewed for this study, 72 were practicing Buddhism.

Table 7: Religious affiliation

Religion Frequency Percentage

Buddhist 72 79%

Muslim 19 21%

Total 91 100%

5.1.4 Education

The educational status of the respondents was relatively low, with only 25% of the male

respondents and 13% of the female respondents having studied above the primary school level.

However, the overall literacy rate was comparable to the national average, which is 82.2% for

men and 65.9% for women (The World Factbook, 2013). Out of all the respondents surveyed,

82% of the men and 70% of the women were literate.

Table 8: Education

Education Male Percentage Female Percentage

No education 14 15% 21 24%

Read Only 3 3% 5 6%

Primary School 52 57% 49 57%

Secondary

School 16 18% 10 12%

High School 6 7% 1 1%

Total 91 100% 86 100%

5.1.5 Family size

According to the 2003 national census, the average family size for the coastal areas of

Cambodia was 5.1 (Ministry of Environment, 2005). On average, the respondents of this survey

had 3.8 children, resulting in a slightly larger family size than the coastal average a decade ago.

25

The large family sizes of the respondents reflect their rural, and predominantly subsistence,

livelihood strategies.

Table 9: Family size

Amount of children Frequency Percentage

No children 5 5%

1 child 8 9%

2 children 11 12%

3 children 23 25%

4 children 13 14%

5 children 14 15%

6 children 7 8%

7 children 4 4%

8 children 3 3%

9 children 3 3%

Total 91 100%

5.1.6 State of settlements and land ownership

Around 92% of the respondents have a permanent house, indicative of a predominantly stable

lifestyle of the overall population. Furthermore, 89% of the households interviewed own land,

with 70% of them had a legally recognized land title. However, most of the land holdings are

relatively small and could be classified as residential land supporting only farming and livestock

for household consumption.

Table 10: Land ownership

Size of land Frequency Percentage

No land 10 11%

Residential land 70 77%

1 ha 6 7%

>1 ha 5 5%

Total 91 100%

5.1.7 Livestock ownership

Majority of the respondents also rear livestock, with 85% of the households raising at least a few

animals. Poultry-raising is most popular, and more than 90% of the respondents rear either

chickens or ducks.

The respondents who were not raising any animals explained that this was due to a lack of

space for them. Two respondents out of 14 mentioned the high expenditure on feed and lack of

skill, resulting in high mortality rates as constraints for raising animals.

26

Table 11: Livestock ownership

Type of

livestock Frequency Percentage

Average number of

heads

Poultry 71 92% 12

Cow/Buffalo 21 27% 3

Pig 23 30% 3

5.1.8 Monthly income and expenditure

Monthly income and expenditure in rural livelihoods exhibits a seasonal variation, which is why

high and low levels of both were recorded. It should also be noted that many respondents found

it difficult to report monthly incomes due to the variety of revenue sources and the income

fluctuation between different months of the year. Expenditure levels are also unstable—peaking

from November until April—due to the higher frequency of ceremonies, weddings and festivals.

Table 12: Average monthly income Table 13: Average monthly expenditure

Income High (US$) Low (US$)

Average 456 150

Max 3500 1500

Min 81 25

Median 300 100

Expenditure High (US$) Low (US$)

Average 290 130

Max 3000 1200

Min 63 19

Median 200 100

Table 14 indicates the main items respondents spent their incomes on. The highest expenditure

is incurred for household food consumption and education of children.

Table 14: Reasons of expenditure

Reason for expenditure Average (US$) Maximum (US$) Median (US$)

Health 15 125 9

Education 46 180 35

Food 83 225 75

Clothes 7 25 6

Ceremonies 23 83 17

Electric usage 5 12,5 5

5.1.9 Loans

It has been understood that the informal lending sector dominates the formal banking sector in

rural livelihoods (The Learning Institute, 2010). Furthermore, this has been used to indicate that

the middlemen buying goods from fishermen have a monopoly over the market as fishermen

depend on their credit (UNEP, 2007a). However, the results of the present study indicate that

the services of micro-credit institutions are readily available to villagers. In total, 52 of the

27

respondents had acquired a loan, which accounts for 57% of the total respondents. Out of

these, the vast majority acquired a loan from institutions such as Angkor Microfinance

Kampuchea, Vision Fund, Prassac, Hatha Kasikor, Amrit, Sathapana and Niron.

Table 15: Loans

The chief reasons for borrowing money were to buy or repair fishing gear. Other reasons

included to connect to the electricity grid; running costs for a shop; buying a motorbike, land,

medicine, pigs, a biogas oven, animal feed, food, ceremony costs; and the education of

children.

Table 16: Reasons for borrowing money

Reason Frequency Percentage

Buy fishing gear 32 58%

Repair fishing

gear 6 11%

Repair house 6 11%

Other 11 20%

Total 55 100%

5.2 Occupational distribution

The main characteristic of rural livelihoods is occupational diversification, where people depend

on more than one income source. Of the 91 male respondents in the household survey, 72%

had more than one occupation. In addition to fishing, the male respondents were mostly

involved in livestock rearing and farming to support their household’s income. Other occupations

included shop keeping, wage labour, boat-fixing, working as motor taxi drivers, non-timber forest

product (NTFP) collection, trading and processing marine products.

Female occupational distribution was more diverse. Primary occupations included fishing,

processing food, trading, shop keeping, being a housewife and wage labour. Out of the 86

female respondents, 63% also had a secondary occupation for providing additional household

support.

The high number of respondents having two occupations can be seen as a strategy to cope with

the seasonal fluctuations in terms of availability of natural resources. The Seasonal Calendar

Origin of loan Frequency Percentage

Village middleman 3 6%

Bank 43 83%

Savings group 1 2%

Other 5 10%

Total 52 100%

28

exercise done with the Focus Groups in all villages clearly shows fluctuations in the possible

income contributions to household wealth between the dry and rainy season.

Table 17: Seasonal Calendar

Occupation Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov DecFishing

Rice cultivation

Processing

Fish trading

Livestock rearing

Most Least Medium Most

Livestock rearing

Most MostMediumLeast

Rice cultivation

Most Least Medium Most

Rice cultivation takes place for six months in the year, with preparations beginning in the first

month of the rainy season and harvesting taking place in November and December. The prime

season for fishing is from October until February when the water temperature is lower than in

the summer. This condition attracts fish, crabs and shrimp in shallower areas and seagrass

beds. From June until the end of September, fishing is disrupted due to weather conditions, as

the water is more turbid and there is a higher chance of heavier rains and more frequent storms.

From March until May, the catch of fish is low. Due to the increased water temperature, marine

fauna migrate further towards the open sea. Unsurprisingly, the processing and trading of

fishing products fluctuates along with the fishing season.

5.3 Dependence on seagrass

5.3.1 Fishing practices

Fishing was the primary occupation of 90 household heads and the secondary occupation of

one household. This means that out of all of the households surveyed, 100% are dependent on

fishing.

Fishing strategies of the respondents differed in terms of gear choice, number of hours spent

fishing per day, and the number of days per month spent fishing. In total, the respondents own

104 fishing gears, with 76% owning only one type of gear, 19% owning two gears, and two

respondents have a total of three gears. There were only three people who had no fishing gear

at all, but they worked on boats for a fixed fee or for a fixed percentage of the catch. In total,

there were nine different types of gears that were recorded. The most popular gears were

gillnet, hand-push net, different traps and surround net.

The gillnets that were recorded targeted different species; with mackerel gillnet (10) being the

most prominent, followed by shrimp gillnet (8). Other types of gillnet that were recorded included

that for needlefish, rabbitfish and crab gillnets. Out of the recorded traps, the crab trap was the

most popular (14), while other traps targeted shrimp and squid. The popularity of hand push

nets also shows the relatively low availability of capital in the villages, as these are possibly the

cheapest fishing gear with a low catch per unit effort.

29

Table 18: Types of fishing gears

The respondents were also asked why they had chosen to fish with the gear they were using.

The most common reason was the cost of the gear, which was mentioned 38 times. A close

second was the skill and experience with the gear, mentioned 36 times. Other important

characteristics were the ease with which to operate the gear and the amount of catch

achievable.

Sixty four respondents out of 91 had a boat, and three people had two trawlers giving a total

count of 67 boats. Long tail boats were the most popular, with the majority also having a motor,

allowing the fishermen to obtain their catch further from the shore.

Figure 5: A fisherman showing his hand-push net in Trapeang Sangke village

Gear Type Frequency Frequency

Gillnet 39 38%

Hand-push net 27 26%

Traps 17 16%

Surround net 10 10%

Octopus line 4 4%

Trawler net 4 4%

Hook 1 1%

Stationary bagnet 1 1%

Snorkel 1 1%

Total 104 100%

30

Table 19: Types of boats

Type of boat Frequency

Average

length (m)

Horse

Power

Distance from

shore (km)

Long tail boat

with motor 43 9.9 9.8 9.5

Long tail boat no

motor 16 5.7 - 2.0

Trawler boat 8 9.5 23.6 9.0

No boat 27 - - -

There was some variation in the villages, with the most boats being recorded in Chang Houn

Village. This is partly due to the fact that this village is located directly by the sea and there is

quick and easy access using boats with less costs for fuel. In Trapeang Sangke Village, which is

located in an estuary, a different pattern emerged, where one person would own a boat and

others would pay the boat owner between US$ 0.50-0.75 for a ride to the sea.

Furthermore, 49% of the fishermen reported that they employed labour to operate their fishing

gear In 58% of the cases, the payment system was a fixed percentage between 10-20% of the

total catch. This can be seen as a mechanism to share the risk of the economic impact of low

catch between the owner of the fishing equipment and his employees. In 27% of the cases, the

fishermen would pay their employees a fixed sum, on an average of US$ 5 per day. Only 16%

of the fishermen used family members as labourers.

Most of the respondents fished all year around, with no exceptions between seasons. Out of 91

people interviewed, 92% fished all year around. The remaining seven fishermen would venture

out to the sea between 7-11 months per year. The average days per month spent fishing varied

a little between peak and low season. During the peak season, the average fishermen would go

out to the sea for 23 days out of the month, while during the low season 20 days were spent

fishing on an average. The average time per fishing trip was nine hours, but there was a high

variation between different gears used.

Table 20: Hours per day spent fishing

Gear Type Respondents Hours per trip

Gillnet 39 7

Hand push net 27 8

Traps 17 13

Surround net 10 10

Octopus line 4 7

Trawler net 4 12

Hook 1 2

Stationary bag net 1 3

Snorkel 1 17

31

Figure 6: Long tail boats in Trapeang Sangke village

5.3.2 Fishing grounds by importance

The fishermen in Kampot Province fish relatively close to the shore; at an average distance of 9

km from the coastline. The table below shows the importance of different fishing grounds such

as seagrasses, coral reefs, open fishing grounds, mangroves and the river.

Table 21: Importance of fishing grounds

Of the 91 respondents, 64% rated seagrasses as ‘very important’ and an additional 11% rated

them as ‘important’. The second most highly regarded area was the open fishing ground, with

34% of the total respondents regarding it as ‘very important’. Two fishermen specialized in river

32

fishing. Coral reefs and mangroves were regarded as ‘not important’ by a large majority of the

respondents. The overall opinions reveal a high importance of seagrasses for local fishermen.

5.3.3 Main income generating species

Most fishermen were very specialized in terms of the target species they would catch, especially

fishermen owning octopus lines and traps; gears which have a low amount of by-catch. The

most targeted species were blue-swimming crabs and different species of shrimp, due to their

high market value. A total of 54% of the 91 respondents were catching crabs and 42% of the

respondents were catching different species of shrimp. The total number of respondents

catching each species is recorded in Table 22 (on the following page).

Table 22 also indicates if the species is related to the seagrass. For example, studies on the

relation of seagrass coverage and crab (Portunidae) abundance clearly show a significant

correlation. Higher seagrass coverage, density and species composition results in an increased

crab population (Tuntiprapas et al., 2008). The most popular species that are fished after the

blue swimming crabs and shrimps are rabbitfish, octopus, needlefish and mullet. These

preferences can be seen in terms of the relatively high market value of these species. Mud

crabs are measured in numbers, not kilograms, as they are only caught in Trapeang Sangke

Village as juveniles, and are mostly sold to supply aquaculture farms in Viet Nam. According to

the villagers, seahorses are not targeted specifically, but they are mainly collected as by-catch,

despite their high market value of US$ 2.50 per piece.

However, it should be noted that it is most probable that the fishermen who were survey

respondents reported only the most important income-generating species they were catching,

as a catch monitoring study done by the Regional Fisheries and Livelihoods Programme

showed that over 100 species were reported by only 26 fishermen in a period of eight months,

including income-generating species and by-catch (Ngor & Heng, 2012).

33

Table 22: Main species caught by fishermen

Family

Common

name

Frequ-

ency

Average

kg/

month

Price

/kg

(US$)

Income/

month

(US$)

Association

to sea-

grasses Reference

Penaeidae Shrimp 49 73 3.58 260.21 Yes Coles (1993)

Portunidae

Blue

Swimming

crab 38 155 3.41 527.30 Yes Fortes (1990)

Siganidae Rabbitfish 31 112 2.16 240.90 Yes Fortes (1990)

Cephalopda Octopus 30 93 3.00 278.57 Yes Fortes (1990)

Belonidae Needlefish 20 162 1.52 245.32 Yes Fortes (1990)

Mugilidae Mullet 15 35 1.99 70.41 Yes Fortes (1990)

Scombridae Mackerel 14 643 0.51 327.37 N/A N/A

Clupeidae

Chacunda

Gizzard

Shad 10 416 0.40 164.12 Yes Fortes (1990)

Leiognathidae Pony fish 7 192 0.23 43.91 Yes Fortes (1990)

Sphyranidae Barracuda 7 49 2.23 108.87 Yes Fortes (1990)

Lutjanidae Snapper 6 40 3.38 134.83 Yes Fortes (1990)

Portunidae Mud Crab 6

878

(heads) 0.07 60.36

Yes

Arshad et al.

(2006)

Polynemidae Threadfin 4 25 1.94 48.92

Yes

Gilman et al.

(2006)

Plotosidae

Striped

eel catfish 2 155 1.81 281.62 Yes Fortes (1990)

Ariidae

Sea

catfish 2 34 3.23 108.84

Yes

Arshad et al.

(2006)

N/A Oyster 1

9000

(heads) 0.09 787.50 N/A N/A

Hippocampinae Seahorse 1

50

(heads) 2.50 125.00 Yes Fortes (1990)

Engraulidae Anchovy 1 94 0.33 30.47 Yes Fortes (1990)

Sillaginidae Sillago 1 288 1.75 504.00 Yes Fortes (1990)

N/A Mixed fish 20 95 0.88 83.86 N/A N/A

N/A Trash fish 17 129 0.33 41.78 N/A N/A

Source: Compiled by author

What is striking, though, is the percentage of the economically important species which are in

some form dependent on seagrasses in their life cycle. Out of all the species recorded, 17 have

a relation to seagrasses and in only two cases, mackerel (Scombridae) and oysters, a scientific

reference could not be found to document a species-to-seagrass relationship.

34

Table 23: Seagrass related species

5.3.4 Perceptions of the value of seagrass

Not only are seagrasses regarded as significant fishing grounds supporting the most important

income generating species, but the respondents also seemed to have a good understanding of

other benefits that they may provide. The two main perceived values were that seagrasses

provide food for marine fauna and serve as nursery grounds. Overall, it seems that the

ecosystem services provided by seagrasses were understood, to some extent, by the

respondents. Only 5% of the surveyed households were not able to assign any indirect values.

Table 24: Perceptions of indirect values of seagrass

Value judgment Frequency Percentage of total population

Food for fish 63 69%

Nursery grounds 58 64%

Protection against waves 15 16%

Habitat 14 15%

Fertilizer 5 5%

Don´t know 5 5%

Despite the fact that most people were able to assign a functional value to seagrasses, there

were indications that the spill-over effect resulting from the nursery ground value were not

understood. When asked what will be the condition of seagrass beds in the future, then

regardless of how the conditions were perceived, the fishermen who did not fish inside the

seagrass beds mentioned that this will not affect them, as they do not directly use the seagrass

areas for fishing.

35

5.4 State and changes in fishery resources

Estimating the status of fish stocks in Kampot Province is not an easy endeavor. The last

estimates were made nearly 15 years ago in the late 1990s, and new studies are needed to give

more accurate information on the current status of fisheries resources. Kampot Province does

not have an official fish landing site, which makes consistent and accurate data collection all the

more difficult. Volumes from low catch gears such as hand-push nets are not included in the

calculations of the annual marine production of the province. In addition to this, catches sold

illegally to adjacent countries and catches harvested illegally by boats from neighbouring

countries are also not recorded, and there are no mechanisms in place to make these

estimations. Overall, it should be noted that the official statistical data should be treated

carefully, as the reported figures vary substantially and errors in recording are highly likely

(UNEP, 2007 a). However, the FiA quarterly data on fish landings can be indicative of overall

trends.

Table 25: Total marine catch in Kampot Province

The latest data obtained shows increasing pressure on the coastal resources. However, since

2009, the total catch has experienced an upward trend. Further exploration of the data also

shows an increase in grade 1 fish—high valued large fish species such as snapper and

grouper—which could be an indication of an increase in the overall fishing effort targeting these

species in the short-term, that will not be sustainable over the longer-term; or it could be due to

the increased availability of these species to Cambodian fishermen as a result of successful

conservation measures; and/or a reduction in illegal fishing pressure from neighbouring fleets.

However, the catch of trash-fish has also shown an upward trend, which may be suggestive of

increased fishing pressure, or it could be a response to market conditions in which trash-fish

has an increased value and is no longer discarded in the sea. It would take much more detailed

long-term research to fully understand these trends.

In contrast to the upward trend in official statistics, the results collected from the conducted

household survey show that majority of the respondents perceive that they are catching less fish

36

than 5-10 years ago. Despite the overall catch in the province increasing, individual fishermen

are apparently catching less.

Table 26: Perceptions of fish catch

There was considerable variation in estimating if the size of fish had changed in the past five

years. Around 49 of the total respondents indicated that the size of the fish was smaller,

whereas 34 respondents suggested that the size of fish had not changed, and only four said the

size of fish had become bigger.

Table 27: Perceptions of size of fish

An explanation for this variation may be that the respondents estimated the size of the produce

based on their particular target species. The data obtained from FiA regarding fishing gears

between 2009-2012 shows a significant jump in the numbers of crab and shrimp gillnets and

traps. This could be seen as a response to market conditions, where shrimp and crab are highly

in demand and are also highly valued. Furthermore, analysis of the FGDs show that the fish

stocks have been perceived as being relatively abundant over the past 18 years. However, the

crab population is perceived to be under considerable pressure, leading to decreasing stocks

and an increasing catch of smaller sized crabs.

Amount of catch Frequency Percentage

Less 75 82%

Same 6 7%

More 9 10%

Don’t know 1 1%

Total 91 100%

Size of fish Frequency Percentage

Smaller 49 54%

Same 34 37%

Bigger 4 4%

Don´t know 4 4%

Total 91 100%

37

Figure 5: Middlemen waiting to buy blue-swimming crabs in an unofficial landing site

5.5 Drivers of change and proposed solutions

There are noticeable trends in both fisheries resources and the coastal habitats. The annual

catch data from FiA (2003-2012) shows increasing fishing efforts, while the fishermen

themselves reported catching less and less fish per person. The size of the commercially most

demanded species is also seen to be declining. All of this is an indication that unsustainable

fishing practices have been dominant. Furthermore, Kampot Province is increasingly targeted

by large scale development projects, which are putting the health of coastal ecosystems at

considerable risk. The Problem Matrix and Solution exercise in all the villages revealed the main

issues of concern and the best potential solutions seen from the perspective of the villagers.

From the data analysis, six main themes emerged which are discussed in detail below.

5.5.1 Development activities, loss and degradation of habitat

The main concern in three out of the four villages is coastal development. Sand mining and

landfilling of seagrass beds is seen as the predominant driver of degradation of coastal habitats.

Sand mining for export purposes is still clearly visible, despite the complete ban on it which was

enforced in 2009 (MFF, 2013). The International Port Development and the Kampot Special

Economic Zone will be developed on reclaimed land

38

Figure 6: Map indicating location of port development

Source: Fisheries Administration Cantonment (2010)

Figure 4 clearly shows that the international port is planned directly on the most extensive

seagrass patch; covering an area of a little over 23,000 ha. According to the EIA published in

2010, 1,449 ha of seagrasses will be lost due to land-filling and 587 ha will be lost due to

dredging the navigational waterways. A total of 2,036 ha of seagrasses will be lost due to this

project. In addition, other areas of natural seagrass near the project site will be impacted

indirectly due to deterioration in water quality. The reasons for this project to be planned and

built directly on one of the most productive ecosystems in the world are unclear.

Another problematic issue is the encroachment into mangrove areas due to the expansion of

salt farms. Production of salt in Cambodian coastal areas covers 4,000 ha, with 85% of this

lying in Kampot Province (Khim, 2010). This is also inducing another problem of salt intrusion

into agricultural lands, thereby decreasing the productivity of that scarce resource in the coastal

areas.

The main solution proposed for these issues was a call for coastal zoning, with the

establishment of more legally recognized conservation areas, while at the same time

empowering local communities to manage and protect them. Furthermore, it was suggested that

local authorities should keep a close eye on development projects to ensure proper mitigation of

their negative effects on natural resources.

39

5.5.2 Disputes over fishing areas

Disputes mainly occur due to incompatibility of different types of fishing devices used in the

same locations. However, in the case of Chang Houn Village, these have escalated to an

international level. Cambodia’s Exclusive Economic Zone legally overlaps with those of its

neighbours Viet Nam and Thailand (Seng et al., 2005). Further complicating this issue is the

notoriously disputed island of Phú Quốc (Koh Trol) belonging to Viet Nam, which is merely 10

km away from the coast of Cambodia.

The overall solution proposed was a clear demarcation of fishing areas based on gears used

and the clarification of fishing domains between Cambodia and Viet Nam.

5.5.3 Use of illegal fishing devices

The use of illegal fishing devices was also a major issue which was brought up in all the villages

during the study. In addition to the results of the FGDs, 49% of household respondents also

found that illegal fishing was contributing to lower fish catch. The use of pair trawlers, small

mesh-sized nets, and motorized push nets in shallow waters are regarded as problematic

issues leading to the degradation of habitat and small-aquatic resource collection. The

persistence of illegal activities is seen to be the result of a lack of knowledge regarding the

effects of such practices.

Further complicating the issue are the offences of foreign boats operating illegally in Cambodian

waters. Contributing to this problem is the fact that the laws in Viet Nam and Cambodia

regarding legal vessels are different. For example, pair trawling is completely prohibited in

Cambodia and is punishable as an offence with a prison sentence. The same vessels are legal

in Viet Nam if used in the deep sea, and are considered illegal offences that are punishable with

a fine. In Kampot, illegal offences by Vietnamese operators are most common due to the

proximity to the border between the two countries and Phú Quốc Island. However, there is

collaboration amongst the FiA in Cambodia and the FiA in Viet Nam to ensure mutual learning

and cooperation in order to crack down on any such illegal activities.

The solutions for the use of illegal fishing devices were suggested as increased patrolling

efforts, strengthening the capacity of existing teams, and increasing cooperation and

collaboration with local authorities in suppressing these illegal activities. Furthermore, it was

suggested that outreach and education programmes would be beneficial to disseminate

knowledge on the impacts of illegal fishing gears and the collection of juvenile marine

resources.

5.5.4 Increase in fishermen

Another issue that emerged from the FGDs is the large number of fishermen, which is regarded

as problematic due to the increase in the overall fishing pressure, leading to lower catch of fish

by individuals. Furthermore, 58% of respondents in the household survey found that an increase

in fishermen was a reason for lower fish catch. Alternative livelihood options in rural areas are

40

seen to be scarce, as there is lack of land for agriculture. Fishing provides a fast daily income

and is often more lucrative than wage labour.

Alternative livelihood development was seen to be the main solution for reducing the pressure of

the growing number of fishermen. Suggestions made were to train communities in marine

product processing techniques, marine aquaculture, integrated farming systems, and eco-

tourism.

5.5.5 Low capital and increasing costs

Despite the fact that half of the respondents have loans, access to adequate capital to invest in

fishing equipment is still seen as an issue. Another perceived problem is the middlemen-based

selling structure, which results in lower prices for marine products. In addition, gasoline prices

have increased, resulting in higher cost inputs without the return of higher outputs.

The solutions put forth were to establish a savings group in the village to increase capital

availability at low interest rates. The establishment of a cooperative was also supported as a

possible way to increase the price of marine catch.

5.5.6 Climate change

The increase in storms and natural disasters is also seen as a significant problem. Severe

weather conditions affect income levels, as there are fewer days during which fishermen can go

out to sea. The rise in sea temperature could also have a severe impact, as with higher

temperatures marine resources migrate seawards, which in turn affects the large group of

fishermen using gears suitable only for fishing near the coast.

The solutions proposed by respondents during the FGDs to offset the increase in the destructive

capacity of storms were seen in replanting and conserving the existing forests, especially

mangroves. It was also suggested to set up an early warning system to ensure the timely

dissemination of information about the occurrence of storms.

5.6 Future outlook

The future outlook of the region is discussed based on data compiled from the household

survey, analysis of the FGDs, and interviews with relevant stakeholders. The possible future

directions for the four villages are different due their location and proximity to coastal

development projects. Rolous Village, in particular, has already experienced an occupational

transition from fishing towards alternative livelihoods. Their CFi was abolished due to the

overlapping interests of the conservation of fishing grounds and port development. The PRA

data in that particular village also shows that solutions are seen in terms of adapting to the

situation by changing fishing locations and engaging in alternative livelihoods.

The opening of the port has been delayed for more than three years, with no clear estimate of

the future date of its completion. According to the EIA, there should be a social fund of US$

41

250,000 per year over 10 years that should be allocated for vocational training of community

members. However, none of this money has as yet been received by affected communities. As

the FiA Chief pointed out, the communities have unfortunately lost their fishing grounds, while

no new jobs have been currently created due to the delay in port construction.

Overall, the interviewed government officials agreed that the benefits from port development are

higher than the losses. They believe that the jobs created and the monetary contribution to

Kampot Province will result in a general positive effect. What exactly will happen to the

economy of Kampot is unclear, but it is most probable that port development will bring in

benefits to the trade and processing industry of marine products. Currently, processing is only

done on a small scale, with the only commercial scale company for frozen shrimp operating in

Sihanoukville (UNEP, 2007a). It can be expected that national and foreign investment will flow

in to establish manufacturing due to the increased possibility for export. Furthermore, it is most

probable that an official landing site will be created, which will benefit local trading.

These developments, however, do not come without costs as the pollution from the port may be

hazardous to the marine habitat and fauna. The discharge of ballast and the use of anti-fouling

paints for ships which cause reproductive disorders in marine organisms can disrupt the local

ecological balance (UNEP, 2007a). That said, according to the EIA, in addition to the social

funds, an extra US$ 250,000 per year over 10 years will be allocated toward ecosystem

rehabilitation; including mangrove and seagrass replanting. Currently, none of this money has

been received and it is unclear when the payments will start. Furthermore, it is questionable if

the estimated economic loss of US$ 2-4 million/year due to the loss of 2036 hectares of

seagrass can be offset by this amount. Seagrass recovery and replanting techniques are still in

a developmental stage and can be very expensive (Ganassin & Gibbs, 2008).

Despite the increasing pressure on coastal resources, the PRA data shows another trend

emerging in Chang Houn, Trapeang Sangke and Koh Kreusna villages. Due to the

establishment of CFis and conservation areas, an increase in the health of seagrasses has

been reported over the past three years. The CFis in general seem to have a considerable

influence in the villages, as 90% of the household survey respondents in these three villages

were members of a community fishery. The benefit of the CFis are seen by these respondents

in the protection of fishing grounds (52%); establishment of conservation areas (23%);

education and awareness-raising (12%); and reporting illegal activities (11%). Hence, to a large

extent, CFis seem to be working as the critical response system to the main issues seen to be

threatening the habitat and sustainability of fishing. Other studies have also indicated that the

expectations from CFis are high in Kampot Province, as they are seen as legal management

mechanisms empowering local communities and helping to facilitate external support from

government programmes and development organizations (The Learning Institute, 2010).

The interviews conducted with CFi chiefs also indicated that since the establishment of new

management practices, the seagrass and mangrove areas are protected; awareness of the

need for conservation of resources amongst fishermen is higher; and collaboration with

governmental institutions such as the FiA is stronger.

42

This relatively recent change in management practices of coastal resources can also be seen in

the variations of perceived future conditions of the seagrass habitat amongst individual

respondents.

Table 28: Condition of seagrass in the future

Condition of seagrass in the future All villages Percentage

Better 34 37%

Same 6 7%

Worse 41 45%

Don’t know 10 11%

Total 91 100%

Although the majority of fishermen (45%) see the condition of the ecosystem as being in a state

of deterioration, many (37%) respondents expect the condition of the seagrass beds to improve

in the future. These respondents see their incomes rising in the following years due to the

increase in marine catch.

Table 29: Perceptions of the sustainability of a career in fishing

Fishing in the future Frequency Percentage

Yes 63 69%

No 9 10%

Undecided 19 21%

Total 91 100%

A large majority of the households interviewed also see themselves as continuing with a career

in fishing. The main reason given for this choice was that this was the only skill that they have,

and the only occupation with that they can sustain themselves with. Around 21% of the

respondents were undecided about whether they will continue fishing in the future. This group

explained that they will remain fishermen, provided they can generate sufficient income and the

marine catch does not decline.

VI. Findings

The main objective of this study was to assess the extent of dependence of coastal fishermen

on the seagrass ecosystem. It is clearly visible from the data that dependency is high:

Around 89% of the income generating species caught by fishermen are in some way

dependent on the seagrass ecosystem.

Fishing is providing economic and food security to a large segment of the population in

Kampot Province. No formal statistics are as yet available, but it can be estimated that

the number of people dependent on marine fishing is high. There are 3,054 members in

the currently registered CFis in Kampot Province. The actual number of fishermen may

43

be twice as high, because not all fishery villages have a CFi and not all fishermen are

members.

A conclusion of these two key findings is that any changes in the health, composition and

coverage of the seagrass beds will result in a decline of marine fauna, which will severely affect

the economic and food security in Koh Kong Province.

Another topic explored was the state of inshore fishery resources. It can be concluded that

currently there is still a large and productive seagrass area in Kampot Province, but that it is

exhibiting signs of increasing pressure.

Statistics from FiA between 2003 and 2012 show an increasing trend in overall volumes

of marine catch in Kampot Province.

Around 82% of the household survey respondents perceive that they are catching less

marine products than 5-10 years ago.

Qualitative data from the FDGs shows that the most important income-generating

aquatic species group, crab, has been declining in both size and numbers.

Increasing volumes of overall catch, but decreasing volumes and size of the higher value

marine products, are indicative of the escalating pressure on coastal ecosystems.

The exploration of the drivers of change in seagrass health and fishery resources revealed that

there are numerous demands from multiple stakeholders on the coastal area of Kampot

Province. Pressure is exerted on coastal resources via:

Population growth and increase in fishermen;

Lack of skills and shortage of alternative livelihood options;

Illegal gear usage and foreign vessels operating illegally in Cambodian waters;

Coastal development projects;

Climate change.

It is expected that as a result of these pressures, the coastal area of Kampot Province will

experience considerable changes in the patterns of resource usage. The Council for

Development of Cambodia (CDC) sees two industries with a high potential for growth in Kampot

Province - tourism and marine products. The role of the Kampot SEZ is to act as a hub for

manufacturing, while the international port is intended to invigorate tourism and increase the

export of marine products (CDC, 2013).

Effects of these development projects will be manifold. While creating new jobs and industries,

these projects will also threaten the health of the ecosystem and the economic security of

subsistence fishermen. These consequences are already being felt by communities adjacent to

the coastal development, as they have reported a decline in marine produce and income

resulting in many being forced to change their occupations. These findings highlight the

importance of mitigating negative effects of such development activities to ensure that both the

integrity of the ecosystem remains intact and that the affected communities are given adequate

training to be able to transition to alternative livelihoods.

44

Possible effects of climate change on the seagrasses are highly unclear (Morgan, 2011).

Increase in the frequency and severity of storms is already noticed by fishermen, but how the

ecosystem will respond to higher water temperatures and CO2 levels is under researched by the

scientific community.

The last objective of the present study was to explore the management of coastal resources.

Decentralization of natural resource management in Cambodia has proven to be successful in

Kampot Province:

Qualitative data from the FDGs shows an increase in the health and distribution of

seagrass in villages with a CFi.

CFis have a considerable influence in the villages and 90% of the respondents were CFi

members.

CFis are reported to be integral in protecting fishing grounds, establishing conservation

areas, providing education and awareness, and reporting illegal activities.

The results of the present study show that Community Fisheries are highly regarded by their

members and are reported to be effective in sustainably managing their fishery areas through

knowledge dissemination and law enforcement.

Overall, it is evident that there are significant pressures on coastal resources of Kampot

Province. However, if supported and strengthened, there are also management mechanisms

which could be effective in combating some of these negative effects. Most importantly, what

needs to be central to all future coastal development plans and activities is the recognition that

the seagrass ecosystem is providing food and economic security to thousands of households,

while also acting as a significant revenue stream for the province.

VII. Recommendations

The completion of the Coastal Zoning Plan for Kampot Province designating appropriate

areas for development, fishing and conservation in close cooperation with existing CFis.

This is currently in the initial phases of planning, and will be supported until the end of

the BCR project in 2014.

An increase in conservation areas, in close cooperation with the existing CFis, by

strengthening their knowledge and capacity for coastal resource management.

Scientific analysis comparing the productivity of the area with a CFi and an area without

a CFi to assess the ecological benefits of community management.

Scientific assessment of the value of seagrasses, including an estimation of both

ecosystem goods (e.g., marine fauna) and services (e.g., carbon sequestration) to be

able to measure the true benefit of seagrasses to Kampot Province, as a means of

securing long-term financing for improved seagrass management. As Cambodia is now

a full member of MFF, some grants could possibly be allocated to support these

activities.

45

VIII. References

Arshad, A. et al. (2006). Fish communities from seagrass bed of Merchang Lagoon,

Terengganu, Peninsular Malaysia. Coastal marine science. Vol. 30 (1): 268-275.

Council for the Development of Cambodia (2013). Provincial Government Policies for

Investment Promotion. Provincial Brief Introduction. Available at:

http://www.cambodiainvestment.gov.kh/kampot-province.html

World Factbook. (2013). Cambodia. Washington, DC: Central Intelligence Agency. Available

at: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html

Coles, G. R. et al. (1993). Distribution of Seagrasses, and their Fish and Penaeid Prawn

Communities, in Cairns Harbour, a Tropical Estuary, Northern Queensland, Australia.

Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research1993 (44):193-210.

Department of Fisheries (2004). Map of Seagrass Distribution. Phnom Penh: Department of

Fisheries.

Department of Fisheries. (2005). National Report on Seagrasses of Cambodia. Phnom

Penh: Department of Fisheries.

Fisheries Administration Cantonment. (2013). Community Fisheries in Kampot Province.

Kampot: Fisheries Administration Cantonment.

Fortes, M.D. (1990). Seagrasses: A Resource Unknown in the ASEAN Region. Philippines:

International Center for Living Aquatic Resources Management.

Ganassin, C. and Gibbs, P.J. (2008). A review of seagrass planting as a means of habitat compensation following loss of seagrass meadow. New South Wales Department of Primary Industries. Fisheries Final Report Series No. 96. ISSN 1449-9967.

Gilman et al. (2006). Pacific Island Mangroves in a Changing Climate and Rising Sea.

United Nations Environment Programme Regional Seas Reports and Studies. Nairobi:

Kenya.

Khim, K. (2010). Review on the current status of fisheries/aquaculture and policies of

Cambodia relevant to RFLP. Regional Fisheries Livelihoods Programme for South and

Southeast Asia (GCP/RAS/237/SPA). Policy Paper CMB#1. 34 pp.

Law on Fisheries (2007). Law on Fisheries. Unofficial translation.

Mangroves for the Future. (2013). Cambodia. National Strategy and Action Plan 2014-2016.

Mangroves for the future. Phnom Penh: Mangroves for the Future.

Ministry of Land Management, Urban Planning and Construction. (2012). Kampot Hot Spot

Map. Phnom Penh: Ministry of Land Management, Urban Planning and Construction.

46

Ministry of Environment (2005). State of the Coastal Environment and Socio-Economy in

Cambodia. Phnom Penh: Ministry of Environment.

Morgan, C.L. (2011). Limits to Adaptation: A review of Limitations Relevant to the Project

“Building Resilience to Climate Change - Coastal Southeast Asia.” Gland, Switzerland:

IUCN.

Ngor, P.B. and Heng, K. (2012). Systems and Procedures for participatory monitoring of

management measures developed, introduced and implemented - Catch Monitoring. For the

Regional Fisheries Livelihoods Programme for the South and Southeast Asia Cambodia

Component. Kampot: Cambodia.

Osborne P.L. (Ed.) (2012) Tropical Ecosystems and Ecological Concepts. United Kingdom:

Cambridge University Press.

Rizvi, A.R. and Singer, U. (2011). Cambodia Coastal Situation Analysis. Gland, Switzerland:

IUCN. 58 pp.

Seng, K., Song, S.L., Navy, H. and Leang, S. (2005). Conflicts Arising from Re-Allocation of

Fishing Lots: Perceptions from Community Fisheries in Cambodia. In Cambodia Country

Report (2005).

The Learning Institute (2010). Cambodia baseline survey final report. Regional Fisheries

Livelihoods Programme for South and Southeast Asia (GCP/RAS/237/SPA) Field Project

Document 2010/CMB/1.

Tuntiprapas, P. et al. (2008). The Effect of Seagrass Coverage On Swimming Crabs

(Portunidae) At Koh Tha Rai, Khanom – Mu Koh Talay Tai National Park, Nakorn Si,

Thammarat Province, Southern Thailand. Proceedings of the 6thIndonesia-Malaysia-

Thailand Growth Triangle University Network Conference, Penang, Malaysia, 28-30 August,

2008, 324-329.

United Nations Environment Programme (2007a). National Reports on the Fish Stocks and

Habitats of Regional, Global, and Transboundary Significance in the South China Sea.

UNEP/GEF/SCS Technical Publication No.15. Thailand: United Nations Environment

Programme

United Nations Environment Programme (2007b). Procedure for Determination of National

and Regional Economic Values for Ecotone Goods and Services, and Total Economic

Values of Coastal Habitats in the context of the UNEP/GEF Project Entitled: “Reversing

Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand” South

China Sea Knowledge Document No.3. UNEP/GEF/SCS/Inf.3. Thailand: United Nations

Environment Programme.

INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR

CONSERVATION OF NATURE

IUCN Asia Regional Office

63 Soi Prompong

Sukhumvit 39

Wattana - 10110,

Bangkok, Thailand

Tel: +66 2 662 4029

www.iucn.org/building-coastal-resilience