CHAPTER IV. EAFM Issues and Goals

4.1. Identification of Priority Issues and Targets

Identifying issues must include all direct and indirect impacts of fishing activities, both those that need to be maintained and those that must be eliminated in the broader ecosystem, and social and economic impacts desired or unwanted by fishermen/community. The issue identification process must also identify all needed elements for effective fisheries governance and administration. Identifying external problems that can influence fisheries management performance, such as climate change, pollution, inflation, rupiah exchange rate, and others, must also be done.

In identifying priority issues, issues can be grouped into 3 (three) EAFM components:

1. Ecological welfare issues, namely all issues/impacts generated by fishing activities, can influence ecological conditions, including the managed fish species domain, the environmental domain of fish resources, and the domain of fishing technology.

2. Human welfare issues, namely all issues/impacts generated by current fishing activities that can influence social and/or economic conditions, both good issues/impacts and destructive issues/impacts, include the social and economic domains.

3. Governance issues, namely all issues related to management systems and institutions, can influence performance to achieve the desired conditions. It includes the governance domain and the stakeholder domain.

     Considering that many problems are identified, all important parts of the EAFM process are used to ascertain the most important issues for direct intervention by managers. It requires setting priorities using risk-based assessment methods or tools and/or prioritization procedures. Following are some of the methods available to categorize the issues (Table 2).

Table 2. Methods for Identifying and Categorizing Issues

Source:  FAO Inland EAFM Handbook for Trainees 2019

       Prioritizing key issues is usually done using risk assessment. Key issues are issues that have a high probability of occurrence and impact. High-priority issues will require direct management. Risk assessment can be qualitative (opinion-based) or quantitative (data-based). Risk analysis usually seeks answers to four questions:

1. What is wrong? (Risk)

2. How likely is it to be wrong? (Possibility)

3. What will be the consequences of each mistake? (Impact)

4. What can be done to minimize the threat or impact of the error? (Action)

Several available methods or tools for compiling priority issues can be seen in Table 3.

Table 3. Several Methods for Prioritizing Issues

Source: FAO Inland EAFM Handbook for Trainees 2019

      A simple semi-quantitative risk assessment is used to assess each problem, whether the issue has a high or low impact and likelihood. With this method, high probability/high impact issues are identified. Issues in the red box are priority issues (Figure 8).

4.2. Reality Check

     Reality check-1 allows the EAFM Team to review and assess what might prevent EAFM's plans and objectives. This section discusses how to assess conflict so it can move toward consensus and describes the stages of conflict management. It then outlines strategies and techniques for dealing with conflict, including how to achieve mutually beneficial solutions.

     Priority issues have been identified at the planning stage, and objectives developed. Now it's time to do a reality check to see if the goal was achieved, hereinafter Reality Check 1.

     Each goal must be reviewed to identify constraints and opportunities to achieve it. As written on FAO Inland EAFM Handbook, to evaluate whether the goals are being achieved, the EAFM team can ask the following questions:

     Some of these questions may already arise as governance issues. If the answer is "no" to any of these questions, there are two options: reset goals to be more realistic, work with stakeholders to remove constraints/conflicts, or manage them. If possible, constraints/conflicts should be turned into opportunities.

Conflict management

Considering that the scope of the EAFM process includes various interests or multi-stakeholders, there is a possibility of confrontation and conflict between resource users in implementing EAFM. In this way, conflict management can facilitate the emergence of more equitable power relations, correct fisheries management practices, and improve EAFM policies.

Conflicts over fisheries resources have many dimensions, including power, technology, politics, gender, age, and ethnicity. Conflict can occur at various levels, from within the household to the community, on a regional, social, and global scale. Conflicts can occur due to differences in power between individuals or groups. It is because of actions that threaten livelihoods, and so on.

In the EAFM process, potential sources of conflict are caused by several things, namely:

• Relationships: values, beliefs, prejudices, past injustices, past miscommunications;

• Information: poor quality, misinformation, different interpretations;

• Importance: perceived or actual, physical or intangible; and

• Structure: Flow of resources, authority, institutions, time constraints, and finances.

Conflict management aims to help the parties involved in the conflict can develop effective processes for dealing with those conflicts. Thus, conflict management is not to avoid conflict but to develop skills to help people express differences between each party and solve problems collaboratively with win-win solutions.

The first step in conflict management is assessing the particular conflict in question. Analysis of specific conflicts can provide insight into the nature, scope, and stage of the conflict and possible management approaches. There are four main factors to analyze when assessing conflict:

• Characterization of conflicts and stakeholders. Here the types and origins of the conflicts are analyzed. It includes the number of stakeholders involved, the balance of power between the parties, and the relationship between them.

• Stage in the management cycle. Conflicts in the "early" stage will likely differ from conflicts in the implementation stage. New stakeholders may emerge as a result of the EAFM process. It requires a flexible process that adapts to changing circumstances.

• Stage in the conflict process. Determine if the conflict is at a good point of intervention.

• Legal and institutional context Formal and informal institutions, modes of conflict resolution through institutions, and formal legal doctrines can influence the proper approach.

Conflict management is the best form of negotiation. So, in this condition:

• all parties to the dispute are known;

• there is a will to solve problems;

• must reach solutions that are important to all and mutually beneficial;

• the parties mutually trust conflict management methods;

• the parties have the authority to make an offer;

• available funds, time, and other resources; And

• there is a desired resolution in the broader context.

Stages in conflict management:

1. Initiation: stakeholders or outsiders can request help to manage the conflict;

2. Preparation: conflict assessment, information sharing, rules, selection of participants;

3. Negotiation: expressing interests and win-win options, and preferred options;

4. Consent: concluding the best choice e, recording decision-making; and

5. Implementation: publish results, sign agreements (optional), and monitor.