Upload
lythien
View
217
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
A Case Analysis of the Customary Fishing Practices ofThe Palangri and Pukotero Fisherfolk in the Sulawesi Sea
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. Introduction
The Sulawesi Sea, also known as the Celebes, lies in the western Pacific Ocean, it is
bordered in the north by the Sulu archipelago and the island of Mindanao, the islands of
Sulawesi in the south and Borneo to the west. Due to its rich aquatic resources, the Sea has
become a rich fishing ground from which a complex combination of traditional and large-scale
fisheries flourish. Fisheries in the Sulawesi provide support to about 20 million people who live
around the area and have contributed significantly to the economies of the Philippines and
Indonesia (Palma, & Tsamenyi, 2008). Yet coastal communities have been dependent on the
Sulawesi ever since the invention and development of maritime technology. They have been
interacting and developing customary fishing practices, which predated the formation of
contemporary nation-states. The Agreement between the Government of the Republic of the
Philippines and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia Concerning the Delimitation of the
Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) Boundary was signed by Secretary of Foreign Affairs Albert F.
del Rosario and Dr. R.M. Marty M. Natalegawa, Indonesian Foreign Minister and was witnessed
by President Benigno S. Aquino III and President Yudhoyono (Official Gazette, 2014).
Nevertheless, fisherfolk from around the Sulawesi Sea have been continuously governed by their
own customs in their use of a common fishing ground.
Most of the small scale fisherfolks in the Sulawesi live in the coastal communities
surrounding it. There was a presupposition that coastal communities are gradually displaced due
to the rise of the large scale fishing industry. Large scale fishing threatens these coastal
communities and thus the latter resort to alternative source of income because most of the fishes
are now caught by the former.
However as the researchers gathered the data they’ve found out that these coastal
communities are not necessarily displaced by the rise of large scale fishing industry. Small scale
fishing only reaches about 500 meters from the shore while large scale fishing can reach more
than 500 meters. Large scale fishing catch most of their fishes in the high seas, they don’t fish
near the shoreline.
The rights of Filipino and Indonesian small scale fisherfolk are being threatened because
they are classified as small scale commercial fishing. This is because the international
regulations on commercial fishing require them to hire professionals and degree holders such as
nautical engineers, marine engineers, licenced seafarers, to be able to obtain a permit or license
as tuna fishing operators (Fisherfolk Resource Development Center, 2006). These strict
regulations deprive small scale fisherfolk of their right to fish in the Sulawesi, as the regulations
give advantage to the large scale fishing companies in the region. The international regulations
are also strictly implemented to avoid accidents and restrict small scale fisherfolk to venture into
the high seas.
Customary fishing practices may be challenged by the large scale fishing industry, but
there are instances that show the interdependent connections between the two. Customary fishing
practices play a vital role in the interaction of fisherfolk in the Sulawesi be they small scale
fishing vessels or large scale fishing vessels.
This study would be relevant to the ASEAN Economic Community, especially to the
local fisherfolk and the appropriate local Filipino authorities.
The study sought to record and analyse the customary fishing practices of the local
Filipino fisherfolk in the Sulawesi fishing grounds. It focused on determining the undefined
customs and practices of small scale fisherfolk in governing the Sulawesi Sea and aimed to give
a clearer picture of the customary fishing practices between the fisherfolk of the Sulawesi Sea.
Though the primary respondents are Filipino fisherfolk, this study shed light on the practices of
other nationalities particularly Indonesians. Consequently, the study covered the implications of
customary fishing practices occurring in both countries.
This study is relevant to the ASEAN Economic Community, in its pursuit of greater people
to people interaction within the region. This can be a starting point for the formulation of more
suitable agreements among ASEAN members in governing regional commons cognizant with
resource management, environmental protection and protection of human rights.
This study is also relevant to the local fisherfolks for it would help them understand the
implications of their customary fishing practices in the Sulawesi Sea, and help them in
understanding how their customary fishing practices could be a mechanism in governing its
resources.
Lastly, this study ultimately hoped to help the concerned Filipino authorities in creating
laws and agreements that would be beneficial to both small scale and large scale fisherfolk. This
study hopes to provide sufficient information about the customary fishing practices in the
Sulawesi Sea and how these customary practices should be taken into consideration when
drafting laws and agreements relevant to coastal resource management.
B. Statement of the Problem
This study’s goal was to record and analyse the customary fishing practices of the
fisherfolk in the Sulawesi Sea. It specifically answers the following questions:
1. What are the customary fishing practices of fisherfolks in the Sulawesi Sea?
2. How do these customs reconcile with the codified maritime laws and treaties between
Indonesia and the Philippines?
3. What are the implications of these customary fishing practices with the Maritime
Agreement of 2015 between the Philippines and Indonesia?
C. Methodology
The lack of writing on fishing and fishing practices in the Sulawesi Sea has led the
researchers to use some older references those sources were the most recent ones available with
information relevant to the study.
The research design chosen for the study follows the case analysis approach. The
researchers deem case analysis fitting since it could utilize a variety of methodologies and
provide detailed description of specific or rare cases. The main unit of analysis used by the
researchers will be fisherfolk who fish in the Sulawesi Sea. The group sought to identify and
analyze the fisherfolks’ customary fishing practices and identify these customary fishing
practices. The instrument utilized is the interview schedule. Aside from one-on-one interviews
the researchers also conducted informal group discussion. These interviews range from the
highly structured style, in which questions are determined before the interview, and hoped to
eventually lead to an open-ended, conversational format.
Respondents were gathered through non-probabilistic linear snowball sampling. The
procedure depended on the referrals of the initial respondents. Snowball sampling best fit the
data collection procedure due to its convenient and fluid process.
D. Theory
The researchers opted to use Anthony Giddens theory of Structuration, the theory says
that within a great many circumstances there is the structure, and there is the agent. The concept
of structure constitutes the rules and resources of a given situation. With the agent being the
actor within the circumstances created by the rules and resources of the structure. Between the
Structure and the Agent, there were nine elements, divided into three levels showing the
connection between the Structure and the Agent. These were the levels of interaction, modality
and the structural level.
The first level is comprised of three elements that are mostly confined to the purview of
the agent. Power, is the element that is most important to the agent. It is the agent’s ability to
affect surrounding circumstances. Communication is the means by which the agents make their
power clear, a communication of ability and intent. Sanction is the means by which actions of
those who are agents are rewarded or punished.
The level of Modality is comprised of modal elements; these are elements by which the
first level can affect the succeeding structural level and vice-versa. Interpretative Scheme is the
element where actions; such as those done through the previously mentioned element of
Communication, are interpreted through stock knowledge of the situation. Facility is the physical
and non-physical means by which the element of power can be exercised, such as machinery in
the physical case, and an agreement between companies in the non-physical case. Norm is set of
social nuances that are affected by the element of Sanction.
The third level is the Structural level. This level is comprised of elements that are
affected by the elements of the first level. However, each element can in turn affect its
corresponding element in the first level through the same modal elements in the second level.
The element of Domination speaks for itself, it is control over the rules and resources of the
structure, with it are the elements of Signification and Legitimation. Signification is the elements
following interpretative scheme, where the information has finally gained some symbolic value,
this symbolic value can in turn affect communication at the first level. Legitimation mirrors
sanction, it sanction borne of Domination, sanction approved by the structure, an action or norm
attains legitimation when it is made somewhat legitimate by the standards of the structure.
The concepts of structure and agent and the elements in-between were adequate for
explaining the role of the Sulawesi Sea, and its maritime resources, and the rules for harvesting
them as reason for the circumstances that the fisherfolk as the agents had to deal with in their line
of work. With all this, the structure and agent are not seen as separate entities, but rather as a
whole, with the structure affecting the agent, which in turn affects the structure.
These levels and the elements that comprise them were used in data analysis, with the
data from the respondents matched with the element it would be appropriately attributed to, the
themes from this were drawn from their place and connection to each other in the Structure-
Agent cycle.
E. Methodology
The lack of writing on fishing and fishing practices in the Sulawesi Sea has led the
researchers to use some older references those sources were the most recent ones available with
information relevant to the study.
The research design chosen for the study follows the case analysis approach. The
researchers deem case analysis fitting since it could utilize a variety of methodologies and
provide detailed description of specific or rare cases. The main unit of analysis used by the
researchers will be fisherfolk who fish in the Sulawesi Sea. The group sought to identify and
analyze the fisherfolks’ customary fishing practices and identify these customary fishing
practices. The instrument utilized is the interview schedule. Aside from one-on-one interviews
the researchers also conducted informal group discussion. These interviews range from the
highly structured style, in which questions are determined before the interview, and hoped to
eventually lead to an open-ended, conversational format.
Respondents were gathered through non-probabilistic linear snowball sampling. The
procedure depended on the referrals of the initial respondents. Snowball sampling best fit the
data collection procedure due to its convenient and fluid process.
The researchers conducted the data gathering on July 23, 2016. The researchers arrived at
Barangay Bawing at approximately 9 in the morning. Upon arriving, they communicated with
their guide to assist them. By 9:15, they arrived at the house of their first respondent. Before they
interviewed their respondents, they asked first if they were willing to be interviewed and assured
the respondent that they will honor confidentiality, privacy and anonymity. They interviewed the
first respondent for 15 minutes, after they interviewed the respondent, their guide had already
gone ahead and asked another friend to be the next respondent. They were passed on from one
respondent to another, walking from one house to another. When the suggested respondent was
not around they had to find another respondent. One of the respondents’ houses was near the
shoreline, after interviewing the said respondent, they took the opportunity to take pictures of the
boats and the fish cages nearby. Each interview lasted roughly 15 minutes. They finished their
last interview at around 5 in the afternoon, following the ethical standards set for researchers.
On October 23, 2016, the researchers gathered additional photos. They arrived at General
Santos City Fishport at around 7:00 in the morning. Initially, they were not allowed to enter due
to strict protocols, however, they talked their way through and they were allowed to enter at
around 7:30 in the morning. Since the researchers do not have boots with them, they can’t go any
further without boots. They were then instructed to rent the boots at the Resources Office. The
next procedure was to quarantine the boots they rented and after that they were directed to the
“Bagsakan.” Bagsakan is the drop-off point of the freshly caught fish. This is where the big
fishes are dropped like the Tuna. They saw how the tuna’s were unloaded from the boats, then
cleaned, chopped, packaged and then delivered. To taste the freshness quality of the tuna, the
fisherfolks cuts the tail part and then tries the raw meat of the tuna. The next place the researcher
visited was the docking area of the service boats. They snapped pictures of the service boats and
steel boats that were in the outrigger of some of the service boats. They were around the area for
about 10-15 minutes. Then they visited the Pokutero docking area where they snapped photos of
the different classification of boats like the light boats and ranger boats. They stayed there for 30
minutes.
The researchers asked for information where they could find a mother boat, they were
initially told that there were no available mother boats. They roamed around the fishport and
spotted one mother boat that was under repair. Luckily, the chief engineer was around. They
asked the chief engineer if they could board the mother boat and they were allowed, and was the
one who guided them around the mother boat. They were shown first at the starboard side and
then the portside. He showed the storage area, deck, helm, seaman’s quarters, and the mess hall.
The last portion of the boat they were toured was the engine room. At the time of their tour, only
one engine was working but the sound it generates was very loud. The researchers captured
photos at around 11:00 am since most of the activity in fishport happens early in the morning.
They left the fishport at around 11:30 am.
F. Summary of Findings
1. The Practices of the Palangri and Pukotero Fisherfolk of the Sulawesi Sea
The practices of the fisherfolk in the Sulawesi can be interpreted as practices revolving
around the scramble to capitalize on the present marine resources. This can be observed through
application of the data to the three levels of the structuration framework. It can be seen through
the level of interaction where the different means of fishing and their alternatives are detailed.
Through the level of modality, with the tools the fisherfolk have at their disposal, and the
interactions and rules that are set. And through the structural level, the power present in an
advantageous situation shown by imposing authority back onto the agent..
Beginning with the level of Interaction, the element of Power may be identified as the
means to capitalize on the presence of marine resources; that is, fishing power. The most obvious
means of capitalizing on the marine resources of the Sulawesi lie in the means and methods of
fishing. Over the course of the interview, the researchers have come to identify two groups of
respondents; namely the Palangri, and the Pukotero.
The Palangri utilize long line fishing, where they attach the bait to their lines. One The
line is then spread out. They wait, observing the stretched line, and upon movement in the lines
being spotted, they move towards that portion of the line.
Longline fishing puts to test the essence of patience for fisherfolk. They have to lay down
their lines and wait for hours, sometimes it may take a day before they can haul back their lines.
This fishing method is very effective in catching tuna, billfish and sharks, among others.
This method is also used in the Sulawesi Sea, most fisherfolks roam around the Sulawesi to lay
down their lines. Since the Sulawesi Sea is abundant in tuna, some fisherfolks use this technique.
Pukotero fisherfolk make use of floatation devices called payaw. The payaw is a Fish
Aggregating Device being used by the artisanal or small scale and industrial Filipino fishermen.
It is used mainly to attract free-schooling tuna and small pelagics (sardines, scad, mackerel, etc.).
One of the respondents describes the form of their payaws:
Aside from fishing there are also other means one can make money, such as smuggling.
The researchers inquired as to the existence of illegal commerce taking place between the
fisherfolk of Indonesia and the Philippines. Through the answers, the researchers inferred that at
one point, smuggling was indeed present. Items from Indonesia such as soap, cigarettes, utensils
and jewelleries were some of the products being smuggled to the Philippines. Filipino fisherfolk
back then, went to Indonesia to buy their products. Engaging in this kind of commerce had
eventually become quite lucrative, it was a sideline for the fisherfolk who were unable to fish
and had been considered an alternative. Since the signing of the agreement, the Indonesian
governments’ stricter policies have stopped the smuggling in the area.
One problem that continuously plagues the fisherfolk in the area is piracy. Some
respondents had encountered pirates, known colloquially as Tulis. This threat affects both the
Palangri and the Pukotero fisherfolk. Piracy can be considered as means by which resources can
be capitalized upon in the Sulawesi. These pirates, being a faction unattached and unaffiliated
with fisherfolk and merchants, raid and take what they need. This is not a legitimate means of
gaining income, but is an action that can be done.
One respondent described the wariness of his particular compatriots when he encountered
an unidentified group, the respondent stated that if possible, they would try to discern whether
the group was hostile or not, and restrain them if they were so.
The presence of the pirates as an entity to fear or deal with in the Sulawesi Sea
communicates the intent and meaning of their power, their ability to command authority over
their victims. This fear of the pirates forced the victims and would be victims to adapt, either
abandoning ship, or acting pre-emptively,
Though palangri fisherfolk do not remain in one area, the Palangri don’t have
predetermined fishing grounds and so are constantly moving, Some of them sailed as far as
Malaysia to look for suitable catch. It is obvious that they are free to choose where they sail in
search for fish, as long as it is within their capability. In dividing the fishing grounds among
Palangri fisherfolk, they practice the “first come first served” basis. Whoever puts down their
lines first, will occupy the area. The amount of fish caught and present in the area may determine
how the fisherfolk adapt. When there is a decrease in fish they will have to wait for another
season to fish and find other means of income. They can’t transfer to another area if it is owned
and occupied by others. Some respondents said that catching smaller fish in nearby shores are
also alternative ways of earning money. Some fisherfolk had wanted to move to another area but
they couldn’t because they needed to follow the contract they had with the companies.
Sometimes others even cross the borders of Indonesia just to take chances of catching fish. A
respondent told us about this, saying:
“Dira ra mi sa among pwesto. Muhulat ug season. Unsahay mu kawat-kawat ug sulod sa Indonesia, didto managat.” (We just stay at our area waiting for another season. Sometimes taking chances to get inside of Indonesia, so as to fish there.)
On the other side of the spectrum, Pukotero fisherfolk have predetermined fishing
grounds. Unlike the Palangri, they aren’t burdened with the constant need to search for viable
fishing grounds and so don’t have to move from one place to another just to secure their catch,
another respondent explained: “Butang nato na sa kani na area, butang nato 06126, kamo ra gyud
dira, wala gyud lain naa dira.” (Say for instance, in this area for example 06126, you’re the only
one there, there is no one else there but you.)
Here one can observe that the companies have already secured fishing grounds, dividing
them as needed between the fisherfolk under their employ. The same respondent also added:
“bahin na siya daan. Sa kompanya na na. Naa man nay posisyon. Makita na sa tanan.” (It is
already divided. The company owns it. It has a position. Everyone can see it.)
This division can be visually confirmed through the presence of payaw or buoys
representing the physical borders of their assigned fishing grounds, The buoys for the most part
have visual differences, and correspond with the ships GPS, forming a grid, thus everyone with
access to an appropriate GPS could see. These buoys are also owned by different companies,
and are a way of communicating the ownership and current use of the fishing ground.
The buoys are then guarded by their ranger boats, patrolling their area. Even at sea, they
encounter thieves, fisherfolk with bad intentions, and pirates. A respondent said: “Mamutol ug
payaw, manguha sa amoang area, manguha pud na silag payaw.” (They cut down our buoys,
they also get our area and get our buoys.) These means of communicating the fishing capability
are sanctioned both by the fishing company, and by a rule of respect practiced by and between
fisherfolk.
On the level of modality the element of Facility is shown through the fishing vessels and
equipment available to the fisherfolk. The mother boat is the largest ship in the fleet; and is the
lead ship. The mother boat is where the commander of the fleet known as the piyado is located. It
is the main storage and preservation area for the fish and carries the catch before it is transported
to the mainland. It is the most advanced ship in the fleet because of the navigational systems
which help it direct the fleet whenever fishing begins.
The service boat; is the second largest ship in the fleet. It is the boat primarily used to
catch and transport the fish. Smaller boats called steel are carried on the outriggers of the service
boats. Each steel boat is manned by a single person.
Service boats transport the catch from the storage area of the mother boat to the
mainland. In addition, it also serves the purpose of resupplying the mother boat. It also acts as an
emergency transport vehicle, ferrying casualties to medical facilities on land.
The light boat and ranger boat are technically the same kind of vessel, only separated into
both light and ranger classes based on assignment. The light boat is called such because it
provides light to the other boats at night time. It also serves as guard when assigned to the duty
of ranger boat.
Pieces of equipment are responsible in keeping track of the border. Examples being
Radar, a radar-capable compass, and the Global Positioning System or the GPS. Most of the
fisherfolk make use of this technology; it is reliable in identifying location and boundaries
The element of interpretative scheme is shown how the fisherfolk interact with one
another, Fisherfolk therefore formulate standards on how to perceive and interact with each other
based on their existing stock of knowledge. The approach of fisherfolk to their fellow fisherfolk
is not initially hostile. Approach and interaction is passive. Action would be taken if the situation
were to escalate. When asked how they interacted with and treated their fellow fisherfolk,
Indonesians in particular; one respondent stated: “Oo, mga Indonesian nihawa ra pud sila kay
amoa man to na area didto, nag respetohay lang gyud sila.” (Yes, the Indonesians left since it
was our area, they simply showed respect). Respect is observed among them and this rule has
been practiced for decades. However, due to the fact that some fisherfolk decide to go against the
rules, actions are undertaken in order to protect what is theirs. One respondent told us:
”Kung kanang mamutol na ug payaw, dira na namo badlungon. Naa man mi ranger naga
patrol, kung madakpan sila badlungon lang pud namo.” (If they attempted to cut the buoys, we
would try to reprimand them. Our ranger boats patrol the area, and if we catch them we would
simply reprimand them.)
Fisherfolk are cautious every time they’re out at sea. What they face for the most part are
fellow fisherfolk who may have the intention to tamper with the buoys. There is no violence
between them. If the situation does escalate then non-violent actions such as reprimanding are
undertaken.
Fishing out at sea means that fisherfolk have to deal with unexpected happenings. These
happenings if not handled properly may lead to injuries and at the worst may take one’s life..
One of the most unnerving situations for any fisherfolk is watching as the weather slowly
worsens. The common practice, done by the respondents in a scenario of bad weather is to go
back to the mother boat, remount the smaller boats and hide. Fisherfolk, most especially those
who are working for companies have undergone training in handling emergency cases at sea.
Their training includes first aid, and proper swimming techniques for use during emergency
cases. The training is mandatory and is a requirement before working in the company.
Communication in a time of emergency is dependent on co-operation. Here the
territoriality is temporarily set aside when faced with the possibility of injured crew members
and casualties. The respondents for the most part stated that despite the chance that the fisherfolk
in trouble may be of a different nationality and the possibility that the other party may not
reciprocate despite the aid rendered, they are perfectly willing to help any fisherfolk in danger.
This reflects the elements of sanction and norm. Concern and respect for fellow man counts as
normative practice. This in turn is connected to the element of sanction, as one respondent stated
that failure to help may be reported to their superiors.
With the Structural level is the element of Domination, the authority and control over the
rules and resources that make up the structure. In this case, it is the ability to hold authority both
over the rules and the resources in the Sulawesi Sea. Since the element of domination cannot be
separated from the other two elements of the structural level, the power over the resources in the
Sulawesi Sea are also manifested through the signification and legitimation.
Legitimation is embodied through the normative practices used when fishing, interacting
with other fisherfolk or reacting to unforeseen parties such as pirates. These norms are
sanctioned by the fishing companies and the fisherfolk. Following these rules and norms means
having ones fishing uninterrupted, violating these rules means a reprimand and a negative report
to the guilty party’s superiors. The fishing companies provide the pay. Being able to fish is
directly affected by whether or not one follows the rules of fishing. Obeying the rules is
difference between whether or not the fisherfolk would be able to make enough money.
Signification is reached through both the interaction of fisherfolk with one another. One
group of fisherfolk would interact with another group, and relying on what they already know
understand that the other group has claimed the area.
The practices of the fisherfolk in the Sulawesi Sea are not what the researchers initially
expected, for one, the presence of advanced equipment means that unlike the researchers
previous assumptions, the fisherfolk are well aware and capable of continuously monitoring their
position relative to the Philippine-Indonesian maritime border
The fisherfolk operate on the orders and demands of their companies, be it from
designated territory or by fishing grounds claimed by whosoever managed to lay claim to it first.
The Palangri in give the impression of always being on the lookout for viable fishing grounds,
while the Pukotero give the impression of always guarding against those who may disrupt their
fishing through theft. For many companies that are operating in the area, the various groups of
fisherfolk are in a scramble to capitalize on the marine resources of the Sulawesi Sea. This
scramble revolved around the projection of fishing capability. This capability and its application
revolved around a rule of respect and sanction by the authorities. The objective of this scramble
was to capitalize on the marine resources of the Sulawesi, gaining dominance over fishing
grounds, either claimed, or assigned. This dominance ensures continued operation of the agent
through a steady supply of fish to their employers
2. The Previous State of Affairs Between Fisherfolk in the Sulawesi Sea
The previous state of affairs between Filipino and Indonesian Fisherfolk was one where
the Philippine Fishing Industry was dominant, due to minimal contact between the Filipino and
Indonesian fisherfolk, company authority and a disparity in marine resource acquirement and
processing capability.
Through the first level of interaction, the presence of Filipino fisherfolk in Indonesian
waters, and the emphasis of the fishing companies on peacefully resolving problems can be seen
as a projection of fishing power. On the second level of modality there is the lack of
communication and the disparity in fishing capability between Filipino and Indonesian
fisherfolk. And on the Structural level the advantages in the level of interaction and modality
ensured the advantage of the Philippine fishing industry.
It has already been established that the ability to fish is the main form by which power is
shown in the Structure-Agent cycle of the Sulawesi Sea. Also mentioned is the practice of the
Palangri fisherfolk, who claim fishing grounds within their limit of range, and respect the claims
ofothers if the territory stumbled upon has already been taken.
Many Palangri fisherfolk have sailed as far as Indonesia, with one respondent saying that
he had fished in Bitung, under a company operating in its area. Many of these companies
operating in Indonesian territory have their main bases of operation elsewhere, such as General
Santos City in the case of the respondent.
The presence of Filipino fisherfolk in Indonesian waters is communication of fishing
ability, moreover Filipino fisherfolk already have access to more advanced equipment compared
ot their Indonesian counterparts.
This communication of fishing ability is sanctioned by the fishing companies. The
Filipino fisherfolk aren’t able to operate in Indonesian waters without company approval and are
paid to ensure that those in their employ act properly. The method of punishment is the same,
namely reprimand or disciplinary action from the superiors.
The companies were usually responsible for dealing with grievances between fisherfolk
that passed up along their chain of command. The emphasis on non-confrontational solutions to
potential incidents was useful because tension which would probably have made its way up the
company chain of command would be avoided. From this it can be seen that in the time before
the 2015 PH-IND MDA, the companies cooperated with each other in this scramble to capitalize
on the marine resources present in the area, and the fisher folk’s rule of respect and avoidance of
confrontation was a rule that avoided complications and prevented incidents between Indonesian
and Filipino fisherfolk.
There is a lack of communication between Filipino and Indonesian fisherfolk. This lack is
mainly due to a language barrier, however some fisherfolk are capable of communicating with
them. Of the responders who did mention contact with Indonesia fisherfolk, some mentioned
having Indonesia crewmembers, others had relatives who knew how to speak Indonesian
The researchers found out that the fisherfolk interviewed had no knowledge of the fishing
practices of the Indonesians, whether or not they might have been the same as theirs, or if they
were somewhat different. Any contact when possible is usually concluded with both sides doing
little, the rule of respect for claimed areas still applies, and the respondents interviewed mostly
replied that there was no difference in treatment between Indonesian and Filipino fisherfolk.
Indonesian fisherfolk were allowed to enter Philippine territory and Filipino fisherfolk were
allowed to fish in Indonesian waters.
Interaction between Filipino and Indonesian fisherfolk has not always been positive,
reports from the 1990’s mention Filipino fishing vessels displacing their smaller Indonesian
counterparts, usually taking their spots, where fish were most abundant.
The respondents asked said nothing of the sort happened in recent years, only
commenting that despite the size and wealth of marine resources in the Sulawesi Sea, the
Indonesian fisherfolk weren’t as capable in fishing. The communication of power, through the
presence of Filipino fisherfolk may be seen as an unfair disadvantage for the Indonesians. The
facilities and means to catch fish employed by the Filipinos are brought to bear by a fishing
industry much larger and sophisticated.
There have been instances where this disparity in capability has had complaints. Many
have argued that despite having most fish caught in Indonesian territory, those same fish were to
be processed in Philippine territory, specifically General Santos City.
In this the actions and activities of the fisherfolk, in making use of their fishing power are
sanctioned by the companies. The companies then begin to affect what would be seen as
appropriate for the situation. Much like the general practices of the fisherfolk in the Sulawesi, the
companies make use of the same sanctions and the norms still revolve around respecting fellow
fisherfolks territory.
Here, the level of modality can be summarized as first, with Interpretative scheme, such
as having little contact between Filipino and Indonesian fisherfolk, and the agreement amongst
the Filipinos on their advantage in Fishing techniques and ship size. Second, there are the
agreements between fishing companies, allowing for the Philippine fishing industry to extend its
capability to Indonesian waters. And last, Norm, with the rule of respect for territory keeping
both Filipino and Indonesian fisherfolk away from conflict.
The level of modality, combined with the level of interaction can be summarized as the
fishing capability of the Philippine fishing industry being carried out through the agreements
between the fishing companies and the subsequent policies and requirements that come after.
Fishing power is communicated through the presence of the fishing fleets in the fishing grounds.
This communication is interpreted in many ways, but can be seen as communicating a disparity
in equipment and fleet capability of the Indonesian fishing industry. Furthermore, this is
sanctioned by the fishing companies, who encourage having any potential incidents end by non-
confrontational means, leading to this communicated power and disparity becoming part of the
structure.
The structural level begins with the element of domination, wherein the fishing and fish
processing capability has led to the dominance of the Philippine fishing industry. This is
supported by the element of signification, wherein the stock knowledge in place, that of the
disparity in capability between the Philippine and Indonesian fishing industries has reached a
level of symbolic power, the Indonesians and the Filipinos are aware of the unequal capability.
The element of legitimation is shown when the enforced policy of non-confrontation, combined
with the disparity in capability has led to the dominance of the Filipino fisherfolk.
The power to fish when put into practice meant taking advantage of the disparity in
capability. There were reports in the 90’s of larger Filipino vessels displacing smaller Indonesian
ones, taking the catch that the smaller vessels would have caught. Such is an example of
domination, as structures of domination exercise power, through the more capable vessels; the
Filipino fisherfolk of the time took advantage of the size of their ships, taking an unfair amount
of fish which may have rightly belonged to the Indonesian vessels also in the area.
Simply put in the structural level, the Filipino fishing and fish processing industry is
dominant through the use of the various tools ready to project fishing power. The present
disparity, coupled with the lack of communication between fisherfolk, give the Filipino
fisherfolk more freedom as agents compared to their Indonesian counterparts.
The Filipino fisherfolk hold more capability as a result of this domination. The Filipino
fisherfolk did not intend to give the Indonesians a disadvantage, yet Filipino fisherfolk held
greater leeway and yielded bigger catches. The elements of structuration cast the data as a cycle
that upheld the domination of the Philippine fishing industry near the Sulawesi, as the companies
sanctioned the fishing within the Sulawesi Sea. The disparity in capabilities between Philippine
and Indonesian fishing companies, show the Philippine fishing industry holding an unfair
advantage in the scramble to capitalize on the marine resources..
Complaints about the disparity, when coupled with past reports of Philippine vessels
imposing themselves on spots occupied by Indonesian vessels, spots that were equally abundant
in fish, can be seen as unfair resource allocation and gathering perpetrated by Philippine fishing
companies.
The common practice when tension was present between fisherfolk was to pass it up to
the relevant authorities, followed by an attempt to diffuse the said tension. This combined with
the disparity in fishing and processing capability, and the perceived unfair allocation and
gathering of resources, leads the researchers to conclude that this state of affairs may have played
part in the eventual proposal, drafting and ratification of the 2015 PH-IND MDA.
3. The State of Affairs in the Sulawesi Sea after the Ratification of the 2015 Philippine-
Indonesian Maritime Delineation Agreement
The new state of affairs between Indonesian and Filipino fisherfolk in the Sulawesi Sea is
a state wherein the Filipino fisherfolk have adapted in the face of strict border protocols in lieu of
the 2015 Philippine-Indonesian Maritime delineation agreement. This is first observed from
application of the stricter Indonesian border protocols, in response to the 2015 Philippine-
Indonesian maritime delineation to the structure of domination, and how the subsequent border
protocols affected the Filipino fisherfolk, and second, in the adaptation of the Filipino fisherfolk
in response to the change in circumstance.
The conclusion shows that the previous state of affairs between Philippine and
Indonesian fisherfolk in the Sulawesi Sea is a state wherein the Filipino fisherfolk, and by
extension the Philippine fishing industry in the region carried an advantage over their Indonesian
equivalents. This advantage, rooted in a previous state of disparity a stated by previous reports,
coupled with protests of relevant authorities in Indonesia may have led to the 2015 PH-IND
MDA.
The manifestation of the element of domination would be stricter border protocols on the
part of the Indonesians, these border protocols are enforced by the Indonesian authorities, and
though standard border protocol might be envisioned as warning and processing of documents,
the data gleamed from the respondents puts forward the idea of a border enforcement force, one
respondent said: “Muabot ra man gani kag boundary dakpon naman ka karun.” (When you
reach the boundary, they [Indonesians] will move to arrest you immediately.)
These border protocols are structures that give the ones using them the power to dictate
what is to be perceived as appropriate both in physical and social action. In this case, when
taking the nine points, and the previous state of affairs between Indonesian and Filipino
fisherfolk into account, the Indonesian authorities, mindful of the maritime delineation
agreement used their power as agents to institute these border protocols, acting through their
naval capacity and by means of law at their disposal.
The institution of the border protocols falls under Signification and Legitimacy, namely
signification and legitimacy far above the de-facto state of affairs in the past years, where
resource allocation was coupled with emphasis on non-confrontational means to solve potential
problems, this structure of domination is now enforced by legal means, and by a presumably
militarized arm in the vessels patrolling the area.
By also embodying the elements and structures of Signification and Legitimation, it can
also be assumed here that the elements and structures of Interpretative scheme and norm are also
taken into account. The Filipino fisherfolk have at many times commented on the strictness and
quick response of the Indonesian authorities should the authorities be in the position to intercept.
This behavior continues even if the fisherfolk in question return to the Philippine side of the
boundary, often in pursuit, another respondent said this: “Indonesia mugukod diretso na basta
makit-an ka.” (Indonesians will immediately pursue you once they see you.)
The consequences that come after being caught by such authorities are as follows, the
destruction of the fishing vessel, and the imprisonment of the fisherfolk for months.
The previous range of fishing has been cut at the side of the Indonesians, resulting in
some practices being effectively halted or delayed, These border protocols, in their harsh
methods have no doubt stymied the fishing practices of the Palangri fisherfolk, The process of
interpretative scheme is seen, as the Filipino fisherfolk had adapted in reaction to this new
information. One respondent noted that there was a clear divide between what now belonged to
the Indonesians and what belonged to the Filipinos, the respondent said: “Wala na. Di pud mi
makaingon na hatagi mi ninyo dira. Managat sila diri makakuha sa ilaha na, amoa amo lang
gyud.” (Not anymore. We can’t ask them to give us anything. If they fish here that’s theirs, ours
is ours only.)
This does not mean that the possibility of the Filipino fisherfolk moving in said area is
gone for good, as another respondent mentioned occasionally entering past the boundary zone, if
only rarely. This area beyond has been noted by some of the respondents as being very abundant
in Tuna, though that same respondent said that it was illegal to cross over to the said area.
Through the border protocols and subsequent actions it becomes clear that through the
stock knowledge held in thought, the Filipino fisherfolk now understand that their actions are no
longer acceptable, both by physical consequence and by social and legal consequence.
Embodying the elements of Interpretative scheme and norm, as in reaction to this new
knowledge the common practice would be to either leave and search for fishing grounds in
places that the Indonesians had no power over, or to take chances and fish past the border,
leaving once alerted to the presence of Indonesian naval vessels.
One of the more obvious effects of the stricter border protocols is the decrease in
smuggling, as shown by the data in Chapter 2. Smuggling was prevalent when possible, products
from both the Philippines and Indonesia were sold in the other country, often at higher price, the
products on the Indonesian side ranged from soaps to jewelry and cigarettes, one respondent
said: “Sa unang panahon, naa gyud na. Kanang barter. Tanan gamit gikan gyud na didto mga
plato, sabon.” (There really is smuggling before, that barter. All things really came there like
plates and soaps.)
The introduction of the stricter protocols and the resulting punishment on offenders
seems to have made the point needed, and other respondents spoke of such smuggling not being
prevalent or even done anymore.
These actions and subsequent consequences are now endorsed by the fishing companies,
largely out of the fact that these protocols are upheld as law. This newfound power over the
ability of the Filipino fisherfolk to fish falls under the element of power. Agency at this point, for
the Indonesian authorities had become more than just being able to police their own boundaries,
but also hold power over the fishing capability of the Filipino fisherfolk.
The stricter border protocols and subsequent effect on the Filipino fisherfolk had led to
some companies ceasing operations. This does not mean that the situation of the Palangri was
completely hopeless and untenable, many of the Palangri fisherfolk have adapted and looked for
other means of income, some of them remained as Palangri but fished elsewhere.
In response to the lack of opportunity as Palangri fisherfolk some fisherfolk for the most
part fish in local waters, away from the deeper sea and closer to home. Other former Palangri
moved to becoming Pukotero fisherfolk, as the Pukotero fisherfolk have not been affected much
by the border protocols, as their means of fishing means that their areas aren’t anywhere close
enough for Indonesian forces to take any action of hostility.
This is one way in which the structures of power may be embodied, in the absence of the
means to exercise the ability to fish as they had done previously, via long line fishing; the
fisherfolk looked for employment elsewhere, not discarding the idea of fishing altogether.
Some have been compensated by the Philippine government in lieu of the new structure;
others had been compensated by the government transitioning from being Palangri to making use
of fish cages. This may be a positive development, for it means having a smaller chance of
running into the pirates usually feared by both Palangri and Pukotero.
The sudden change in fortunes for the fisherfolk in the Sulawesi came as a surprise for
those who were unfortunately in a state which the Indonesian authorities thought illegal, when
asked some said that they didn’t see this coming at first, with the sudden escalation of the
Indonesian authorities being the only warning, .
In the wake of this sudden change, one method of fishing became less prevalent, with
those who used to practice it searching for other means to make ends meet, leading them to
search for a way to bypass the new structure limitation, which they found via other means of
fishing, and other methods. The change in structure led to the eventual decline and discarding of
inadequate modes of fishing in the area.
When the new state of affairs came, the change of the previous structure, the options of
the fisherfolk affected began to dwindle, so the agents reacted, using their means of agency, their
ability to search for other viable means of employment. These means communicate their means
of power, their fishing power, some decided to transfer to an unaffected means of fishing power,
while others decided to fish elsewhere, leaving the fishing in the Sulawesi to other individuals.
In summary, when viewed through the three levels of the structuration framework, one
can first observe the change in the structure brought by the previous state of affairs in the
Sulawesi Sea, namely the implementation of the 2015 Philippine-Indonesian Maritime
Delineation Agreement and the following border protocols.
These protocols, in practice, prohibit any unauthorized access of Filipino vessels into
Indonesian waters, effectively cutting off the Indonesian portion of the Sulawesi Sea to the
Filipino vessels and companies. This cutting off had somewhat negative impact on the fishing
companies who could not cope with the change in situation, and led to many Palangri fisherfolk
losing their means of income. It led to the decline of the more illegal means of income in
smuggling undeclared goods. With that, the fisherfolks options are very limited; some ended up
with jobs in the mainland; others had turned to fishing in the local waters; some others had opted
to become Pukotero fisherfolk. This means of communication, while sanctioned, is not as
flexible in range as the previous state of affairs, but does not go against the new structure.