Privatizing the commons for aquaculture in Thailand Emerging Concerns of Fishing Communities: Issues of Labour, Trade, Gender, Disaster Preparedness, Biodiversity and Responsible Fisheries July 2006 SESC, Fortaleza, Brazil

Sea food bank

Sea Food Bank  This project has been promoted by Thai Rak Thai political party with its campaign to end poverty for the poor.  The project advocate to allocate potential areas for aquaculture at the coastal areas and seashore as well as to endorse ownership rights to 107,000 persons to conduct aquaculture activities.(3-10 rai to each individual)  The Rights given can be used to guarantee for getting credit from the bank, or to lease for having capital for an investment.It can also be inherited. ∙∙

Capitalized the sea  In this coming January, we going to start the policy in capitalizing the sea in which we hope to benefit the poor. In the past,the poor have not been able to easily access to capital in which made them have to borrow money from informal sector with high interest. These made the poor poorer…………  I would like to repeatedly say that in the world of capitalized democratic countries, it is impossible to have bright future if you do not have capital. Therefore everyone have to access to capital source………..  There are many critique on my idea of capitalized the sea : the concept of transformation of property to become capital It is their opinion that this idea will destroy the poor. In my opinion, this policy will offer opportunity for the poor to built their future,built their life.  “ Tasking meet the people program “

Background  Present fish production is around 3.7 million tons a year.Most of the production are from the sea.76 percent from the sea/12 percent from aquaculture.  Increasing more production from aquaculture is needed to ensure food security for internal consumption and for income generation...

Background [cont’]  Over used of natural resources beyond its caring capacity cause to decreasing of natural products.  Aquaculture will help substitute natural products and increase high productivity sufficient for consumption and export.  There are abandon of potential areas for aquaculture that can be utilized for increasing productivity of marine products instead of relying only from natural sources.

Background [cont’]  There is a total potential coastal areas of 262,68 rais can be utilized for aquaculture only 130,160 rais have been utilized, another 154,386 rai have not been used.  The government has the policy to diminish poverty within 6 years, those potential areas can be distributed to registered poor families for earning form aquaculture activities.

Sea Food Bank  This project has been promoted by Thai Rak Thai political party with its campaign to end poverty for the poor.  The project advocate to allocate potential areas for aquaculture at the coastal areas and seashore as well as to endorse ownership rights to 107,000 persons to conduct aquaculture activities.(3-10 rai to each individual)  The Rights given can be used to guarantee for getting credit from the bank, or to lease for having capital for an investment.It can also be inherited. ∙∙

Objectives  Distribute available areas to be used for economic activities for registered poor families to address poverty.  Increase food production and food security.  Keep moderate food price for consumers.  Improve and upgrade production system.

How do they do it?  Survey the potential areas ใ  Call for poor families registration.  Distribute the areas ;according to the type of activity and potentiality for production the natural system.  Getting credit from the bank: capital for aquaculture.  Training and technology advise.

How do they do it? [cont’]  Contract for the production.  Close monitoring; Food safety standard.  Market arrangement.

??????????? What will be happening? Who will actually benefit from this project? Will it be really benefiting the small scale fishery.? Who actually be benefiting.? Do it has other alternative if GO is really mean to help the poor? ???????????

“rights to use but not rights to own”  Sea is a public property, no one has rights to own.” If one wants to conduct aquaculture activities, one need to get permission from authorized agencies.  Permission of use is according to the arrangement, if one want to do this one can get permission usually it will be last for one year, and subject to be reviewed every year.  The property remains for the common, and other small-scale fisher folk have the rights to utilize the area

Increasing/decreasing of food products  Promoting aquaculture mean increasing demand for instant foodstuff  Foodstuff is products in which juvenile fishes are one of the main ingredient.  It has been an evidence that the juvenile fish are economically significant species that have been destroyed by destructive fishing gears and techniques.

Increasing/decreasing of food products  If the scale of aquaculture development increased, significant and direct impacts will be on economic fish species.  Would it be worthy to increasing food products to serve a few, while destroying natural juvenile fish species?  Wouldn’t it be more worthwhile to rehabilitate juvenile species and benefit more small-scale producer?

Entry point to privatize the sea  Distribute and re locating the areas can not be realistic-only to open new areas.  Only some will be benefiting but not the real poor families.  Direct dependency relationship to macro economic for export oriented not for ensuring food security as as stated.  It is the open ways to transfer community rights to individual-first look to be for the fisherman families but later it will be for private sector,  since it is open to poor families nation wide.

Impact  Conflict inside the community and among the community.  Marginalize the small scale fishery families.  Environment impact.  Destroy micro economy-put up dependency relationship with macro economy.  Marginalize the women-bad condition.  Not only that it will not create food security but also create more debt-more hard life.

Good governance vs Public policy  This project effect to thousand of the small fishermen  This project to top down decision while Thailand Constitution require public participation in the development of public policies that will effect to socio- economic, and an environment of the community and society.

It is the concrete the political party’s popular policy to gain more votes from the so call ‘the poor’ for the next election. It is the concrete the political party’s popular policy to gain more votes from the so call ‘the poor’ for the next election.

People action NO TO SEA FOOD BANK AVOCATE FOR COMMUNITY RIGHTS IN THE MANEMENT OF COASTAL RESOURCES. ALTERNATIVE ACTION