{"doc_desc":{"title":"FSM_2006_SES_PROCFISH_v01_M_v01_A_ESS","idno":"DDI_FSM_2006_SES_PROCFISH_v01_M_v01_A_ESS_FAO","producers":[{"name":"Statistics for Development Division","abbr":"","affiliation":"Pacific Community","role":"Documentation of the study"},{"name":"Statistics Division","abbr":"ESS","affiliation":"Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations","role":"Metadata adapted for FAM"}]},"study_desc":{"title_statement":{"idno":"FSM_2006_SES_PROCFISH_v01_M_v01_A_ESS","title":"Socio-Economic Survey PROCFish\/C 2006"},"authoring_entity":[{"name":"Coastal Fisheries Programme","affiliation":"Pacific Community (SPC)"}],"production_statement":{"producers":[{"name":"Reef Fisheries Observatory","abbr":"","affiliation":"","role":"Technical assistance"},{"name":"National Department of Resources and Development","abbr":"","affiliation":"Government of the Federated States of Micronesia","role":"In-country assistance"},{"name":"Yap Department of Resources and Development","abbr":"","affiliation":"Government of the Federated States of Micronesia","role":"In-country assistance"},{"name":"Chuck Department of Marine Resources","abbr":"","affiliation":"Government of the Federated States of Micronesia","role":"In-country assistance"},{"name":"Kosrae Marine Resources Division","abbr":"","affiliation":"Government of the Federated States of Micronesia","role":"In-country assistance"},{"name":"Pohnpei Fisheries","abbr":"","affiliation":"Government of the Federated States of Micronesia","role":"In-country assistance"}],"funding_agencies":[{"name":"European Commission","abbr":"","role":"Funding"}]},"distribution_statement":{"contact":[{"name":"Coastal Fisheries Programme","affiliation":"Pacific Community (SPC)","email":"","uri":"https:\/\/coastfish.spc.int\/contact-us?lang=en"}]},"series_statement":{"series_name":"Socio-Economic\/Monitoring Survey [hh\/sems]","series_info":"In late 2003\/early 2004, the Pacific Community (SPC) conducted a survey of several Pacific regional fisheries authorities to identify the types of socioeconomic information needed to support reef fisheries management. In 2007, PROCFish\/C project conducted fieldwork in Cook Islands in four different sites."},"study_info":{"keywords":[{"keyword":"Socio-economics","vocab":"","uri":""},{"keyword":"Fisheries","vocab":"","uri":""},{"keyword":"Finfish","vocab":"","uri":""},{"keyword":"Invertebrates","vocab":"","uri":""},{"keyword":"Consumption","vocab":"","uri":""},{"keyword":"Subsistence","vocab":"","uri":""},{"keyword":"Gift","vocab":"","uri":""},{"keyword":"Sale","vocab":"","uri":""},{"keyword":"Fishing techniques","vocab":"","uri":""},{"keyword":"Habitat","vocab":"","uri":""}],"abstract":"The Pacific Regional Coastal Fisheries Development Programme (CoFish) conducted fieldwork in four locations in the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM) from April to May 2006. The Federated States of Micronesia is one of 17 Pacific Island countries and territories surveyed over a 5-6 year period by CoFish or its associated programme, PROCFish\/C (Pacific Regional Oceanic and Coastal Fisheries Development Programme, coastal component).\n\nThe aim of the survey work was to provide baseline information on the status of reef fisheries and to help fill the substantial information gap that hinders the effective management of reef fisheries.\n\nOther programme outputs include:\n\n- implementation of the first comprehensive multi-country comparative assessment of reef fisheries (finfish, invertebrates, and socioeconomic aspects) ever undertaken in the Pacific Islands region using identical methodologies at each site;\n- dissemination of country reports comprising a set of \"reef fisheries profiles\" for the sites in each country to provide information for coastal fisheries development and management planning;\n- development of a set of indicators (or reference points for fishery status) to provide guidance in the development of local and national reef fishery management plans and monitoring programmes; and\n- development of data and information management systems, including regional and national databases.\n\nSurvey work in the FSM covered three disciplines (finfish, invertebrate, and socioeconomic) at each site, with two teams of five programme scientists (one team working in Yap and the other in Chuuk), together with several local counterparts from the Chuuk Department of Marine Resources, the Yap State Government Department of Resources and Development, and one participant from each of the Pohnpei and Kosrae Fisheries Departments.\n\nThe fieldwork included capacity building for local counterparts through training in survey methodologies in all three disciplines, including data collection and data entry into the programme's database.\n\nIn the FSM, the four sites selected for the survey were Yyin and Riiken in Yap State, and Piis-Panewu and Romanum in Chuuk State.","coll_dates":[{"start":"2006-04-01","end":"2006-05-31","cycle":""}],"nation":[{"name":"Micronesia (Federated States of)","abbreviation":"FSM"}],"geog_coverage":"In the Federated States of Micronesia, the four sites selected for the survey were Yyin and Riiken in Yap State, and PiisPanewu and Romanum in Chuuk State.","analysis_unit":"Households","universe":"The survey covered de jure household members. All household members responding to the Finfishers and Invertebrate Fishers questionnaires were required to be 15 years of age or older and to be usual members of the surveyed household.","data_kind":"Sample survey data [ssd]","notes":"HOUSEHOLD\n\n- Household size and composition;\n- Ranked sources of household income and average household expenditure levels;\n- Household consumption patterns and sources of food;\n- Average number of fishers and fishing vessels per household.\n\nINDIVIDUAL\n\n- Educational attainment of adult household members;\n- Timing, frequency, and seasonality of fishing activities, including the habitats targeted by fishers;\n- Average catch volume and catch composition;\n- Fishing methods and techniques used;\n- Proportions of catch used for subsistence, gifts, sales, and preservation;\n- Methods used for preserving finfish and invertebrates;\n- Community fishing grounds and resource-use patterns;\n- Fisheries management rules and practices;\n- Major issues related to the use and management of marine resources;\n- Quantities marketed by species or species groups;\n- Quality and level of processing of marketed products;\n- Prices in local currency and US dollars;\n- Types of clients and markets served; and\n- Perceived quantitative and qualitative changes in fisheries marketing over time."},"method":{"data_collection":{"sampling_procedure":"The geographic scope of the socioeconomic survey at each site was determined by the size, characteristics, and use of the fishing grounds. The selection process was highly dependent on local marine tenure arrangements. For example, where fishing rights are community-owned, a fishing community includes all villages with access to a particular fishing ground. If fisheries activities are comparable across these villages, one or two villages may be selected as representative samples and surveyed. The results may then be extrapolated to all villages accessing the same fishing grounds under the same marine tenure system.\n\nMost households included in the survey were selected through simple random sampling, as were the finfish and invertebrate fishers associated with those households. In addition, key participants in one or more specific fisheries were selected for supplementary interviews. Random sampling was used to provide an average and representative picture of fisheries activities within each community, including non-fishing households, households engaged in finfish and\/or invertebrate fishing for subsistence purposes, and households involved in small-scale artisanal fishing.\n\nThis approach assumes that the selected communities are predominantly traditional, relatively small (approximately 100-300 households), and largely homogeneous from a socioeconomic perspective. Similarly, the gender composition and participation patterns observed in the survey are assumed to be representative of the wider community. Subject to adequate sample sizes (at least 25-30 percent of all households), harvest estimates reported by male and female fishers may therefore be extrapolated to assess the fisheries production and impacts of the community as a whole.","coll_mode":["Face-to-face [f2f]"],"research_instrument":"The questionnaires are designed to allow a minimum dataset to be developed for each site, enabling:\n\nthe community's dependency on marine resources to be characterised;\nassessment of the community's engagement in, and the possible impact of, finfish and invertebrate harvesting; and\ncomparison of socioeconomic information with data collected through PROCFish\/C resource surveys.\nThe questionnaires are divided into four main areas:\n\nHousehold Survey: incorporating demographics, selected socioeconomic parameters, and consumption patterns;\nSurvey of Fishers (finfish and invertebrate): incorporating data by habitat and\/or specific fishery;\nGeneral Questionnaire targeting key informants: the purpose of which is to assess the overall characteristics of the site's fisheries; and\nFinfish and Invertebrate Marketing Questionnaires: targeting agents, middlemen, or buyers\/sellers (shops and markets).\nIn addition to the questionnaires, two sets of size charts are provided to help assess the weight of fish and invertebrates caught and consumed. This is necessary because most village fishers do not use kilograms but local units of measurement (heaps, plastic bags, strings, baskets, etc.), which are difficult to translate into kilogram weights.\n\nData collection is performed using a standard set of questionnaires developed by PROCFish\/C's socioeconomic component, including a household survey (key socioeconomic parameters and consumption patterns), a finfish fisheries survey, an invertebrate fisheries survey, a finfish marketing survey, an invertebrate marketing survey, and a general information questionnaire for key informants. In addition, further observations and relevant details are noted and recorded in a non-standardized format.\n\nThe questionnaires are fully structured and closed-ended, although open-ended questions may be added on a case-by-case basis when required.","sources":[{"name":"","origin":"","characteristics":""}],"coll_situation":"If translation was required, each interview was conducted jointly by the leader of the project's socioeconomic team and the local counterpart. In cases where no translation was needed, the project's socioeconomist could work individually. Selected interviews could be conducted by trainees receiving advanced field training, but trainees were monitored by project staff in case clarification or support was needed.\n\nMost of the data were collected through face-to-face interviews. The names of respondents were recorded on each questionnaire to facilitate cross-identification of fishers and households during data collection and to ensure that each fisher interview was complemented by a household interview. Linking data from household and fishery surveys was essential to permit joint data analysis. However, all names were removed once data entry had been finalized, ensuring that the information provided by respondents remained anonymous.\n\nTeam members were expected to be familiar with the objectives of the survey, their role in it, and the survey's contribution to resource management. They were required to understand the relationship, importance, and content of the entire set of questionnaires to ensure that the data collected were relevant, reliable, and accurate. The tasks undertaken by each team member were to be clearly defined and agreed upon in advance. It was also important that survey team members were interested in meeting members of local communities, were patient in asking similar questions repeatedly, and were able to listen to and engage with local people through an open, understandable, and non-manipulative communication process.\n\nThe project utilized a \"snapshot approach\" that allocated 5-7 working days per site (with four sites per country). This timeframe generally allowed approximately 25 households, together with a corresponding number of associated finfish and invertebrate fishers, to be covered by the survey. The total number of finfish and invertebrate fishers interviewed also depended on the complexity of the fisheries practiced by a particular community, the degree to which both men and women were engaged in finfish and invertebrate fisheries, and the size of the target population. Data from finfish and invertebrate fisher interviews were grouped by habitat and fishery, respectively. Consequently, the project's time and budget constraints, together with the complexity of a site's fisheries, determined the level of data representation: the larger the population and the number of fishers, and the more diversified the finfish and invertebrate fisheries, the lower the level of representation that could be achieved.\n\nThe interviews were conducted jointly by the Pacific Community (SPC) Coastal Fisheries Programme and the Cook Islands Ministry of Marine Resources.\n\n*Negotiation*\n\nA survey could not begin or be implemented without the consent and cooperation of the target community or communities. It was advisable to identify in advance how to approach communities, keep them informed, and ensure their ownership of the data. One of the major responsibilities of the team leader was to approach the target communities at an early stage to inform them about the scope and objectives of the planned survey and the reasons for selecting the respective community or communities. The team leader was required to request their agreement to participate and, more importantly, gain their full support for and engagement in the exercise. Survey team members also needed to be aware of local customs and cultural protocols and to proceed accordingly.\n\nThe community needed to be fully informed of:\n\nthe reasons for and objectives of the survey;\nthe contribution required from the community;\nhow the data would be collected;\nhow the data would be used;\nwho would be responsible for data management; and\nthe form in which, and the timing with which, results and possible recommendations would be returned to the government authorities and the communities concerned.\n\n*Pilot Test*\n\nThe proposed methods, approaches, and questionnaires were based on tests carried out and experience gained within the framework of two long-term projects implemented by SPC's Reef Fishery Observatory.\n\nPilot testing of the methods, approach, and questionnaires was therefore not mandatory. It could, however, be undertaken to familiarize and train survey team members and to determine the most appropriate language and approach for engaging with the target community and conducting individual interviews.\n\nIt should be borne in mind that the questions provided in the questionnaires served as a guide to the data required. The sequence of questions was arranged in a logical order according to the information needs identified. The sequence and the way questions were ultimately formulated and asked could vary depending on the situation, the interviewer, and the respondent.","cleaning_operations":"A software programme (SEMCoS) has been developed in tandem with this manual to assist in automatically performing all necessary analyses and producing outputs from the data collected."}},"data_access":{"dataset_use":{"conf_dec":[{"txt":"The Pacific Data Hub - Microdata Library, is responsible for improving the accessibility and availability of datasets and promoting new ways of using and reusing data for current and future use. These datasets have been modified in such a way that the possibility of identifying individuals or households is minimised.\nThey are made available to individual researchers, universities and research institutions subject to a number of conditions known as Terms of Use. (See https:\/\/microdata.pacificdata.org\/index.php\/terms-of-use).","required":"yes","form_no":"","form_uri":""}],"cit_req":"\"Pacific Community's Coastal Fisheries Programme, Federated States of Micronesia PROCFish\/C - Socio-Economic survey 2006 (SE-PROCFISH 2006), Version 01 of the public-use dataset (2006), provided by the Microdata Library. https:\/\/microdata.pacificdata.org\/index.php\/home\"","conditions":"Public use file, accessible to all.","disclaimer":"The user of the data acknowledges that the original collector of the data, the authorized distributor of the data, and the relevant funding agency bear no responsibility for use of the data or for interpretations or inferences based upon such uses."}}},"schematype":"survey"}