| Working Paper Series |
 |
|
| Title | Socio-Economic Aspects of Brackish Water Aquaculture (Tambak) Production in Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam | | Author | Indra Zainun, Suseno Budidarsono, Yanis Rinaldi and Mifftachhuddin Cut Adek | | Year | 2007 | | Publisher | World Agroforestry Centre - ICRAF, SEA Regional Office and The Ford Foundation | | City of Publication | Bogor, Indonesia | | Series Number | ICRAF Working Paper no 46 | | Number of Pages | 71 | | Call Number | WP0085-07 | | Keywords | Brackish water aquaculture, economic assessment, land holding, mangrove, tsunami, return to labor |
|
| Abstract: |
| The December 2004 tsunami brought Aceh and its coastal zone to the forefront of public
interest and discussions on the environment and development. Conversion of mangrove forest to brackish-water aquaculture (tambak) in the 1980s almost certainly increased the death toll from the tsunami. The devastation was unprecedented in recorded human history. Thousands of hectares of brackish water aquaculture (tambak) mature for harvest, which is the main livelihood for the NAD province coastal community, were swiped away in minutes. Tambak rehabilitation is a strategic intervention aimed at restoring the livelihoods of thousands of people living in coastal areas of the province. Although external assistance is required, post tsunami tambak aquaculture rehabilitation efforts in NAD province by external parties (such as donor institutions and development drivers) have been hindered by their limited knowledge of the socioeconomic and environment aspects of tambak aquaculture; hence, to determine the appropriate interventions for tambak rehabilitation which will restore community life post tsunami.
The objective of this study is to contribute to the debate on rehabilitation strategies by clarifying the social, economic and legal issues that relate to the development of tambaks in the mangrove zone. Five aspects of tambak systems explored in the study: tambak holding patterns in NAD province pre-tsunami, job opportunities in tambak aquaculture, tambak production systems, legal aspects of tambak ownership in NAD province and tambak management patterns, pre and post tsunami. Data collection was conducted over 20 days (2-21 December 2005) using the Rapid Rural Appraisal technique; secondary data documentation, field observation, group interviews, and focus group discussions using semi-structured interview guidelines.
Brackish water aquaculture in Aceh started in the 1940s by Ulee Balang, in the form of traditional earthen pond systems that depended on tidal water exchange for wild seed supply and maintenance of water quality. Brackish-water pond establishment along the north-east coast grew rapidly in the late 1970s in line with the development of semi-intensive shrimp farming. Extensive conversion of mangrove forest for shrimp farming in Aceh began in the early 1960s, when a Medan-based investor provided a credit scheme for shrimp culture to groups of 40 farmers.
With regard to property rights, not all tambak are established on privately owned land.
It is estimated that 19.8% of the tambak area in the 12 villages under study are established on non-private land and only 36.5% of those on privately-owned land have land certificates. Land with this kind of secured title is mostly found in the urban areas closest to Banda Aceh (Tibang and Lambaro skep, 99.5% and 44.9% respectively) and Pidie (Baroh Lancok, 43.9%). In rural areas, the amount of private land with land certificates is very low, less than 15%. It is important to develop a sustainable strategic livelihood for the future on lands where people are vulnerable to eviction.
The cost of tambak rehabilitation per hectare is estimated at between Rp. 5.89 million
and Rp 32.41 million depending upon the level of damage and the method used; capital
intensive (using ba
ck hoe) or labor intensive (done manually). Labor intensive rehabilitation will never work to reconstruct severely damaged tambak, while other level damage can do both.
Ex ante financial assessment of brackish water pond production after reconstruction
finds out that traditional systems practiced by the largest tambak operator in the province, are still profitable under 15% discount rate, assuming that the survival rate for shrimp fry and milk fish is 48% and 70% respectively, with initial capital ranges from about Rp 18.5 million to Rp 45 million per hectare (cost of establishment and working capital). Hence, in normal conditions, this amount is affordable. However, in situation such as exists in Aceh at present, it is not affordable for smallholder shrimp/fish farmers. At the other extreme, an intensive tambak system requires more initial capital ranging from Rp. 57.86 - 84.1 million. This provides the highest profitability, although it assumes a production scenario whereby there will only be seven
effective years out of 11.
All these calculations do not internalize the social cost of mangroves lost, the
environmental and social damage associated with problems of pollution, the public health risks and salinization caused by intensive shrimp farming. These factors are in stark contrast to the values of communal ownership, coastal protection and domestic food supply intrinsic to intact mangroves. These values need to be monetized to provide more comprehensive information to national governments and international funding organizations which have been working on tambak rehabilitation in Aceh. Institutions that protect local communities and the environment from short term profit-makers must be developed and supported and their rules must be enforced. Although estimates indicate that the ‘social value’ of intact mangroves is much higher than the ‘private value’ of converted mangroves, there is no mechanism to provide benefits which might prompt those with the right to convert mangroves to reconsider their decisions. Part of the tsunami damage can thus be seen as the result of institutional failure to internalize externalities.
From an employment generation point of view, brackish-water aquaculture is a good
option because it has a reasonably better return to labor than that of other agricultural activities in rural areas. Brackish-water aquaculture requires 395–813 person-days per hectare per year to operate, depending on the technology. It appears that intensive systems would provide more employment for local communities, however this does not always happen in reality. The experience in Aceh is that tambak operators are often not from the local community and so very little local labor is employed. This can create tension between local communities and migrant laborers working the intensive shrimp farms.
The capacity of coastal ecosystems to regenerate after disasters and to continue to
produce resources and services for human livelihoods can no longer be taken for granted. Socioecological resilience must be understood at a broader scale and actively managed and nurtured. Incentives for generating ecological knowledge and translating this into information that can be used in governance are essential. The ‘human causation’ element of the tsunami impact has received a lot of attention for the most coastal zone which lost its protective mangroves in the 1980s due to conversion to other commercial uses. Attention to ‘human causation’ is in line with a general tendency that judges the seriousness of an environmental loss by what caused it. The effects on the rest of the coast are more difficult to quantify, but are still important in the debate. The social cost of past conversion of mangroves to tambaks was previously estimated primarily based on the value of open-sea fisheries. Therefore, tambak rehabilitation should consider the balance between the economic potential of coastal resources and environmental problems that could occur in the future as a result of exploiting coastal reso
urces. The conflict between public and private interest should be internalized into the rehabilitation process. Multilevel social networks are crucial for developing social capital and for supporting the legal, political, and financial frameworks that enhance sources of social and ecological resilience. |
|
