J. Parks.

The next major activity in the co-management process is research.

The role of research in co-management is to help establish baselines, inform the management process, and nourish community education and involvement. A common mistake is to focus on research to the exclusion of education and action. By involving community members in these activities, the research process itself becomes one of education and action. In this way, such participatory research lays the foundation of awareness and commitment from which other activities grow.

(White et al., 1994)

Research constitutes the information gathering activities of the co-management programme (Table 7.1). A great deal of information is gathered about coastal resources, resource use activities and people. During this activity, both secondary and primary data are collected and analysed and a community profile is prepared. The community profile will serve as the basis for planning and management activities and as a baseline for future monitoring and evaluation. The community profile incorporates the community's problems, needs and opportunities assessment. The decision on the scope and scale of the community profile and research is made by the core group, based on information needs for decision-making and on available resources and time.

The community profile includes five components:

• Resource and ecological assessment;

• Socio-economic assessment;

• Legal and institutional assessment;

• Problems, needs and opportunities assessment;

• Management issues and opportunities.

While some of the information used in the community profile comes from secondary sources, other information will come from scientific studies by experts and from participatory research with resource users and other community members (Box 7.1). Scientific information is very useful and important for the community profile, but the type of information collected by scientists often differs from that obtained from resource users, and the tools and methods of collecting the information are also different (Walters et al., 1998). A significant amount of information can and should come from the community. The 'indigenous or local knowledge' of resource users and other community members (including women and elders) is critical information for planning and management. As will be discussed, there are a number of tools and methods available that involve the extensive participation of local community members in gathering and analysing information and for obtaining indigenous or local knowledge. The combination of scientific and local knowledge can complement each other and greatly enhance the co-management planning and management programme. The collection of information may take several weeks to several months depending upon the scope and scale of information needs. All the information collected should be kept in a small reference library so that it is available to all participants in the co-management programme.

Some of the data to be used in the community profile should have been collected during the preliminary community profile conducted in the community entry and integration phase (see Chapter 6, Section 6.2.4).

7.1. Participatory Research

The conventional approach to research has been characterized by control by outside experts, scientists and development specialists who have set project agendas and carried out research without any or only minor input from local community members (Chambers, 1994). Not only have local people not played a part in the planning and implementation of such projects, but their knowledge of local ecology and the structure of their social, economic and political systems have also been ignored. The process is relatively static, one in which information is gathered from a community and then processed and analysed by experts with little or no feedback to the community. Consequently, many projects have failed due to inappropriate project goals, community apathy and a lack of understanding of local social and ecological systems (Landon and Langill, 1998).

In recent years, new approaches to research have been developed which involve community members in gathering information in a participatory manner (Box 7.2). Participatory research (PR) represents a family of methodological approaches increasingly accepted and utilized to involve local people in research projects taking place in their own communities. PR is characterized by a cyclical, ongoing process of research, reflection and action, which seeks to include local people in designing the research, gathering information, analysing data and taking action. A key objective of PR is to empower community members by utilizing local knowledge and practices and by giving local people the opportunity to learn skills about and share in the research process. It is meant to move away from dependence on scientific information provided by outside professionals to local knowledge and skills. It is also intended to contribute directly to positive changes in the specific circumstances of the participants, as well as increase the chances that the co-management programme will succeed through local involvement (Landon and Langill, 1998).

There are a variety of ways that people can 'participate', depending upon the particular context of the research, the capacities of those involved and the willingness to let community people participate. Participation can range from consultation or information sharing (where local people are kept informed about research activities but do not influence the research process) to self-mobilization (where the researcher acts only in a guidance capacity and local people take the initiative in project design and implementation).

It is important to note that the use of participatory research does not mean that conventional scientific research conducted by outside experts should not be conducted. There are a number of circumstances where this will be the most appropriate method of gathering information. There are overlaps and complementarities between the two approaches to research (Box 7.3). For example, participatory research may identify an issue, which is then studied in more depth through conventional research.

Conventional research is most appropriate:

1. When data needed are mostly quantitative;

2. When follow-up action, in terms of programme and project training, is uncertain;

3. When issues addressed are not sensitive;

4. When the purpose of the study does not include setting the stage for staff or community involvement in a programme;

5. When time and resources are not serious considerations.

Participatory research is most appropriate:

1. To establish rapport and a commitment to use study results;

2. When staff or community interest and involvement is central to achieving programme goals;

3. When information is sensitive;

4. When major issues are unknown or relatively undefined;

5. When supporting local capacity is important (Narayan, 1996).

Among the many approaches which make up participatory research, rapid rural appraisal (RRA) and participatory rural appraisal (PRA) offer the best alternatives to the conventional approach to research. Although there are a large number of descriptions, the most useful are the following.

Rapid rural appraisal (RRA) emphasizes the importance of learning rapidly and directly from people. RRA involves tapping local knowledge and gaining information and insight from local people using a range of interactive tools and methods (Jackson and Ingles, 1995). RRA is often used to inform those from outside the community (Box 7.4).

Participatory rural appraisal (PRA) involves field workers learning with local people with the aim of facilitating local capacity to analyse, plan, resolve conflicts, take action and monitor and evaluate according to a local agenda (Jackson and Ingles, 1995; Maine et al., 1996) (Box 7.5).

RRA is regarded as a set of guidelines and tools which can be used in many different ways and many different circumstances and without necessarily attempting to change political and social structures. PRA is used to specifically refer to a use of RRA approaches and tools to encourage participation in decision-making and planning by people who are usually excluded.

Both approaches are carried out by multidisciplinary teams and differ from conventional information-gathering approaches in that field workers work with and learn directly from local people. The methods involve a minimum of outsider interference or involvement.

Because of the apparent simplicity of the methods, many feel that they can be learned from a book or in the classroom. However, the subtleties of understanding and using the methods can be learned only by experience. RRA is a useful technique for data gathering and problem identification, whereas PRA is more appropriate to programme design and planning. The distinction is not merely one of proper sequencing. If not used correctly, PRA can generate false expectations of what the programme will provide or what local people can achieve. This can cause problems in the relationship between the community members and the programme staff which can threaten success.

While the speed with which data can be collected using these methods is an advantage, it also introduces the risk of accepting superficial descriptions of situations and adopting superficial solutions to issues. RRA and PRA are often seen as a replacement for other forms of investigation and study even in situations where more formal or analytical research is called for. These methods can be biased towards local people who have time and motivation to talk to field workers and towards people who appear to have knowledge. The potential effectiveness of the RRA and PRA methods can be reduced by either using them in a too highly formalized fashion, or applying them too rigidly and repetitiously. Good practitioners will use a variety of methods for crosschecking information and the applicability of proposed solutions (Box 7.6). The depth of understanding of issues should be undertaken over time and with other methods (Box 7.7).

It should be noted that most community members have limited experience with participation and participatory research methods and time will need to be allocated to empower community members to actively participate in PRA activities. In addition, PRA should not be thought of as merely about tools that would lead to some initial form of community analysis about their problems and issues. PRA, more than anything else, is about the shared experience of the researchers and communities in a cycle of reflection and action. It is not just doing research with local people; it is part of a much broader goal of people empowerment (Brzeski et al., 2001).

Good RRA and PRA are characterized by behaviour and attitudes that build rapport with local people, avoiding putting people in uncomfortable situations, learning from people not lecturing to them, creativity, checking and rechecking the validity of the information obtained, listening and probing, being patient, engaging in conversations that have two-way exchange of information, being trustworthy, and being open and friendly (Jackson and Ingles, 1995).

7.2. Indigenous Knowledge

Indigenous knowledge (IK) is broadly the knowledge used by local people to make a living in a particular environment. Terms used also include traditional environmental or ecological knowledge, rural knowledge, local knowledge and fisher's knowledge. IK can be defined more specifically as: 'A body of knowledge built up by a group of people through generations of living in close contact with nature' (Johnson, 1992). Generally speaking, such knowledge evolves in the local environment, so that it is specifically adapted to the requirements of local people and conditions. It is also creative and experimental, constantly incorporating outside influences and inside innovations to meet new conditions. It is usually a mistake to think of IK as 'old-fashioned', 'backwards' or 'static'.

IK is considered to be both technical knowledge of the environment, as well as cultural knowledge including all of the social, political, economic and spiritual aspects of a local way of life. IK includes classification systems of fish, animals, terrestrial and aquatic plants, soil, water, air, weather; empirical knowledge about flora, fauna and inanimate resources and their practical uses; resource management knowledge and the tools, techniques, practices and rules related to fishing, gathering of wild food, agriculture and agroforestry; and the world view or way the local group perceives its relationship to the natural world. Such knowledge can contribute to resource management, development of alternative economic strategies, conservation, environmental assessment and biological and ecological research (Box 7.8).

IK can provide valuable input about the local environment and how to effectively manage its natural resources. Also, by incorporating IK into projects it can contribute to local empowerment, increasing self-sufficiency and strengthening self-determination. Its use by outsiders to the community can increase cultural pride and thus motivation to solve local problems with local ingenuity and resources (Boxes 7.9, 7.10 and 7.11).

As with scientific knowledge, however, IK has its limitations, and these must be recognized. IK is sometimes accepted uncritically because of naïve notions that whatever indigenous people do is naturally in harmony with the environment. There is historical and contemporary evidence that indigenous peoples have also committed environmental mistakes through over-fishing, over-grazing and over-hunting.

A critical assumption of IK approaches, for example, is that local people have a good understanding of the natural resource base because they have lived in the same, or similar, environment for many generations, and have accumulated and passed on knowledge of the natural resources and conditions. In some cases, local people may be recent migrants from other areas and may not have accumulated much indigenous knowledge about their new environment. It is important to evaluate the relevance of different kinds of indigenous knowledge to local conditions. Most observers, in fact, suggest that a combination of both IK and science be used.

In order to utilize IK, it must first be documented, and researchers must be aware of the ethical and methodological issues associated with doing research in local communities. The methods of participatory rural appraisal, for example, are now accepted as a means of effectively involving local people in the research process. Researchers must also be sensitive to the issue of intellectual property rights over knowledge. Local people have become concerned that knowledge is being 'stolen' and used without their awareness and without a share in any economic benefits that may result from the development of related commercial products. This knowledge must, therefore, be protected (Langill and Landon, 1998). The ethics of IK also require that those with and who provide the knowledge be asked first whether they will share that knowledge and be acknowledged for doing so.

Older people have different types of knowledge than the young. Women and men, net fishers and spear fishers, educated and uneducated people all have different types of knowledge. Common knowledge is held by all people in a community (e.g. how to cook rice). Shared knowledge is held by many but not all community members (e.g. seasonal fishing activities). Specialized knowledge is held by a few people who might have served an apprenticeship (e.g. location of fish aggregations). The types of knowledge held by people is related to their: age; sex; education; labour division in the family, enterprise or community; occupation; environment; socio-economic status; experience and history.

7.3. Gender

Participatory research requires full community participation, including women, men, youth and elderly. Gender differences are often easily ignored given that most fishers who go to sea are men and development projects tend to be male-dominated. Equitable impact of development is enhanced by putting views, areas of knowledge and strategies of women into the process. Understanding these issues can have important implications for project planning and to reduce conflict (Box 7.12).

Women play a valuable role in the many activities in the community and can provide much useful information on such issues as time use, access to resources, food distribution, decision-making and control of income. In fisheries, for example, women often are involved in gleaning and other shore-based harvesting activities. Women also are commonly fish traders. Efforts should be made to encourage women to participate in PR activities. In some cultures, it may be socially uncomfortable for women to participate. In these cases, accommodations should be made, such as having separate exercises for men and women, or using a woman facilitator.

Understanding the roles women and men play in the household and in the community as they relate with resource use and management is the first step in analysing gender. However, it is not enough to end here because a deeper analysis on gender relations that includes an understanding of the dynamics of men–women relationships and patterns of decision-making is needed.

7.4. Community Profile

The community profile will serve as the basis for planning activities, provides a context for management and serves as the baseline for monitoring and evaluation. It provides the community with information about itself, often information which the community may not even know or be aware of itself, such as similarities and differences and views and attitudes. The community profile should be sufficiently detailed to provide the reader with a clear understanding of the environmental and social conditions at the site, why management is needed and how management might improve coastal conditions (DENR et al., 2001c). The profile should help to answer key questions:

• What are current resource conditions, patterns of resource use, and resource use problems and how are they changing over time?

• What problems or obstacles for coastal management are revealed?

• What are patterns of power as they relate with resource use and exploitation? And gender differences?

From a CO perspective, it is also important for the community profile to contain community responses to problems and issues because this gives us an idea of what issues resulted in some collective action, and in what ways the community members cooperated with one another.

A community profile should contain detailed data on aquatic habitat distribution, resource conditions, demographic and socio-economic conditions, existing legal and institutional arrangements for resource management, and identification of problems, needs and opportunities. Detailed maps are included to better illustrate the habitats, resources and socio-economic activities.

As mentioned above, the community profile includes five components:

• Resource and ecological assessment (REA);

• Socio-economic assessment (SEA);

• Legal and institutional assessment (LIA);

• Problems, needs and opportunity assessment (PNOA);

• Management issues and opportunities.

Each component of the community profile will involve use of different methods, but all combine participatory research and scientific assessment.

The preparation of the community profile is a multi-step process for gathering information:

1. Preparation;

2. Secondary data collection;

3. Fieldwork/assessment/research;

4. Database and profile preparation;

5. Prioritizing results and analysing causes;

6. Validation.

7.4.1. Preparation

Preparation is when the scope of the community profile is established. This involves:

• Team organization;

• Defining the goals and objectives;

• Identifying the stakeholders;

• Determining the parameters to be included.

The community profile addresses a broad range of issues across different disciplines and technical fields, including social sciences, natural sciences and political sciences. Ideally the team conducting the community profile, working with community members, will reflect this range by including social scientists, natural scientists and political scientists. The most important consideration for the team is a balance of expertise. It may be feasible for a team, at a minimum, to be composed of two technical experts (for example, a marine biologist and an economist) complemented by local researchers. Local researchers, coming from the community or an NGO, bring in local knowledge and their skill base may be expanded by participation in the community profile activities. An ideal community profile team may be composed of a coastal habitat expert, fisheries biologist, economist, sociologist or anthropologist, and political scientist or public policy expert. The team leader will be critical to guide and organize (logistics, administrative, community relations) the community profile. The team leader may be a technical expert or local researcher or may have no technical assignment and only handle leadership activities. Team members may be divided into sub-groups based on component, for example REA, SEA or LIA. Team members may be rotated to conduct field work.

In addition to their disciplinary and technical skills, team members should also have the following characteristics:

• Open-minded attitude and willingness to learn;

• Gender balance;

• Ethnic balance;

• Local language skills;

• Organizational background.

A challenging aspect in combining expertise is trying to make individuals work together. For example, an initial activity is team building so that the sociologist will have a chance to know the biologist better, and vice versa. Social scientists can learn how to dive. In the field, even if the division of tasks is quite clear-cut, there should be regular sharing sessions on field experience and findings.

The goal of the community profile will guide how to set up the activities and how complex it will be. In most cases, the goal will be to increase knowledge of the biophysical, socio-economic and institutional conditions of the community for planning and management. The goal may also include monitoring and evaluation in the future so there will be a need to establish a good baseline for assessing change over time. Specific objectives are defined to identify more specifically the focus and activities of the research.

The process of conducting the community profile will need to be defined including determination of time, people, funding and resources needed for each component. A table can be drafted which identifies each component and activity, timeline, resource needs and team members.

The team will need to identify the community members and stakeholder groups to determine which ones should be the focus of the activities. Depending upon the goals of the community profile, the study may only involve those stakeholders associated with particular activities. When it is not possible to study all stakeholders, it may be necessary to set priorities for which stakeholders to study. This can be done by noting three main factors:

• Their proximity to the resources;

• The impact that their activities may be having on the resources;

• Their relative levels of dependence on resource-related activities.

New stakeholders may be identified as the team learns more about the area.

Stakeholders who will be the focus of the community profile activities should be consulted early to help ensure concerns and priorities are addressed, ensure cooperation, increase stakeholders' sense of ownership of the study, involve them in the study and increase support for the output. Consultations can be conducted through one-on-one meetings, small discussion groups and community meetings.

The level of participation of stakeholders may change during the research. The team will need to decide on the right level of participation, level of interest, which research activities stakeholders can be involved in, the resources (number of people needed, training, funds) required and the political context for participation.

A rule of thumb for most researchers is to encourage as much participation as possible from all stakeholders. However, the determining factors would be which stakeholders are appropriate to include in relation to the research objectives and the willingness of stakeholders to participate. Participation is not something only the researchers decide on (this immediately violates the essence of PR). The researcher strives to have community members (i.e. stakeholders) as equal partners in research and would always seek the broadest and deepest participation possible from all stakeholders.

The team needs to decide which parameters and sub-parameters to research for each component. The parameters determine the substance of the research and form the basis for deciding which methods will be used in the field. There is no definitive list of parameters for the REA, SEA and LIA. The sections discussing each of these components below will provide a listing of the most commonly identified parameters. Rarely is it possible to assess all the parameters. Therefore the team will need to prioritize based on goals and objectives, needs of the end-users, and resources and time available.

7.4.2. Secondary data

All relevant secondary data on the parameters and sub-parameters are identified. Secondary data are those that have already been collected, analysed and published in various forms, including:

• Official and unofficial documents;

• Statistical reports;

• Reports of previous assessments and surveys;

• Research reports, including academic papers, e.g. thesis;

• Documentation of previous or ongoing projects, including monitoring and evaluation reports;

• Maps;

• Aerial photographs and satellite images;

• Historical documents and accounts;

• Websites on the internet.

These data will be used to:

• Identify gaps in existing knowledge in preparation for the field data collection;

• Ensure the field data collection does not collect information that has already been collected;

• Provide a basis for cross-checking information collected during the field data collection;

• Provide supporting documentation for the field data collection;

• Refine the lists of objectives, stakeholder groups, study sites and parameters.

Some secondary data should have been collected during the 'beginnings' stage. The team will want to review this and decide if additional secondary data are needed and are available.

In the process of collecting secondary data, the team may make contact with individuals who have worked in the community or area in the past. In addition to the materials provided, these contacts can often provide valuable information and insights from personal experience.

The search for secondary data should go beyond the usual government offices. Unofficial materials or 'grey publications' exist from student theses and NGO project activities. There is no detailed methodology for gathering secondary data. It is mostly a matter of writing letters, making telephone calls, visiting offices and libraries, interviewing officials, teachers, scientists and researchers. When a document is located, check the references section and try to locate relevant references. Always credit the source of the material in the community profile.

The secondary data should be compiled so that it can be easily used during the research. A filing system should be developed to code, record and store the secondary data. The team should read through the secondary data to identify information related to the parameters and to determine the quality of the data.

7.4.3. Reconnaissance survey

A reconnaissance survey, which is a brief observational survey of the study area, can provide the team with valuable information to help plan the field data collection. This activity allows the team members to familiarize themselves with important field features, such as terrain, natural resources and human settlement, and to know firsthand the feasibility of conducting the research. It can also help identify logistical requirements based on local conditions and make arrangements for the field data collection. Where the team is familiar with the area, a brief trip may be needed. If the team is unfamiliar with the area, the reconnaissance may involve collecting some basic preliminary data through a rapid survey of stakeholders and resources. Key informants may be interviewed and biophysical characteristics mapped.

7.4.4. Planning of the field data collection

The team should plan the field data collection in detail to ensure that they will enter the study area prepared to collect the data effectively and efficiently. Planning the field data collection involves several steps:

• Identifying the methods for each component and the parameters;

• Preparing materials and tools for the methods;

• Pre-testing instruments, equipment, interview guides and questionnaires;

• Deciding how to keep track of information;

• Develop a database that allows for analysis and information retrieval;

• Developing a coding system for data;

• Defining plans for analysis;

• Deciding on sampling units;

• Deciding who to interview and survey;

• Establishing the field teams;

• Defining the schedule for field data collection;

• Training team members;

• Providing a briefing on local culture;

• Arranging logistics.

The entire team needs to be involved in planning. This develops team spirit and ensures everyone understands everything involved in the field data collection. Regular team workshops should be held throughout the field data collection to exchange information and identify problems and needs.

7.4.5. Resource and ecological assessment

Resource and ecological assessments (REAs) are detailed studies which may include biological and physicochemical parameters. The information obtained can be used to determine the status of the ecosystem. The reports or profiles generated are technical and quantitative in nature. REAs are usually conducted by highly skilled technical persons mostly coming from academe. Methodologies are generally based on English et al. (1994).

REAs can also be conducted with community participation with very minimal technical input. When outside experts conduct the REA they can benefit from participation by local community members and can provide them with training in methods which can be used for monitoring studies. Time should be taken to explain the characteristics, terminologies, uses and analysis of the methods to the local people. Usually resource maps, transects and trend diagrams are generated as a result of consensus among community participants (Walters et al., 1998) (Box 7.13). This approach increases community participation and can be conducted at a minimal cost. Maps and data produced in a participatory way can be validated by more scientific assessments conducted by experts. In addition, time should be taken to listen to the local people discuss the coastal area and their use of the resources (Boxes 7.14 and 7.15).

An example of community participation in a REA is a commercial fish landing survey. This is a tool to assess commercially important fishery resources at the local level. Selecting appropriate fish landing sites and designing the questionnaire or survey form is the first step and will depend on the purpose of the survey and the type of information needed. Surveyors can go to the landing sites and record types, number and size of fish being landed, as well as number of boats, fishers and types of gear being used. Additionally, using interviews, information on changes in fish catch over time can be gathered by asking fishers what they are catching now, what they caught 5 years ago and 10 years ago. The community participants and the experts analyse the data together.

The REA content can include information on the following parameters:

• Physical setting (geophysical overview including: land; soil; slope; sea floor; coastal habitat classifications; overview of coastal forests, rivers and watershed);

• Ambient environment (salinity, turbidity, light penetration);

• Climate (seasons, rainfall, winds, temperature, cloud cover);

• Oceanography (bathymetry, current/circulation patterns, tidal flow, waves, water quality, eddies, runoff patterns, substrate);

• Important habitats (coral reefs, seagrass beds, mangroves, wetlands, beaches, soft-bottom, estuaries, lagoons and bays);

• Fish, crustaceans, molluscs, echinoderms, elasmobranchs, porifera, aquatic plants, marine mammals, seabirds and other aquatic life;

• Resource use (terrestrial and marine uses);

• Technical attributes of the fishery (type (artisanal, small-scale, commercial, industrial), gear/fishing technology, species harvested, level of exploitation);

• History of resource use (number of resource users, gear, catch, habitat).

Mapping is one of the most important REA activities. Mapping can be more accurately accomplished or verified with global positioning system technology (Walters et al., 1998). Several types of maps can be produced:

• A sketch map is a freehand drawing that can reveal much about both coastal features and the people who prepare them. These maps start on a blank piece of paper and stakeholders identify major features and distinct features.

• A thematic map displays selected information relating to a specific theme, such as land use, coastal habitats, slope, elevation and soil. These may be qualitative (e.g. land use) or quantitative (e.g. population density). The requisite thematic maps are: land use; coastal habitats; resources; uses, livelihood and opportunities; problems and issues; and transect/cross-section.

• A base map shows selected features such as coastline, roads and villages and serves to orient the stakeholder and assist in accurately identifying features.

• A land use map refers to actual land cover or any form of man's use of land. Land use should also be viewed from an historical perspective.

• A spot map describes the area in terms of important features such as roads, rivers and cultural landmarks.

• A coastal habitat map shows the location of important habitats.

• A resource map is a summary of the spatial distribution and condition of resources in the area, and includes resources that provide food and other materials of value to the community. Use, livelihood and opportunities include sites (e.g. fishing gear areas, gleaning sites, mining areas, mangrove cutting) where activities are accomplished or where opportunities or functions provide potential benefits to communities. Problems, issues and conflicts are mapped for later use in management.

A transect is a general reference line cutting across a representative portion of the study area. In effect, the transect line is the side view or cross-section of the site.

Before undertaking a REA, it is important to recognize that there is considerable natural variation within marine ecosystems, both spatially and temporally. Knowledge of the biology of the animals and plants being surveyed will help the researcher understand the differences observed in an ecosystem at different sampling scales. In order to accurately describe the communities in an ecosystem, survey programmes should be designed to minimize differences caused by the sampling itself. It is necessary to conduct regular monitoring to detect changes and suggest causes of change in a resource over time (English et al., 1994). In undertaking the REA it is important that there is a common understanding of local names and terms among the scientists and local people. This is where folk taxonomy, undertaken as part of the SEA, becomes important. It may be useful to refer to photographs, pictures and actual samples or specimens to find out what local names correspond to scientific names. Fishers can be asked to identify habitats, resources, uses, issues and other features on maps.

A variety of detailed technical surveys are conducted in a REA. A few examples of these technical surveys include:

• Manta tows: manta tows involve visual assessment of large areas of underwater habitats by towing an observer behind a small boat. This technique is useful in assessing large-scale changes in resource conditions, determining the effects of disturbances on the underwater community, or in selecting sites that are representative of quality habitat for marine reserve status.

• Line intercept transects: line intercept transects are used to assess and describe the benthic community in coral reef habitats. Divers swim along transect lines placed along the bottom and record the percentage cover of life forms (rather than species) of major groups of corals, sponges, algae and other organisms. This is a reliable and efficient method of obtaining per cent cover data and spatial patterns in abundance of important groups of organisms.

• Transect line plot: the transect line plot is used in mangroves to determine the relative frequency, density and species diversity of mangroves. For each site, transect lines are drawn from the seaward margin of the forest at right angles to the edges of the mangrove forest. Plots are established at 10-metre intervals along a transect through the mangrove forest in each of the main forest types or zones. The method provides quantitative descriptions of the species composition, community structure and plant biomass of mangrove forests.

• Visual fish counts: visual census of fish abundance is an efficient and quantitative tool to evaluate fish abundance and diversity. A diver swims along transects laid on the bottom and counts fish observed within specified distances from the line. The type of fish counted can include all mobile species, target species for fisheries or indicator species.

• Record books: record books can be used by fishers to gather data on catch by gear type and fishing area. At a minimum, total catch per gear per fishing trip should be recorded.

7.4.6. Socio-economic assessment

A socio-economic assessment (SEA) is a way to learn about the social, cultural, economic and political conditions of individuals, households, groups, communities and organizations. There is no fixed list of topics that are examined in a SEA, however, the most commonly identified topics are: resource use patterns, stakeholder characteristics, gender issues, stakeholder perceptions, organization and resource governance, traditional knowledge, community services and facilities, market attributes for extractive use, market attributes for non-extractive use, and non-market and non-use values. SEAs vary in the extent that they cover these topics, and this will depend on the purpose of the assessment. Some SEAs may be a full evaluation of all these topics; others may focus on stakeholder perceptions or resource use patterns. Methodologies can be found in Bunce et al. (2000).

SEAs can be participatory (a broad range of people are involved in data collection, analysis and use) or extractive (outsiders conduct the assessment and take the information with them). They can also be product-oriented (report produced for a specific stakeholder group) or process-oriented (the process of collecting information is as important as the information).

SEAs involve planning and preparation before the assessment team (composed of experts, community members and programme staff) interacts with stakeholder groups through interviews and observation to collect field data. The assessment concludes with the team analysing and presenting the data. However, there is no best step-by-step way to conduct a SEA, and the order of the steps will vary widely depending upon local conditions and the requirements of the people. Sometimes, the assessment steps may follow a clear order, but in other cases they may need to be repeated and the order changed to adapt to new learning and changing circumstances. Each SEA should be adapted and the process modified to the situation faced by the team and based on experience, common sense and knowledge of the area.

There is a wide range of socio-economic parameters which can be included in a SEA. These include:

• Resource use patterns: the ways in which people use or affect coastal and aquatic resources such as resource-related use activities, stakeholders, techniques for resource-related activities, use rights, location of resource-related activities and stakeholders, and timing and seasonality of activities.

• Stakeholder characteristics: demographic characteristics of stakeholders including inhabitants and households, residency status, ethnicity, caste, religion, age, gender, education, family size, years of fishing experience, social status, household economic status, nutrition/health status, stakeholder livelihoods, household assets, community livelihoods, income sources, land tenurial status and culture.

• Economic and political power relations: each community has different levels of social and economic relations due to the economic and political power structures which exist both in and outside the community (Box 7.16).

• Productive assets characteristics: the ownership of fishing boats and gear, engine, level of investment, share system, sharing of catch.

• Gender issues: gender issues refer to the different roles, rights and responsibilities of men and women that are determined by social and cultural norms, and by biology. Gender issues include involvement in income-generation, control over the benefits of work, role in household work, time use, asset ownership, access to resources, rights in the household, rights in the community, and security and vulnerability of women.

• Stakeholder perceptions: stakeholder perceptions are how stakeholders think about resource conditions, threats to the resource, resource management, community and resource use conflicts, collective action, community issues, relations among people in the community, culture and beliefs.

• Indigenous knowledge: the knowledge held by people that is not scientifically based but comes from stakeholder observations, experiences, beliefs or perceptions of cause and effect and include folk taxonomy of resources, local knowledge of resources, and variations in knowledge.

• Community services and facilities: community services are services provided by individuals or organizations to support livelihoods of the community as a whole. Community facilities are the infrastructure that supports and facilitates the provision of those services, such as medical services, educational and religious facilities, public utilities, communication facilities, markets, transportation and other facilities such as hotels, restaurants and commercial businesses.

• Market attributes for extractive uses of resources: the characteristics of buying and selling coastal and marine resources that have been removed from the sea. Extractive uses refer to activities that take a resource without replacing it. Parameters include supply of the product, demand for the product, market prices, market structure, market orientation, market function, market rules, and market infrastructure and operation.

• Market attributes for non-extractive uses of resources: activities in which the resource is used, but nothing is taken or consumed as a result of the activity such as tourism and aquaculture. Parameters include demand for tourism activities, vulnerability of tourism market, characteristics of tourism stakeholders, supply of aquaculture, characteristics of aquaculture stakeholders, and aquaculture market structure.

• Non-market and non-use values: non-market value is the value of resource-related activities that are not traded in the market. Non-use values are the values that are not associated with any uses and include option value, bequest value and existence value.

A wide variety of field data collection and visualization methods is used for SEA (Box 7.17). Some of the methods are participatory and others are not. Some provide qualitative data and others quantitative data. The field data collection, emphasizing verbal modes of communication, involves a probing role for the researcher, a reactive respondent, the extraction of information, and sequential information flow. Field data collection methods include:

• Observation;

• Semi-structured interviews;

• Focus groups;

• Surveys;

• Oral histories.

Many of these methods may occur simultaneously or sequentially. Visualization and diagrams are pictorial or symbolic representations of information, and are a central element of participatory research. They allow non-literate and literate people to participate in the process as equals, facilitate the exploration of complex relationships, and generate collective knowledge. The visual mode of communication involves a facilitation role for the researcher, a creative and analytical role for the local stakeholder, the generation of local analysis and the cumulative flow of information. Techniques for visualizing and diagramming relationships in data include:

• Maps;

• Transects;

• Timelines;

• Seasonal calendars;

• Daily activity;

• Historical transects;

• Decision trees;

• Trend line;

• Process diagrams;

• Venn diagrams;

• Flow charts;

• Ranking;

• Classification.

These techniques are used to gather and present large amounts of complex information in a clear and concise, graphic and easily understood format. They also encourage interaction between the team and the informants; however, they rarely produce data that can be statistically analysed.

7.4.7. Legal and institutional assessment

The legal and institutional assessment (LIA) seeks to identify and analyse the organizations and governance structure for resource management in the community (Box 7.18). The LIA identifies the various resource users, stakeholders and organizations involved in resource management, analyses their roles in management, and evaluates the existing level of involvement of stakeholders in managing resources. The LIA identifies and examines the existing legislation, policies, regulations and programmes for resource management (fisheries, coastal management, marine protected areas, coastal ecosystems) at different levels of government (village, municipal, district, province, regional, national, international) and community (customary, traditional). The LIA identifies existing property right and tenure arrangements (formal and informal) in order to determine rights to access and use the resource, whether these rights are transferable, and the identification of the rules that must be followed. The LIA also identifies the existing political and economic power structures in the community to determine existing structures and what likely effects proposed changes in participation and governance will have. The LIA is crucial to the development of the management plan.

Organizations are groups of individuals bound by common purpose to achieve objectives. These include formal and informal decision-making and representative bodies, cooperatives and associations. Of concern are the organizations that formulate, supervise, monitor and enforce the various rights, rules and regulations governing coastal and aquatic resources. Institutions and agencies are those government bodies with responsibility for managing fish and coastal resources. These include Ministries or Departments of Environment and fisheries agencies.

Resource governance is the way in which resource users are managed by sets of rights, rules, social norms and shared strategies and includes enforcement mechanisms, such as policing measures and punishments. Resource governance can include:

• Formal and informal forms of resource ownership;

• Use rights and the laws that support these rights;

• The rules, rights and regulations that dictate how resources can and cannot be used.

Resource governance can be defined by formal organizations and law, by traditional or customary bodies, and/or by accepted practice.

Both community and external to the community institutional and organizational arrangements are identified and examined since, for example, national or international laws and policies can affect community level management plans. National administrative and economic development laws and policies are also examined since they may impact upon resource management and community development efforts.

There is a wide range of parameters which can be included in a LIA. These include:

• Political context: the political structure of the nation; the extent to and way in which stakeholders are represented; democratic processes and levels of representation.

• External to the community institutional and organizational arrangements (international, national, regional, provincial, municipal, village): government administrative agencies (mandate, functions, structure, resources); policies, legislation, regulations and programmes for resource management and environment, government administration, agriculture, and economic and community development; resource management strategies and programmes; non-governmental organizations (mandate, functions, structure, funding); surveillance, monitoring and enforcement; nested relationships between organizations and spheres of influence (complementarities, conflicts, overlaps, gaps which support or hinder effective management).

• Community institutional and organizational arrangements: identification of stakeholders; community organizations (mandate, functions, membership, structure, period of existence, resources, funding); boundaries (political, physical/natural, gear, customary, fishing area); property and tenure rights; rules and regulations (formal/informal, operational, collective choice, constitutional); decision-making and conflict management mechanisms; surveillance, monitoring and enforcement; compliance levels; nested relationships between organizations and rights (complementarities, conflicts, overlaps, gaps which support or hinder effective management).

• Incentives for collective action and cooperation among resource users.

• Extent of stakeholder participation.

• Extent of community-based management and co-management arrangements.

• Macroeconomic/political/sociocultural exogenous factors (natural calamities, political stability, peace and order, technological innovation, inflation, economic development, international agreements).

The level of detail of a LIA can range from a simple description of the existing coastal resource management system to a very detailed legal, economic and political analysis of the management system in terms of its impact on equity, efficiency and sustainability. Secondary data on organizations and resource governance can be obtained from official publications, including court records, official statutes and government reports.

In general the main methods of collecting primary data are semi-structured interviews and focus groups with key informants, such as government officials, organization officers, and other knowledgeable individuals involved in the organizations and governance. Some useful visualization techniques include:

• Timelines – to understand the history of organizations;

• Organizational charts – to represent aspects of the structure of the political hierarchy and the structure of organizations, as well as links between organizations and agencies;

• Maps – to illustrate areas covered by specific use rights;

• Venn diagrams – to illustrate organizational relationships.

Observations, surveys and oral histories can also be useful, particularly for assessing levels of stakeholder participation, surveillance, enforcement and compliance.

7.4.8. Problems, needs and opportunities assessment

The CO should have conducted a preliminary problems and needs identification early in the community entry and integration phase. A second problems, needs and opportunities assessment (PNOA) is conducted to update the information obtained earlier. The emphasis here is on identifying root causes of problems and agreeing upon them before solutions are identified and actions are taken. Since funds and resources to address problems will probably be limited, it is important to focus efforts.

As discussed earlier, workshops, meetings and discussions are held to help community members to identify and prioritize problems, needs and opportunities. A variety of methods can be used, including focus group discussions, problem trees and solution trees, problem analysis and ranking, brainstorming, and preference ranking (Box 7.19).

Following data collection under the REA, SEA, LIA and PNOA, data analysis is conducted.

7.4.9. Field analysis

It is important to conduct data analysis in the field as data are collected. The advantages of this include:

• The focus of the assessment can be adjusted in response to learning acquired in the field, making it an adaptive process;

• The team's understanding of local conditions can be better used as not all their impressions and observations will have been recorded in a form that is easily reported;

• Stakeholders can participate in analysis, increasing their sense of ownership;

• Mistaken assumptions that may have influenced the design of the assessment can be corrected;

• The process of final analysis and reporting can be speeded up and facilitated so that the findings of the assessment can be quickly incorporated into the plans.

All team members (experts, community members, programme staff) should be involved and a workshop format is recommended to facilitate interaction among team members. Regular workshops should be held both for a specific component team and for all team members. The field analysis should identify key learnings about a parameter, cross-cutting issue, a particular problem or a specific question. Key learnings refer to issues identified or lessons learnt by the team that are essential to the objectives of the assessment or are needed to understand the context of the stakeholders and resource. Key learnings will be identified by team members informally discussing what they have learned. By comparing similar patterns and trends, new insights relevant to the goals and objectives can be identified.

Primary steps in the field analysis workshops include:

• Reviewing notes and questionnaires;

• Analysing quantitative data;

• Analysing qualitative data;

• Assessing the status of data collection and data and revising future data collection plans (Bunce et al., 2000).

7.4.10. Final data analysis

Much of the data analysis, particularly of qualitative information, should have been completed during the field analysis workshops (Box 7.20). Therefore, the final analysis involves:

• Refining key learnings;

• Collecting and ordering data to illustrate key learnings;

• Presenting the key learnings in an accessible form to end-users;

• Validating the key learnings with stakeholders;

• Incorporating the key learnings in a useful report.

There are several critical steps involved in conducting final field data analysis:

• Compile all the information throughout the research.

• Prepare the quantitative data using statistical methods (simple calculations such as sums and percentages) and present in a graphic form.

• Assemble all team members for a final workshop to review, analyse and report the findings.

• Outline the final report and the type of report that is required depending upon target audience (for example, an executive summary for government leaders, a detailed description for scientists and agencies).

• Finalize key learnings by the team and match with assessment objectives to determine how they contribute. The team should synthesize results, share conclusions and discuss insights and recommendations.

• The information that has generated key learnings should be clearly identified by the team. The team should identify the various parameters examined and review how the information they collected contributes to the key learning.

7.4.11. Validation

Once key learnings, parameters and illustrations have been decided, it is time to validate these findings by presenting them to the stakeholders for comment. The findings should be in a clear and concise form, wherever possible using the visualization diagrams that the stakeholders have developed during the research. Long, verbal explanations or complicated tables of data generated during the research may be difficult for some people to understand.

Validation can take place in various forms:

• Small discussion groups with key stakeholders;

• Presentations to specific groups of stakeholders or interest groups;

• Presentations to groups of selected representatives of different stakeholder groups;

• Community meetings involving a wider range of stakeholders.

Discussions at these validation meetings should be recorded and the results incorporated into the final output. Although achieving a consensus is ideal, the more important thing is for the community members to be more aware of their problems and opportunities as they relate to the management of their resources. Consensus may not be desirable or achievable at the whole community level. It may be possible to gain consensus among community subgroups. It will be important to document these differences. When stakeholders disagree with some of the results, the team must use its judgement to decide whether or not to change their results. Alternatively, it may be necessary to collect additional field data to clarify these discrepancies.

7.4.12. Final report

After the validation workshop, and if any additional information is collected as needed, the team should prepare the final community profile report (Box 7.21). The report should be circulated to the end-users and also presented again to different audiences as needed to provide information. The final community profile may be prepared in several different forms for different audiences, such as a policy brief for government officials and an illustrated form for illiterate community members.