Impact on income and livelihood of fisheries workers: Closed fishing season policy for sardines in Zamboanga Peninsula, Philippines

Impact on income and livelihood of fisheries workers:

Closed fishing season policy for sardines in Zamboanga Peninsula, Philippines

This is an Author's Original Manuscript of an article published in the Journal of Coastal Conservation.

Cite as: Brillo, B.B., Jalotjot, H., Cervantes, C. & Rola, A. (2019). Impact on Income and Livelihood of Fisheries Workers: Closed Fishing Season Policy for Sardines in Zamboanga Peninsula, Philippines. Journal of Coastal Conservation, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 1057–1067 (ISI/SCOPUS).

Bing Baltazar C. Brillo

Associate Professor and UP Scientist

Institute for Governance and Rural Development

College of Public Affairs and Development

University of the Philippines Los Ban͂os

E-mail: bcbrillo@up.edu.ph

Hadji C. Jalotjot

University Researcher

Center for Strategic Planning and Policy Studies

College of Public Affairs and Development

University of the Philippines Los Ban͂os

Catherine C. Cervantes

University Research Associate

Center for Strategic Planning and Policy Studies

College of Public Affairs and Development

University of the Philippines Los Ban͂os

Agnes C. Rola

Professor and UP Scientist

Institute for Governance and Rural Development

College of Public Affairs and Development

University of the Philippines Los Ban͂os

Acknowledgements

This research project is funded by the Philippine Council for Agriculture, Aquatic and Natural 

Resources Research and Development of the Department of Science and Technology (DOST-PCAARRD) through the Socio-Economics Research Division. Special thanks for the field assistance offered by our collaborating academic institutions — Western Mindanao State University
and Jose Rizal Memorial State University.

Keywords

Income, Fisheries workers, Philippines, Sardines, Zamboanga Peninsula

Abstract

The closed fishing season policy for sardines in the Zamboanga Peninsula is intended to conserve the sardine species and sustain long-term operations for the sardine industry in the region. As the fishing regulation entails work suspension, it could inevitably pose serious repercussion on the fisheries workers who are highly dependent on sardine production for livelihood. This study assesses the impact of the three-month fishing ban on the income and livelihood of the fisheries workers. Utilising a survey research design, the article shows that income loss as the first and immediate consequence following the implementation of the policy in 2011. This is consequential to the economic well-being of the affected fisheries workers, especially to those among low-income households. While income loss seems to cast a shadow over the favourability of the fishing regulation, the fisheries workers still managed to alleviate the impact by: obtaining a replacement job or substitute livelihood; being rehired by the canning factories and bottling companies after the fishing ban; having multiple sources of income; and staying in the workforce for scaled-down operations in the sardine processing companies. These factors mitigate income loss, translate to a guaranteed re-employment, and offer some security to the fisheries workers and their households during the closed fishing season.

Introduction

Sardines are vital marine resource in steering the fisheries sector in the Philippines. The sardine industry shares a considerable proportion of the economy as it provides livelihood opportunities to Filipino fisheries workers. For the last decade, the Zamboanga Peninsula has yielded 70% of the total output of sardines making it the country’s centre for sardine production (Philippine Statistics Authority 2015). The Zamboanga Peninsula’s sardine sector includes 12 canning factories, 25 active bottled sardines processors, ten establishments in the allied industries, four tin cans manufacturers, four industry associations, 20 commercial fishing operators, 2,046 licensed municipal fishermen, and 588 licensed vessels (Department of Trade and Industry [DTI] Region 9 2013; DTI Region 9 2014). The region’s two constituent cities — Zamboanga City, and Dipolog City in Zamboanga del Norte — are acknowledged as the capital of canned sardine and bottled sardine processors, respectively. 

The volume of sardine production in the Zamboanga Peninsula has been increasing over the years; however, this trend was interrupted in 2011 when sardine production unexpectedly dropped by almost 44% or around 91,000 metric tons (Philippine Statistics Authority 2015; Bureau of Agricultural Statistics 2014). The sudden decline raised concerns on the sustainable supply of sardines in the region which prompted the industry stakeholders and the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) to extensively evaluate the situation. As a direct response, the Department of Agriculture (DA) and the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) issued Joint Administrative Order No. 1, series of 2011 (JAO-01 s.2011) otherwise known as closed fishing season policy for sardines in the Zamboanga Peninsula. The regulation took effectivity in August 23, 2011.

The closed fishing season policy for sardines was enforced for three months within a 12-month period for three years that started in December 2011 (BFAR 2011a, BFAR 2011b). The conservation area covers 13,987 km² comprising portions of East Sulu Sea, Basilan Strait and Sibuguey Bay as non-fishing zones for the harvest of sardines and other related species. The jurisdiction of the fishing regulation stretches further across the western municipal/national waters of Zamboanga del Norte, the waters bordering south and eastern waters of Zamboanga City and the southern part of Zamboanga Sibugay (Fig. 1 and 2). 

In March 2014, regular fisheries operations resumed in the Zamboanga Peninsula as the seasonal fishing ban was lifted. Since preliminary assessments emphasized positive outcome, particularly on quantity and quality of fish caught, the fishing regulation was promptly superseded by BFAR Administrative Order Circular No. 255, series of 2014 (BAC No. 255 s. 2014) extending the effectivity of the closed fishing season policy and expanding the non-fishing area to cover Sulu and Tawi-Tawi altogether. 

Seasonal fishing ban is a widely accepted conservation measure that promotes the preservation of a species by limiting fishing and protecting the species during their spawning season (see Sadovy et al. 2005; Arendse et al. 2007; Hargraves 2011; Cohen et al. 2013; Chimba and Musuka 2014). It is a well-recognised management-conservation regulation in the Philippine Fisheries Code of 1998 (see Republic Act No. 8550, Section 9). In principle, this conservation measure is a component of the fisheries management which refers to an integrated process of crafting regulations to ensure the continuity of fisheries productivity (Food and Agriculture Organization 1997). By adopting the fishing regulation, the dwindling fish catch within the waters of the Zamboanga Peninsula is replenished and the operations of the sardine industry is sustained. The BFAR ⎯ as the principal agency looking after fisheries and aquatic resources in the country ⎯ has adopted the closed fishing season regulation through Fisheries Administrative Order No. 167 since 1989.  The regulation was implemented across the Visayan Sea and its adjoining waters covering commercial fishing for sardines, mackerels, and herrings.

Essentially, the closed fishing season policy for sardines offers biological, ecological and industrial benefits (Mardle et al. 2004). While the fishing regulation promotes conservation of sardine species and the sustainability of the sardine industry, it also opens discussions on the socio-economic well-being of the affected fisheries workers (see World Fish Center 2005; Chunga and Phiri 2008; Lungu and Hüsken 2010; Churchill 2010; Barley-Kincaid and Rose 2014). This aspect has even raised questions on the fishing regulation’s immediate consequences, primarily its impact on income and livelihood. A closed fishing season entails socio-economic cost since it affects fisheries workers whose income is directly dependent on their employment in the sardine processing companies in the Zamboanga Peninsula. The fishing ban means no work for three months within three consecutive years. This translates to a decreased number of working days and income loss for these workers. The situation may cause financial burden on them as low-income earners and, if not addressed, would have serious repercussion on the favourability of the closed fishing season. Premised on this, the authors looked into the fishing regulation’s impact on the income and livelihood of the affected fisheries workers and its alleviating/exacerbating factors. On the whole, the study intends to address an existing gap in the literature by supplementing insufficient data on fishing regulations and on the socio-economic impact of closed fishing season policy in the Philippines (see Failler and Pan 2007; Panjarat and Bennett 2012; Bennett and Dearden 2014).

Fig. 1 The Zamboanga Peninsula (National Mapping and Resource Information Authority 2019)

Fig. 2 The coverage area of the closed fishing season policy for sardines

in the Zamboanga Peninsula (Google Maps 2016)

Methods

The study used a survey research design to look into the effects of the closed fishing season policy on income and livelihood of the affected fisheries workers. In the survey, fisheries workers are defined as individuals and households whose main income is derived from working in the sardine processing industry, particularly in the canning factories and bottling companies. The impact on the fisheries workers’ earnings has been estimated according to the changes in income from a reduced number of working days during the three-month fishing ban. The result is evaluated while taking into account the presence of mitigating/aggravating factors such as multiple sources of income, availability of alternative livelihood and assistance/support mechanisms.

A total of 129 respondents were surveyed. The number of respondents corresponds to the sample size recommended by the Philippine Council for Agriculture, Aquatic and Natural Resources Research and Development, which is the funding agency. The respondents were selected from Zamboanga City and Zamboanga del Norte, the two major hubs of the sardine industry in the region. Zamboanga City is the capital of the canned sardine processors, while Zamboanga del Norte ⎯ Dipolog City in particular ⎯ is the heartland of the bottled sardine processors. The study applied purposive sampling in its selection of respondents since random sampling is impractical. The BFAR’s Municipal Fisheries Registration System database, while containing more than 10,000 names, is not sorted according to occupation (i.e. not distinguishing among municipal/commercial fishermen, fisheries workers, aquaculture workers, fish vendors, port workers, etc.) and the home addresses are not updated which makes locating them difficult.

The fisheries workers were identified through the assistance of the local government officials and the sardine stakeholders of the locality. Among the 129 respondents, 67 fisheries workers (52%) were surveyed in Zamboanga City and 62 fisheries workers (48%) in Zamboanga del Norte (Table 1). The survey was conducted in the fishing villages of Ayala, Talon-Talon, Talisayan, Baliwasan, Cawit, Maasin, and Mampang, Zamboanga City from June 2–9, 2015. The second run of survey was conducted from June 8–19, 2015 in Zamboanga del Norte, particularly in the cities of Dapitan and Dipolog, and the municipalities of Katipunan, Roxas, and Sindangan. These localities have been identified with large concentration of fisheries workers and sardine-related activities.

Table 1 Number of surveyed respondents

Location	Fisheries workers
	n	%
Zamboanga City	67	52
Zamboanga del Norte	62	48
Total	129	100

Key informant interviews and documentary sources supplemented the survey. This step was taken to help identify the alleviating/exacerbating factors and to further understand the surrounding context of the fishing regulation. The interviewees comprise the key individuals from the sardine industry in Zamboanga Peninsula (i.e. BFAR, DILG, Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Management Council, Department of Labor and Employment [DOLE], Department of Trade and Industry, Department of Social Welfare and Development, In-glass Sardine Association, Philippine Integrated Industries Labor Union, and the local government units).

Results and discussion

The respondents have a mean age of 36, and most of them have been living in their current barangay (village) for more than ten years. Majority of the fisheries workers are female (93 out of 129), and almost 60% have been working in the sardine industry for five years or less. The other 25% has stayed  much longer, reaching from 6–10 years (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3 Number of years as fisheries workers

The Zamboanga Peninsula’s sardine industry directly employs around 3,000 people which doubles up to 6,000 during peak season (DOLE 2014). If ancillary jobs are to be accounted as well, the industry could benefit approximately 35,000 people (DTI Region 9 2013, DTI Region 9 2014). A great number fisheries workers and fisheries household members in the survey are employed both in the sardine canning factories in Zamboanga City and the sardine bottling companies in Zamboanga del Norte (Table 2).

Table 2 Employment of fisheries workers and their household members

Employer	Zamboanga City	Zamboanga del Norte	All
Sardine canning factories	82	0	82
Sardine bottling companies	2	73	75
Others	4	1	5
Total	88	74	162

More than two-thirds of the fisheries workers are in non-permanent work arrangement status. The non-permanent work includes contractual arrangements, “arawan” (i.e. daily wages), and “pakyawan” (i.e. payment based on the volume of fish processed). Only 36 of the respondents are permanent or regular workers, of whom, 30% are in sardine canning factories and 13% in sardine bottling companies (Table 3). In a way, the predominance of the non-permanent work arrangement affords more flexibility to the sardine canning factories and bottling companies in laying off workers during the three-month fishing ban. 

Table 3 Number of fisheries workers and their household members by employment type

Employment type	Sardine canning factories	Sardine bottling companies	All
Regular/permanent	26 (30%)	10 (13%)	36 (22%)
Contractual	26 (30%)	25 (33%)	51 (31%)
Daily wage (“arawan”)	24 (28%)	12 (16%)	36 (22%)
Others (including “pakyawan”)	10 (12%)	29 (38%)	39 (24%)
All	86 (100%)	76 (100%)	162 (100%)

The fisheries work suspension for sardines is a direct consequence of the closed fishing season policy. During its implementation, a large fraction of the working ban occurs in November or December. For the discharged fisheries workers, the average length of time to find a new job is nine days: five days in Zamboanga del Norte and ten days in Zamboanga City (Table 4). This shows that laid-off fisheries workers obtain replacement or substitute jobs in a little over a week. In such case of immediate work replacement, the income loss inflicted upon fisheries workers during the three-month fishing ban can be significantly mitigated.

Table 4 Number of days for discharged workers to find a new job

Location	Average number of days	n
Zamboanga City	10	67
Zamboanga del Norte	5	62
All	9	129

The rehiring of laid-off workers is an essential facet of the closed fishing season policy since it has a bearing on the income recovery of fisheries workers. The average rehiring rate after a closed fishing season is high at 79% among all respondents: 84% in sardine canning factories in Zamboanga City and 74% in sardine bottling companies in Zamboanga del Norte (Table 5). This high rehiring rate translates to guaranteed employment for the fisheries workers after each closed fishing season. Moreover, the estimated 21% of the fisheries workers who do not return to work after the fishing ban pose little problem to the sardine industry since most of them are classified as ordinary workers (i.e. not highly skilled workers) and can be easily replaced in the labour market.

The average number of days elapsing before a worker is rehired is 118 days. This accounts to almost four months and thus exceeds the three-month time period of the fishing ban (Table 5). The time discrepancy can be attributed to the industry’s laying off of workers weeks before the start of a closed fishing season, and the lag in rehiring workers at the start of the open fishing season. Also, the fisheries workers reported that there has been no change in the type of work they do (76%), the number of working hours (74%), and their wage rate (74%) after being rehired to work in the sardine processing factories.

Table 5 Rehiring rate (in %) and the number of days in rehiring workers

Location	Rehiring rate			Average number of days in rehiring workers
	No	Yes	No response
Zamboanga City	6	84	10	117
Zamboanga del Norte	3	74	23	124
All	5	79	16	118

In terms of income sources, most fisheries households have multiple sources of income: 69% in Zamboanga City and 79% in Zamboanga del Norte. As expected, households with multiple income sources in both localities have a higher average annual income (i.e. Php118,592) compared to households with a single income source (i.e. Php105,967) (Table 6). In a way, having multiple income sources offer more security against the effects of the three-month fishing ban.

The total annual average income for both income sources is higher in Zamboanga City than in Zamboanga del Norte (i.e. Php130,540 and Php99,164, respectively). This can be attributed to the bigger and more established sardine canning industry in Zamboanga City. 

Table 6 Number of income sources and average annual income of fisheries households

Number of income sources	Zamboanga City (sardine canning workers)		Zamboanga del Norte (sardine bottling workers)		All
	Average income (Php)	n (%)	Average income (Php)	n (%)	Average income (Php)	n (%)
Single	126,643	19 (31)	75,748	13 (21)	105,967	32 (22)
Multiple	132,082	48 (69)	105,377	49 (79)	118,592	97 (78)
All	130,540	67 (100)	99,164	62 (100)	115,460	129 (100)

Fisheries workers from Zamboanga City have higher minimum and maximum values of annual income compared to that of Zamboanga del Norte (Table 7). This is especially true for single income fisheries households wherein the values from Zamboanga City are exponentially greater. The variability in the annual income confirms the higher-income dependency on sardine canning factories than on sardine bottling companies. 

Table 7 Variability in the annual income of fisheries workers by the number of income sources

Number of income sources	Zamboanga City			Zamboanga del Norte
	min	max	range	min	max	range
Single	45,360	360,000	314,640	12,000	140,000	128,000
Multiple	24,000	340,000	316,000	12,000	315,000	303,000
All	24,000	360,000	336,000	12,000	315,000	303,000

The fisheries workers have an average household income of Php115,460 and have an average of two-income earners per household. The average annual household income of Php130,540 in Zamboanga City is 25% higher than the income in Zamboanga del Norte at Php99,164. This variance reflects a sharp difference in the sardine processing income since the fisheries workers in Zamboanga City earned almost twice as much from sardine processors than those in Zamboanga del Norte (Table 8). Meanwhile, Zamboanga City is more prone to losing household income compared to Zamboanga del Norte during the three-month fishing closure.

On income diversification, the fisheries workers’ income sources or livelihood can be classified into sardine processing, fishing and related activities, and non-fishing. In sardine processing, households earn more than half of their annual income from working in sardine processing companies on average (Php66,411 of the Php115,460). Fisheries households in Zamboanga del Norte engage more in fishing and other related activities (e.g. fishing, selling or vending fish) with a greater average earning of Php25,407 compared to Zamboanga City with Php5,731. In contrast, Zamboanga City’s fisheries household takes more active engagement in non-fishing activities (e.g. skilled labour, hired/manual labour, farming, working in public sector and small business) with an average income of Php41,442 compared to Zamboanga del Norte with only Php25,668 (Table 8). 

Table 8 Average household income and average number of income earners

Location	Sardine processing income	Fishing and related activities income	Non-fishing	Average annual income	Average no. of income earners per household
Zamboanga City	83,366	5,731	41,442	130,540	2
Zamboanga del Norte	48,089	25,407	25,668	99,164	2
Total	66,411	15,188	33,861	115,460	2

The fisheries workers’ income sources also reveal that Zamboanga del Norte has a more even distribution of income which is about 25% from fishing activities, 25% from non-fishing activities, and 50% from working in sardine processing companies. Zamboanga City has a highly skewed income distribution in which almost two-thirds are coming from the sardine processing companies
(Table 8).

Most of the fisheries households employed in sardine processing companies earn from Php5,000–10,000 per month (Fig. 4). The income distribution of workers in Zamboanga City appears to be normally distributed compared to Zamboanga del Norte, which is otherwise skewed to the low monthly salary end.

Fig. 4 Frequency distribution of average monthly income of workers

During the closed fishing season, only 42% of the fisheries workers (i.e. 39% in Zamboanga City and 45% in Zamboanga del Norte) were drawn to other sources of livelihood to compensate for the loss of income (Table 9). This data shows that more than half of the fisheries workers have no alternative employment during the three-month fishing ban, meaning they are left with no other choice but to take in the full impact of income loss during the imposed fishing ban.

Table 9  Fisheries workers engaging in other sources of livelihood during the closed fishing season

Location	n	%
Zamboanga City	26	39
Zamboanga del Norte	28	45
All	54	42

The type of work the fisheries workers engage in during the closed fishing season is mostly similar to the non-fishing activities (i.e. skilled labour and hired/manual labour) that household members do. Significantly, 20% of the fisheries workers continue to work in the sardine factories during the closed fishing season (Table 10). This continuity of employment is due to the  scaled-down operations extended by some sardine processors, the scheduling of the maintenance service, as well as some cleaning works during the three-month fishing ban. This also implies that a small fraction of the fisheries workers are not directly affected by the closed fishing season policy.

Table 10 Type of livelihood during the closed fishing season*

Closed season work	Fisheries workers
	n	%
Driver	14	13
Vendor	21	20
Labourer	16	15
Nipa roof maker	3	3
Sales attendant	3	3
Sardine factory worker	21	20
Net maker	1	1
Other	25	24

*Includes livelihood of other household members

The number of months fisheries workers were employed vary. More than half of the workers worked for utmost nine months consistent with the three-month fishing ban. In Zamboanga City, 33.7% and 27.2% worked for eight and nine months, respectively. Moreover, in Zamboanga del Norte, 19.7% and 26.3% worked for eight and nine months, respectively. Only 22.8% in Zamboanga City and 19.7% in Zamboanga del Norte worked for the entire duration of 12 months (Table 11). 

The deviation between the two locations can be traced to the production features of the sardine processors. In Zamboanga City, the canning factories are highly specialized. The machineries are designed exclusive for sardines, hence the complete termination of operations during the closed fishing season. In Zamboanga del Norte, however, sardine bottling companies are considered as household/backyard industry that requires less volume of fish. They can shift production to substitute fish species (e.g. milkfish and tuna). This allows continuity of operations even when the supply of sardines drops during the fishing ban.

Table 11 Number of working months of fisheries workers

No. of months employed	Zamboanga City		Zamboanga del Norte		All
	n	%	n	%	n	%
1	1	1.1		0	1	0.6
2		0.0	1	1.3	1	0.6
3	3	3.3	7	9.2	10	6.0
4		0.0	1	1.3	1	0.6
5	2	2.2	1	1.3	3	1.8
6	2	2.2	3	3.9	5	3.0
7	5	5.4	10	13.2	15	8.9
8	31	33.7	15	19.7	46	27.4
9	25	27.2	20	26.3	45	26.8
10	2	2.2		0.0	2	1.2
11		0.0	3	3.9	3	1.8
12	21	22.8	15	19.7	36	21.4

The typical annual operations of the sardine processors are 11 months (less the month of December). Considering this time frame, the lost income can be estimated using the reported monthly income and the number of months without work (i.e. 11 months minus the number of months employed). Table 12 shows the estimated lost income by fisheries workers by the number of months employed. In total, this results in Php2.39 million, or an average of Php14,230 per worker, in income loss for 2014. Fisheries workers from Zamboanga del Norte lost around Php0.897 million (average of Php11,808). Those from Zamboanga City, on the other hand, reached a much higher total loss of Php1.493 million (average of Php16,231) (Table 12).

Table 12 Estimated lost income (annual) per fisheries worker by the number of months employed

No. of months employed	Zamboanga City			Zamboanga del Norte			All
	n	Average (Php)	Total (Php)	n	Average (Php)	Total (Php)	n	Average (Php)	Total (Php)
1	1	64,400	64,400				1	64,400	64,400
2				1	31,500	31,500	1	31,500	31,500
3	3	36,267	108,800	7	16,114	112,800	10	22,160	221,600
4				1	21,000	21,000	1	21,000	21,000
5	2	57,000	114,000	1	42,000	42,000	3	52,000	156,000
6	2	43,500	87,000	3	15,000	45,000	5	26,400	132,000
7	5	34,208	171,040	10	15,760	157,600	15	21,909	328,640
8	31	18,720	580,320	15	17,900	268,500	46	18,453	848,820
9	25	14,069	351,720	20	10,952	219,040	45	12,684	570,760
10	2	8,000	16,000				2	8,000	16,000
11				3	0	0	3	0	0
12	21	0	0	15	0	0	36	0	0
Total	92		1,493,280	76		897,440			2,390,720

For the entire sardine industry, income loss is estimated using the proportion of fisheries workers by the number of months employed (Table 11) and the average lost annual income (Table 12). Following the assumption that the 6,000 direct workforce (DOLE 2014) would work for 11 months without the closed fishing season, the total lost income of fisheries workers is estimated to be Php97.134 million annually (Table 13). But with the implementation of the closed fishing season policy, the overall average annual income of workers has dropped by Php25,655 per year. From Php162,438 during free fishing season in Zamboanga City, fisheries workers’ average annual income plummeted down to Php130,540 ⎯ a substantial cut of Php31,898 induced by the fishing regulation. In Zamboanga del Norte, the policy slashed some Php19,164 from the annual average income of Php118,417, reducing the fisheries workers’ wage to only Php99,164 a year (Table 14).

Table 13 Estimated total annual lost income due to the closed fishing season

Number of months employed	Proportion of workers (A)	Estimated number of workers* (B = A x 6,000)	Average lost income (C)	Estimated annual total lost income (B x C)
1	0.011	67	64,400	4,293,333
2	0.000	0	-	-
3	0.033	133	36,267	4,835,556
4	0.000	0	-	-
5	0.022	133	57,000	7,600,000
6	0.022	133	43,500	5,800,000
7	0.054	333	34,208	11,402,667
8	0.337	2,067	18,720	38,688,000
9	0.272	1,667	14,069	23,448,000
10	0.022	133	8,000	1,066,667
11	0.000	0	-	-
12	0.228	1,333	-	-
Total	1	6,000		97,134,222

*Based on 6,000 direct workforce estimate (DOLE 2014)

Table 14  Average annual income of fisheries workers with and without the closed fishing season

Location	Without closed fishing season	With closed fishing season	Change
Zamboanga City	162,438	130,540	(31,898)
Zamboanga del Norte	118,417	99,164	(19,164)
All	141,115	115,460	(25,655)

For the fisheries workers, the decrease in their income (7.1% and 46.4%) comes with the implementation of the fishing ban (Table 15). This general perception supports the lost income estimates among fisheries workers due to the closed fishing season.

Table 15 Perception of income change among the fisheries workers

Income under the fishing ban versus income five years ago	Fisheries workers (%)
1-Much lower	7.1
2-Lower	46.4
3-About the same	21.4
4-Higher	23.2
5-Much higher	1.8
Total	100.0

To cope with income loss, the fisheries households usually engage in different livelihood activities to mitigate the effects of the three-month closed fishing season policy (Table 16). Such coping mechanisms ameliorate the households’ financial situation ⎯ except for the household budget tightening which is intrinsically a domestic coping means.

Table 16 Coping mechanisms of fisheries households during the closed fishing season

Ameliorating activities	Fisheries workers
Borrowing money	2
Driving	11
Fishing	13
Construction work	6
Hired labour	14
Self-employment	9
Household budgetary tightening	17
Others	5
Total	77

4. Conclusion and implications

On the whole, the study supplements the data on fishing regulations in the Philippines and contributes to a better understanding of the socio-economic effects of a closed fishing season. In particular, it emphasized the impact of the fishing ban for sardines on the income and livelihood of fisheries workers in the Zamboanga Peninsula. The fishing regulation represents a good prospect for the long-term conservation of fisheries resources, sustainability of the local sardine industry, and job security. However, in the short term, the conservation measure entails socio-economic costs, particularly on the livelihood of the affected fisheries workers, which cast a shadow over the favourability of the fishing regulation. 

The three-month work suspension consequentially led to income loss among the fisheries workers. The study has estimated that the total lost income in the 2014 is Php2.39 million (an average of Php14,230 per fisheries worker) leaving Zamboanga City with Php1.493 million (average of Php16,231), and Zamboanga del Norte with Php0.897 million (average of Php11,808) in loss. 

On the fisheries household level, it is estimated that the total decrease in income is at Php25,655 annually, that is Php31,898 in Zamboanga City and Php19,252 in Zamboanga del Norte. These estimates are consistent with the general perception of the fisheries workers on their reduced income due to the fishing ban. Since the fisheries households are mostly low-income earners, this financial contraction has a significant bearing on their socio-economic well-being. However, the income loss among the laid-off fisheries workers is alleviated by: the affected workers obtaining replacement or substitute job in a little over a week; the majority of the workers (79%) are rehired by the canning and bottling companies after the three-month fishing ban; the majority of the fisheries households (74%) have multiple sources of income; and a small workforce (20%) is retained by the sardine companies during the closed fishing season. Overall, these factors mitigate the income loss, translate to guaranteed re-employment, and offer some protection to the affected fisheries households until the closed fishing season policy was lifted in the Zamboanga Peninsula.

Although the income loss of the fisheries households is deemed acceptable vis-á-vis the long term ecological-economic gains from the closed fishing season policy, still, adequate support and assistance are expected from key government agencies. The BFAR and other government agencies have offered safety net programs to the fisheries households while coping within the three-month fishing ban. In particular, BFAR provided training for seaweed farming; DTI conducted livelihood seminars; the Department of the Environment and Natural Resources organised mangrove planting; and the local government units distributed fishing gears (e.g. gill net, hooks and lines). However, these safety net programs have little effect in reducing the income loss of the fisheries households since only a few were involved or participated in them (e.g. only 2 out of 100 participants availed of the mangrove planting livelihood program). The poor reception is attributed to inadequate consultations and preparations ⎯ particularly on the initial implementation of the closed fishing season policy in 2011 ⎯ as many fisheries workers viewed the support as disjoined from what they need and untimely delivered (Brillo et al. 2017). For instance, the Industry Tripartite Council, which is the main forum in discussing the issues and concerns of the affected fisheries workers, was organised only on November 22, 2011, a few days before the December implementation of the fishing ban. While the “Sustained Availability through Genuine and Intensified Preservation of Tamban: Alternative Employment Programs” ⎯ the special program intended to provide alternative employment to displaced workers ⎯ was only organised on December 8, 2011 when the closed fishing season was already in effect. 

Despite the experienced impediments, the continuation and eventual institutionalisation of the closed fishing season policy in the Zamboanga Peninsula augur well. A promising prospect is that the fisheries workers’ income loss and other issues can be expected to improve over time, specifically, the ability of the fisheries workers to prepare and adapt (e.g. look for alternative livelihood or income sources) and the capacity of the government agencies to improve the assistance programs. For instance, the DOLE was largely ineffective in assisting in the initial year (i.e. 2011) of the closed fishing season, but was able to make headway in 2012 and 2013. The agency was able to expand the offering of its livelihood/employment training program to displaced workers, including the workers’ dependents. This improvement in assistance and safeguards is carried over in the extension of the closed fishing season policy via BAC No. 255 s. 2014. Another area where the closed fishing season policy has auspicious prospect is the increasing rate of employment after each year of fishing closure. Except for the first year of implementation where the number of fisheries workers hired dropped, the hiring rate trajectory of workers in the sardine industry is increasing after each closed fishing season (Philippine Statistics Authority 2015). If this trend holds consistent, the increase in the number of hired workers would readily compensate for the lost income due to the fishing ban’s three-month work suspension. 

An effective way to reduce the income loss for the fisheries workers is for the sardine processors to continue scaled-down operations during the three-month fishing ban. This option is feasible if the canning factories and bottling companies would invest ⎯ either individually or collectively ⎯ in adequate cold storage facilities that would allow them to stock sardines before the closed fishing season resumes. As a caveat, the improvement in storage facilities must be accompanied by harvest control or restriction to prevent the tendency of excessive sardine catch before the fishing ban, which otherwise defeats the purpose of the policy. 

In closing, this study can serve as baseline information and guidance in the formulation and implementation of a closed fishing season regulation in other parts of the country, especially in considering safeguard programs among affected fisheries workers. The conservation measure of the fishing ban is expected to be increasingly adopted over the years since the Philippines is archipelagic and it has a lot of major fishing grounds of which many are considered ecologically vulnerable.

References

Arendse C, Governder A, Branch G (2007) Environmental impact of fishing: Are closed fishing seasons an effective means of increasing reproductive output? Fisheries Research 85(1-2):93-100.

Barley-Kincaid K, Rose G (2014) Why fishers want a closed area in their fishing grounds: Exploring perceptions and attitudes to sustainable fisheries and conservation 10 years post closure in Labrador, Canada. Mar Policy 46:84–90.

Bureau of Agricultural Statistics (2014) Country statistics Philippines.

Bennett NJ, Dearden P (2014) Why local people do not support conservation: Community perceptions of marine protected area livelihood impacts, governance and management in Thailand. Mar Policy 44:107–116.

Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (1989) Fisheries Administrative Order No. 167, series of 1989.

Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (2011a) Joint Department of Agriculture-Department of the Interior and Local Government (DA-DILG) Administrative Order No. 1, series of 2011.

Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (2011b) Report on the scientific review of studies on sardines.

Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (2014) Administrative Order Circular No. 255, series of 2014.

Brillo BB, Elazegui DD, Cervantes CP, Rola AC (2016) Assessing the formulation and implementation of the closed fishing season policy for sardines in Zamboanga Peninsula, Philippines. Philippine Journal of Science 145(4):395¬–404.

Chimba N, Musuka G (2014) Impact of closed fishing season on the livelihood of fishers: A case of stratum I of Kafue fishery. International Journal of Life Sciences Research 2(1):49–62.

Chunga Y, Phiri S (2008) Kafue flood plain fishery situation analysis report. MACO, Southern Province, Zambia.

Churchill A (2010) Uncertainty is the grievance: Livelihoods influx on the Kafue Flats.

Cohen P, Cinner J, Foale S (2013) Fishing dynamics associated with periodically-harvested marine closures. Global Environmental Change 23(6):1702–1713.

Department of Labor and Employment Region 9 (2014) Advisory No. RIX-01: Advisory on the implementation of productivity-based incentives schemes for the sardines canning industry in the Zamboanga Peninsula Region.

Department of Trade and Industry Region 9 (2013) Sardines industry in Zamboanga Peninsula.

Department of Trade and Industry Region 9 (2014) Report on sardines industry in Zamboanga City.

Failler P, Pan H (2007) Global value, full value, societal costs: Capturing the true cost of destroying the marine ecosystems. Social Science Information 46(1):109–134.

Food and Agriculture Organization (1997) FAO technical guidelines for responsible fisheries no. 4: Fisheries Management.

Google Maps (2016) Philippines. https://www.google.com.ph/maps.  

Hargraves K (2011) Why do we have closed seasons? http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/28_3055.htm.

Lungu A, Hüsken SMC (2010) Assessment of access to health services and vulnerabilities of female fish traders in the Kafue Flats, Zambia. Project report. World Fish Center. 

Mardle S, Pascoe S, Herrero I (2004) Management objective importance in fisheries: An evaluation using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). Environmental Management 33(1):1–11.

National Mapping and Resource Information Authority (2019). Geoportal Philipppines (GeoPH). http://www.geoportal.gov.ph/

Panjarat S, Bennett N (2012) Responses of fishers to a 25-year seasonal closed measure on the Andaman Coast of Thailand. Report prepared for Project IMPAACT and the Marine Protected Areas Research Group, University of Victoria. 

Philippine Statistics Authority (2015) Fisheries volume of production by subsector, by region and by province.

Republic Act No. 8550 (1998) The Philippine Fisheries Code.

Sadovy Y, Colin P, Domeier M (2005) Monitoring and managing spawning aggregations: Methods and challenge. SPC Live Reef Fish Information Bulletin 14:25–29.

World Fish Center (2005) Fish and food security in Africa. World Fish Center, Penang.