Analysis of natural and social dynamics of fishery production systems in Paraná, Brazil:...

Analysis of natural and social dynamics of fishery production systems in Parana,

Brazil: implications for management and sustainability

By J. M. Andriguetto-Filho1,3, R. Krul2,3 and S. Feitosa3

1Animal Science Department, Universidade Federal do Parana, Rua dos Funcionarios, Curitiba, PR, Brazil; 2Marine StudiesCenter, Universidade Federal do Parana, Curitiba, PR, Brazil; 3Environment and Development Graduate Programme, UniversidadeFederal do Parana, Curitiba, PR, Brazil

Summary

Sustainability and management issues are discussed for eightfishery production systems (FPS) in the state of Parana, Brazil,from an interdisciplinary perspective. FPS were defined after a

set of multidisciplinary classification criteria, in an attempt toconceive fishing activities as a new level of integration betweennatural and social systems. Systems were compared using the

Rapid Appraisal of Fisheries Status (RAPFISH) methodo-logy, with 48 scored attributes, grouped in five evaluationfields (ecological, economic, social, technological and politi-

cal). Systems were also analyzed for a subset of 14 attributesselected as sustainability indicators. All systems from Paranashowed a poor sustainability profile, yet for different reasons.

Two groups of systems proved consistent: traditional systems,and the motorized shrimp trawl systems on the coastal shelf.The traditional systems are historically ancient, employ littletechnology, show a large diversity of fishing practices, and

preserve traditional management. The second is a moderngroup of systems, with a gradient of technological intensifica-tion from motor pirogues or canoes to entrepreneurial

trawlers; these systems are market-oriented, intensive andecologically aggressive, but their fishermen have better livingconditions. The methodology showed a great potential for

offering interdisciplinary interpretations of fishery dynamics,especially in situations of scant information and severalsystems to compare. Yet, the analysis of sustainability provedstrongly affected by the choice of attributes, which necessarily

constitute a small, oversimplified fraction of reality. Manage-ment should seek a broader consideration of the complexity ofsocioeconomic and natural processes that govern fisheries in

order to recognize differences among systems and adequatelyaddress particular development issues and critical points.A viable way to do this could be the consideration of the

fishery system as a management unit, with greater participa-tion of stakeholders to better understand the specificities andparticular needs of the systems.

Introduction

A large, national-scale research effort was established in 2002,

aiming to explore sustainability and management issues inBrazilian fisheries from an interdisciplinary perspective.A general overview of the project, its concepts and method-

ology as well as results from its initial phase can be found inIsaac et al. (2006). The main presupposition of the project isthat failure in fishery management is partially due to limita-

tions in science, particularly those of conventional disciplinary

research (e.g. Longhurst, 2006; Nielsen and Holm, 2007). To acertain extent, such an approach has prevented a betterunderstanding and solution of management and development

problems, as it does not allow full consideration of thecomplex, multidimensional dynamics regulating fishery sys-tems that policies and regulations should address. Also, it does

not necessarily lead to the best recognition of systemsboundaries and, therefore, cannot address the differencesbetween them. In the case of Parana, after 40 years of

conventional management, the most pressing developmentissues still are the classic ones expected in developing countries:impoverished fishermen, lack of marketing and revenuealternatives, strong dependence on middlemen, changes in

catch composition, habitat degradation, and diminishingreturns (Andriguetto-Filho, 2002; Andriguetto-Filho et al.,2006).

As an alternative approach, the project attempted a novel,interdisciplinary methodology in order to study the interac-tions between social and natural processes, thereby addressing

the complexity of real development situations. As the firstcomponent of such an approach, the concept of fisheryproduction systems (FPS) is an attempt to conceive fishing

activities as a major interface or new level of integrationbetween natural and social systems, rather than the usualreductionist, technical point of view embodied in the word�fisheries� (Blanc-Pamard et al., 1992; Cormier-Salem, 1992;

Laloe et al., 1995). This enabled the recognition and descrip-tion of 118 fishery systems in seven Brazilian coastal states,among them Parana. After an initial, diagnostic phase, systems

were compared in the second year of the project throughmultidimensional scaling for 57 attributes, fifteen of whichwere later selected as indicators for exploring sustainability

issues. Sustainability is understood here as the ability of thesystem to reproduce itself and therefore exist into the future,even if with modifications. This exercise allowed a better

understanding of the heterogeneity and complexity of fisherysystems, which can support integrated policy and managementrecommendations. The aim of this paper is to describe andcompare the fishery systems of the state of Parana and test the

methodology in its ability to improve the understanding offactors influencing the systems and those relevant to theirsustainability and management.

The study area and its development context

The coastal zone of the state of Parana covers 6049 km2

between the Atlantic Ocean and the Serra do Mar hills and

J. Appl. Ichthyol. 25 (2009), 277–286� 2009 The AuthorsJournal compilation � 2009 Blackwell Verlag, BerlinISSN 0175–8659

Received: March 21, 2008Accepted: January 15, 2009

doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0426.2009.01273.x

U.S. Copyright Clearance Centre Code Statement: 0175–8659/2009/2503–0277$15.00/0

stretches for 107 km between the latitudes of 25�12¢S and25�58¢S (Fig. 1). Total population is 236 000 and an estimated

11 000 or more fishermen and their families inhabit more than60 villages or urban neighborhoods in six coastal municipal-ities (Andriguetto-Filho et al., 2006). The region shelters a

great variety of small-scale fishing practices with different gearsand target species, ranging from technologically rudimentary,subsistence forms to more sophisticated, market-orientedforms (Chaves et al., 2002; Andriguetto-Filho et al., 2006).

This paper deals only with the locally based fleet, but it shouldbe noted that vessels from neighboring states, particularlySanta Catarina, fish on the Parana coast (but seldom land their

catches), thereby competing for resources with local fishermen(see paper on Southern Brazil, elsewhere in this volume).Local vessels range from canoes without propulsion, which

are restricted to the bays, to 16-m, 16-ton, 150-HP woodenplank boats, operating on the shelf a few miles off the shore.These larger vessels, locally called barcos, are decked, equippedwith an ice bilge and can stay at sea for up to a month. Total

fleet size is estimated at about 900 motorized vessels, 70 ofwhich are barcos. The most common fishing practices are setand drift gillnetting for fish and shrimp as well as bottom

trawling for shrimp. In the bays, the so-called gerival ortarrafinha, a kind of beam trawl developed locally, is widelyused to capture juvenile white shrimp. This gear does not

require motor propulsion and can even be managed bychildren (Andriguetto-Filho, 2002). A number of other prac-tices have a more local importance, such as corrals, longlines

and the so-called irico, which is a melange of larvae of shrimp,

anchovy and other fish, captured by a seine net with a meshsize of a few millimeters and later salted and dried.

Total landings (quite underestimated) have oscillatedaround 1500 t ⁄ year and are comprised of more than 70species of fish and shellfish (Correa, 1987; Natividade et al.,

2006). The penaeids sea-bob shrimp (Xiphopenaeus kroyeri)and white shrimp (Litopenaeus schimitti) constitute the largestproportion of landings both in weight and revenue. Among thefish, Serranidae, Sciaenidae and Clupeidae are currently the

most important groups. All stocks targeted by Parana fisheriesare considered either fully or overexploited (Haimovici et al.,2006).

The origin and permanence of such a variety of practices canbe explained historically by both natural and social factors.Sandy beaches are the predominant feature along the entire

coast, which is interrupted by two estuaries: the Guaratubaand Paranagua bays (Fig. 1). The latter is a 601-km2 estuary-lagoon complex that reaches nearly 40 km into mainland. Thetwo estuaries are bordered by marshes and mangroves, and

exhibit strong gradients in their physical-chemical parameters(for a review on the environment and ecology of ParanaguaBay, see Lana et al., 2001). The continental shelf is broad and

presents low declivity. The bottom is predominantly sandy,with growing importance of reefs and rocky areas toward thesouth.

Fishery activities in this diversified environment have beendeveloped for about 300 years, initially for subsistence, withmarket importance beginning at least at the end of the 19th

century. This enabled the emergence of diverse traditional

Fig. 1. The coastal zone of the state ofParana, Brazil, showing localities andother features mentioned in the text

278 J. M. Andriguetto-Filho, R. Krul and S. Feitosa

fishing practices, originally in co-existence with agriculture andforest extractivism. A set of technical and social changes

operating differentially on the northern and southern portionsof the coast then led to the current diversity of fisheryproduction systems (Andriguetto-Filho, 2003).

Technological modernization began in the 1960s throughthe establishment of the port and roadway infrastructure. Inthe 1970s, there was a strong real estate expansion associatedto beach tourism and an aggressive government financing

policy for fishing vessels and engines. These processes weremore intense in, and in some cases restricted to, the central andsouthern coast of Parana, an area that also received at the

same time a large migratory contingent of fishermen from theneighboring state of Santa Catarina. These fishermen broughtwith them a more open mindset regarding technological

innovation and market economy than the traditional fishingpopulations in the state of Parana. Consequently, the urbansouthern coast is home to more technically advanced, market-oriented fishery systems. Contrarily, the northern coast is

home to rural populations of small farmers and fishermen inprecarious living conditions in isolated communities. Many ofthese communities are inaccessible by land and only recently

have received electricity and piped water services. In ruralareas, even in the south, fishermen abandoned at least 44villages during the 20th century, either in search of better living

conditions in town or due to land concentration processes.The historically adopted agroindustrial model of develop-

ment privileged the plateaus of the hinterland, what brought

two important consequences to fishery development andmanagement in Parana. Firstly, the coast is currently one ofthe poorest regions of the state, which makes fisheries animportant income alternative, particularly because most of it

continues to be an activity of free access. Moreover, significantforest areas have been preserved, particularly along thenorthern coast. The last remnants of the Brazilian Atlantic

Rainforest, one of the biodiversity hotspots of the world, are inthe same area where the poorest fishermen are found.Consequently, environmental and resource protection legisla-

tion has become more complex, enforcement has tightened,and conflicts regarding the use of natural resources wereintensified. For the fishermen, these conflicts also concernhunting, which supplements income and subsistence, as well as

the vegetal resources used in numerous manners in fisheryactivities (vessels, equipment) and at the household.

Materials and methods

The typology of the fishery production systems was obtained

from the sub-classification of the fleets through the successiveapplication of the following criteria: (i) fleet (type of vessel);(ii) practice or gear; (iii) resource exploited; (iv) environment

where exploitation occurs; (v) place of residence of fishermen;(vi) work relationships; (vii) income of fishermen; and (viii)degree of isolation from the community or location wherefishermen live. The data necessary to the classification were

obtained in fieldtrips to fishing communities as well as from anextensive bibliographic review summarized in Andriguetto-Filho et al. (2006). The last three criteria did not prove

necessary for the complete discrimination of the systems.The FPSs were compared and their performances were

investigated in terms of sustainability, applying a modified

version of the RAPFISH method (Pitcher et al., 1998; Pitcherand Preikshot, 2001). The first step consisted in assigningvalues for each FPS to 48 attributes in five evaluation fields:

ecological, social, technological, economic, and management(political) (Table 1). The attributes are categorical variables

with 3–6 classes each and were selected during a nationalworkshop gathering researchers from all states participating inthe project. Attributes with uniform values for all systems were

discarded in the state analysis. Table 1 lists the 48 attributeseffectively used from among the original 57 attributes. Thedetermination of the matrix of attribute values for the FPS ofParana was based on the literature, available databases and

statistics as well as the field experiences of the interdisciplinaryteam of researchers. This team was comprised of ten individ-uals from the fields of oceanography, biology, social science,

and economics. Furthermore, in order to fill in specific gaps,questionnaires and interviews were applied to fishermenrecognized as experts.

Also at the national workshop, two or three attributes fromeach evaluation field (those considered to be less ambiguous intheir relationships to sustainability) were selected as indicatorsfor exploring sustainability issues, 14 of which were retained

for Parana (Table 2). In this analysis, two fictitious FPSs withrespectively the best and worst values for each of the 14sustainability attributes were introduced as good and bad

extreme reference points. Following the methodology, datawere standardized and Multidimensional Scaling (MDS) wasapplied to the matrix of squared Euclidian distances. MDS

spatially distributes the systems such that the rank of thedistances is inversely proportional to the rank of the similar-ities (Clarke, 1993; Legendre and Legendre, 1998). The stress

value was used as a representativity measure for clustering.Values <0.20 were considered acceptable (Clarke andWarwick, 1994).Analyses were performed for each of the five evaluation

fields as well as for the set of sustainability indicators, totalingsix distinct results. Canonical correlation analyses were appliedto each set in the first two dimensions obtained in the MDS

analyses to assist in the interpretation of the results. Attributeswith correlations over 0.60 were used to explain the arrange-ment of the systems. In order to determine the status of each

fishery production system and assess the conditions ofsustainability, the averages of the sustainability indicatorsfrom each evaluation field (ecological, social, technological,economic, and management) were used to build kite diagrams,

which were later grouped according to their outcome shapes.As only eight fishery systems were determined for the state

of Parana, the analysis did not require the application of

multivariate statistical methods. Nonetheless, for comparisonsbetween states, as well as for critical assessment of themethodology, the same general protocol was followed, with

some modifications. The first necessary modification was theelimination of attributes with uniform values. As the methodrequires the total number of systems to be at least three times

the number of attributes, fictitious systems were createdfollowing Kruskal�s (1964) advice. This was performed sepa-rately for each evaluation field in order not to unnecessarilyraise the stress of the MDS analysis, which remained below

0.24 in all analyses. In order to simulate attribute values for thefictitious systems, discreet probability random numbers weregenerated within the amplitude observed for the eight real

systems. This precaution was necessary in order to generate

credible systems, since the original values had been attributedbased on a nationally defined scale for 118 systems. Thus, it

was possible to consider the values of the canonical correla-tions obtained from the complete set of systems (both real andfictitious). In the sustainability analysis, the good and bad

Sustainability analysis of fishery production systems, Parana, Brazil 279

systems received attribute values at the extreme limits of theoriginal scale on the national level, respecting Pitcher�s originalmethod.

Results

Fishery production systems of Parana

Eight fishery production systems were identified in the state ofParana (Table 3). The first two systems, Family trawlers and

Entrepreneurial trawlers, are characterized by the barco type ofvessel previously described. These systems are very similar,showing the highest technological level in the state as well as

strong insertion in the market. Processing after landing is alsodeveloped, including the mechanized shelling of shrimp,filleting, and freezing. The target species for both systems are

the white and sea-bob shrimps, captured on the inner shelfusing the tangones system, with two bottom otter trawls with

10–12 m of opening width. Occasionally, the vessels may beadapted for targeting fish using gillnets (generally bottomgillnets), especially during the shrimp closed season. Crews aregenerally composed of a skipper, a cook and one or two deck

hands. The systems are urban, formed by the migration offishermen from the state of Santa Catarina. They are based atfour locations in three cities: Valadares (city of Paranagua),

Pontal do Sul (Pontal do Parana), Picarras and Caieiras(Guaratuba), the latter two of which apparently concentratingthe family trawlers. These locations were chosen for exhibiting

sheltered harbors, as well as easy landing and provisioning.The two trawler systems are distinguished by the work

relationships criterion, as the choice of crew in the Family

trawlers is influenced by a more traditional mindset of familyand friendship, whereas the logic is impersonal in the entre-preneurial system, which is closer to the criteria of the labormarket. Other distinctions between these two systems are the

Table 1Ecological, social, technological, eco-nomic and management attributesused to characterize fishery systems ofthe state of Parana, and coefficients ofthe canonical correlation analysis bymultidimensional scaling (MDS)dimension

Evaluationfields Attributes

Canonical correlation

DIM 1 DIM 2

Social Professional indicators )0.07 0.21Work relationships )0.25 0.63Schooling )0.00 )0.54Health care and services )0.55 )0.18Social organization 0.49 0.19Transportation and road infrastructure )0.72 )0.28Place of residence )0.75 0.19Housing quality )0.56 0.20No. of fishermen 0.37 )0.08

Ecological Ecosystem vulnerability 0.77 0.21No. of target species )0.67 )0.05Duration of life cycle 0.55 )0.48Migration range 0.09 )0.08Variation in extension of distribution 0.40 )0.60Vulnerability at reproduction )0.46 )0.37Vulnerability at nursing or rearing grounds )0.82 0.23Discard level 0.65 0.53Exploitation status 0.12 0.55

Technological Selectivity of fishing gear 0.65 )0.11Duration of trip )0.62 )0.47Processing and conservation of catch )0.14 0.70Positioning and fish finding technology )0.67 0.20Evolution of fishing power )0.09 0.03Gear impacts on habitat )0.62 )0.10Propulsion power )0.37 )0.37On-board communication technology )0.39 0.66Changes in fishing effort )0.15 0.23

Economic Average price (1st selling) )0.37 )0.15Average production (kg ⁄ year by productionunit)

0.14 0.35

Added value 0.65 )0.12Per capita income )0.54 0.44Frequency of alternative income activities )0.01 )0.84Relative importance of other income activities )0.06 )0.57Gear cost 0.07 )0.33Rate of price change )0.56 )0.54Product destination )0.30 0.23Subsidies and public resources 0.62 )0.36Degree of dependency upon middlemen )0.55 )0.27

Management Access limitation )0.52 0.02Reference points 0.41 )0.28Traditional management measures 0.75 0.30Governmental management measures )0.69 )0.31Stakeholders identified and considered inmanagement

)0.73 )0.15

Existence of conflicts 0.26 )0.47Complete, reliable statistics )0.21 )0.36Support by research )0.61 0.22Assessment of management measures )0.23 0.76Enforcement efficiency )0.34 0.49


slightly smaller size of the vessels in the family system and aslight decline in this fleet in recent years, while the entrepre-neurial system shows signs of increasing its area of operationand technological level, with some boats traveling to as far as

Uruguay or Rio de Janeiro. There are also importanteconomic differences between the two systems, principallyregarding entrepreneurial efficiency and debt levels.

The motorized canoe system is found along the entireoceanfront of Parana in both rural and urban locations.Fishing practices are mostly restricted to set and drift

gillnetting for fish and shrimp and to shrimp bottom trawling.The fishermen work either alone or in teams of two. The fleet iscomposed of wooden or fiberglass canoes, considerably larger

than those found in the interior of the bays, some reaching asmuch as eight meters in length. Canoes can be pulled to thebeach and do not need a port shelter. They are also the besttype of vessel for getting past the surf zone, which explains

their distribution along all the beaches. This system is the mostdirected at direct sales to consumers and appears to attaineconomic efficiency, even on a relatively small scale of

operation. The traditional logics of camaraderie, friendshipand family ties dominate the work relationships.The fishery systems of the Paranagua and Guaratuba bays

are also similar. They are traditional, historically ancient,predominantly rural and have no influence of the SantaCatarina immigration. Both are characterized by a greatvariety of fishing practices, particularly in the Paranagua Bay.

Most widespread are set and drift gillnetting for fish and thegerival or tarrafinha practices targeting the white shrimp. Onecan also find longlines as well as a variety of seines and traps.

Oysters and crabs are also exploited. Some practices, such ascorrals and irico are exclusive to Paranagua. The vessel ofchoice is the canoe, usually moved by oars. Many villages are

remote and inaccessible by land. The market is again stronglyintermediated and restricted, especially in Paranagua. Subsis-tence agriculture and forest extractivism are particularly

important in these systems. The systems were separated herebecause the different geographic location determined differ-ences in diverse attributes of the social, technological, andeconomic evaluation fields.

As in the previous case, the �plank boats� systems aretechnically similar, but exhibit socioeconomic differencesbased on geographic location. The name �plank boat� aggre-

gates different types of motor boats – botes, bateiras, baleeiras,which are made of wooden planks, with no deck or refriger-

ated bilge. These boats trawl shrimp and also practice fishgillnetting on the inner shelf. They are operated by one or twomen. The Guaratuba system to the south is situated in the

same urban areas as the barco systems and has received theinfluence of Santa Catarina immigration. Botes are the choiceboats in this system, which offers various commercializationalternatives. The Paranagua system is situated in urban areas

as well as isolated villages, where commercialization isrestricted. The most common type of vessel in these villagesis the baleeira.

Beach seine is a traditional fishery in Parana, practiced bylongstanding fishermen-farmers. A seine net is pulled from thebeach, employing, not long ago, nets hundreds of meters long,

deployed from row canoes and pulled by up to 60 people in thecase of the largest nets targeting mullet (Mugil spp) in theaustral winter (May and June). In the summer, the target is avariety of coastal fish, especially the Sciaenidae, such as the

King Weakfish Macrodon ancylodon and the WhitemouthCroaker Micropogonias furnieri. Historically, this system alsoincluded line fishing for Serra Spanish Mackerel Scomberom-

orus brasiliensis and Smooth Weakfish Cynoscion leiarchus, butsuch practices are currently abandoned. This system isdisappearing as a consequence of the socioeconomic impact

of urbanization, tourism and the advent of motorized fishingpractices. Currently, only a few fishermen practice beachseining, with much smaller nets in comparison to the original

ones.

RAPFISH Analysis

The eight Parana systems were distributed similarly in all themultidimensional scaling diagrams, with the exception of thesocial field (Fig. 2). The shrimp trawling systems (trawlers,

plank boats and canoes) on the shelf were generally clusteredtogether, while the beach seining system (ARRAS) was eithergrouped with the bay systems in another quadrant, or isolated

in opposition, with the bay systems in an intermediateposition.In the social field, the variables that best explained the

dispersion of the systems on the horizontal axis according to

the canonical correlation analysis were those associated tohousing, access to health services and transportation. Thedistribution of the systems, therefore, corresponds to a urban-

rural gradient, with more urban systems on the left and theParanagua Bay system, which presents a number of isolatedcommunities with no land access, on the extreme right. This

explains the association, only in this field, of the trawlerssystems with beach seining, as that activity is also urban andincome from sources other than fishing allows the fishermen to

have a better housing quality.In the ecological field, all shrimp trawling systems are closely

grouped, as expected due to the characteristics of thesefisheries: multi-specific, targeting species with short life cycles,

and high levels of discard and fishing effort in the study area.At the other extreme, is beach seining with an ever reducedspatial range and exploitation level. It is also a selective fishery,

tending to exploit species with longer life cycles. The Baysystems are in an intermediate position due to the intenseexploitation of a large variety of resources in a rearing

environment par excellence.In the technological field, the systems are positioned

according to the indicated technological gradient. The distant

Table 2Selected sustainability attributes of the fishery production systems ofthe state of Parana, and associated canonical correlation coefficientsfor the first two MDS dimensions

Attributes

Canonical correlation

DIM 1 DIM 2

Schooling 0.44 )0.63Social organization 0.76 )0.27No. of fishermen 0.36 )0.07Discard level 0.45 0.29Exploitation status 0.45 )0.28Selectivity of fishing gear 0.42 0.09Evolution of fishing power 0.23 )0.46Changes in fishing effort 0.20 )0.40Per capita income 0.08 )0.42Subsidies and public resources 0.28 0.27Degree of dependence upon middlemen 0.49 0.37Traditional management measures 0.42 0.50Existence of conflicts 0.46 0.23Assessment of management measures 0.38 )0.19


Table

3Fisheryproductionsystem

s(FPS)ofParana(Brazil)andtheirclassificationcriteria.Thecodeidentifies

theFPSonthemultidim

ensionalscaling(M

DS)diagrams.Incomeclassificationiscomparative,after

Borges

etal.(2006),andapplies

only

toParana

Code

FPSname

Fleet

Gearandfishing

practices

Resources

Fishingground

Place

ofresidence

offishermen

Work

relationships

Income

BarcF

Familytrawlers

Barcosordecked

trawlers,with

icebilgeand

crew

quarters

Shrimptrawling.

Eventuallyset

fish

gillnetting

Whiteand

sea-bobshrimp,

Sciaenidae,

sharks

Inner

continental

shelf

Paranagua,Pontaldo

ParanaandGuaratuba

Family-owned

andoperated

High

BarcE

Entrepreneurial

trawlers

Entrepreneurial

Canoa

Motorcanoes

Motorcanoes

withwooden

or

fiberglass

hulls

Shrimptrawling,

setanddrift

gillnetting

Sameasabove,

butusually

more

diversified

interm

soffish

species

Inner

continental

shelf

Paranagua,Pontaldo

Parana,Guaratuba,

Guaraquecabaand

Matinhos

Family-owned

andoperated

Middle

BGtb

Guaratubabay

fisheries

Row,sailor

motorcanoes

(pirogues).

Also,outboards

withaluminum

hulls

Various,

small-scale:

gerival,seining,

setgillnet,

longline

Whiteshrimp,

swim

mingcrab,

mangrovecrab,

mollusks,

variousfish

species

Guaratubabay

estuary

Guaratuba

Family-owned

andoperated

Low

BPgua

Paranaguabay

fisheries

Various,

small-scale:

sameasabove,

plusirico,and

corrals

Paranaguabay

estuary

Paranagua,Pontaldo

Parana,

Guaraquecabaand

Antonina

ETGtb

Guaratuba-based

plankboats

Variouskindsof

wooden

plank

boats

(botes,

bateiras,

baleeiras)

Shrimptrawling,

gillnetting,and

eventuallydrift

netting

Sameasin

the

motorcanoes

system

Continental

shelf

Guaratuba

Family-owned

andoperated

Middle

ETPgu

Paranagua-based

plankboats

Paranagua,Pontaldo

ParanaandGuaraquecaba

Arras

Beach

seine

Canoes

Beach

seine

Mullet

inwinter,

variouscoastal

fish

speciesin

summer

Beach

PontaldoParana,

Guaraquecabaand

Guaratuba

Family-owned

andoperated,

partnership

Low


position in the vertical dimension of the canoe system was dueto the attribute �processing and conservation of catch�, asfishermen in this system generally sell the product directly to

the consumer, often cleaned and frozen.In the economic field, the trawl systems once again are found

in the quadrant opposite the technically simpler systems (beach

seine and the two bay systems). The later are less inserted intothe market and financial system, typically selling the product innatura at low prices. There are two important differences

within the last group: while fishermen in Paranagua Bay arestrongly dependent upon middlemen and have unexpressiveincome alternatives, those in Guaratuba Bay often manage to

sell the catch directly to the consumer and have more incomealternatives other than fishing. In the other group, the canoesystem stands out for its better performance regarding price,due to the direct sale of the product with aggregate value.

In the political or management field, the beach seine system iscompletely excluded from formal management, as it preservesdiverse traditional measures. The bay systems still present

some traditional management rules, but there is no limitationof access or evaluation of the management system. Research isinsufficient for these three systems. The shrimp trawl systems

have the most intensive and sophisticated level of formalmanagement found in Brazil, with dedicated research, closedseasons, vessel licensing and management evaluation processesas well as the involvement of the stakeholders in management.

The sustainability analysis reveals a poor profile for allsystems, which are grouped near the bad end of the distribu-tion (the good end is not shown in Fig. 2, since it would lie far

to the right in the same scale). Once again, the shrimp trawl

group is separated from the three less technologically advancedsystems. The later are distinguished by the preservation oftraditional management measures, while participation in

community or fishermen associations is common among thefishermen of the bay systems.In Fig. 3, the systems are basically ordered from the most

(top) to the least (bottom) technologically advanced and arecompared through kite diagrams for sustainability indicators.The barco and beach seine systems exhibited the least

sustainable conditions. The slightly worse profile of the familybarco system is due to the reduction in the number offishermen in recent years because of economic hardship. The

same is true for the beach seine system, which may bedisappearing. The other motorized shrimp trawl systems havean intermediate profile, mainly due to the higher values for theattributes schooling and degree of social organization. The

score in the technological field is somewhat better than that ofthe barcos, as these systems have less fishing power. In the caseof the canoes, the lower discard level and more selective fishing

practices led to better scores in the ecological and technologi-cal evaluation fields.The bay systems presented the best profile regarding

sustainability due to their technological characteristics, lessaggressive to the resources, and due to the level of socialorganization, which improves the social evaluation field. InGuaratuba Bay, the lower dependence upon middlemen

increased the economic score. Nonetheless, the two baysystems have fishermen with the lowest income and, in fact,their populations have one of the poorest living conditions in

the state.

Fig. 2. Two-dimensional RAPFISHplots of the multidimensional scaling(MDS) ordination of Parana fisheryproduction systems. Systems are iden-tified by their codes as given inTable 3. On the Sustainability analysispanel, the �good system� extreme mar-ker would be way out the plot to theright


In summary, two groups of systems proved consistent in thestate of Parana: the motorized shrimp trawl systems on thecoastal shelf (barcos, plank boats, and canoes) and traditional

systems (bay and beach seine systems). The first group ishistorically modern and more technologically advanced – witha gradient from canoes to entrepreneurial barcos. These

systems are inserted in the market, intensive, ecologicallyaggressive, and their fishermen have better living conditions.The traditional systems are much older and utilize little

technology. Fish are the most important resource, but there isa large variety of resources and fishing practices. Shrimpcatches are performed with gerival.

Discussion

Scientists and managers generally fail to recognize different

fishing systems for the state of Parana. Parana fisheries havebeen considered a homogeneous whole and labeled �artisanal�because of their small scale in the Brazilian context, with a boat

capacity below the official limit of 20 t. Such label is masking agreat deal of heterogeneity and complexity. By current defini-tions (e.g. Caddy and Griffiths, 1995), the larger Parana fishingsystems could be considered industrial or at least represent a

transition stage. The entrepreneurial character of the opera-tions and the level of technology definitely grant them

industrial status, notwithstanding the rather small capacity ofthe vessels. This misconception has added to the difficulty ofmanagement in considering complexity and therefore in ade-

quately addressing development issues specific to each system.Some more recent, interdisciplinary studies have tried to

overcome this misconception. Andriguetto-Filho (2002), e.g.

identified five fishery production systems sensu Corlay (1995)in the state of Parana, well-associated to the eight systemsidentified in the present study (for a description of the original

systems, see Borges et al., 2006). The beach seine system wassingled out in both studies. The bay system and the trawlersystem in the previous study are each split in two in the presentstudy, yielding, respectively, the Paranagua bay and Guara-

tuba bay systems, and the family and entrepreneurial trawlerssystems. The three remaining systems of the present study(canoes and plank boats) are reconfigurations of two systems

from the previous study.For research and management purposes, the greater dis-

crimination of systems in the present study does not appear to

add to the previous study, but the strong convergence ofresults suggests that the method used here is a rapid andconvenient form for recognizing FPSs, especially when several

systems are involved.The distribution of the systems in the MDS diagrams, in

which beach seine and barcos score at opposite extremes,

Fig. 3. Kite diagrams comparing sus-tainability performance of Paranafishery production systems in the fivedimensions analyzed. Kite axes repre-sentascorebetween0% = �badsystem�(center of kite) and 100% = �goodsystem�


reflects the two large dynamics of fisheries recognized in theliterature for the coast of Parana (Diegues, 1988; Andriguetto-

Filho, 2003): on one side, the capitalist entrepreneurs (themore productive �modernity�); and on the other side, thedeclining traditional modes of production with less technology

and capital, making systems less competitive or even non-competitive in the market. The attribute analysis allowed tobetter understand the differences between the two barcosystems: different cultural processes appear to lead to differ-

ences in economic performance even within the same physicalspace as well as very similar situations regarding ecological,technical and political evaluation fields. The analysis also

revealed that the canoe system appears to be a case ofreasonable social success, in which the small-scale activity andmoderate technological level demonstrate the viability of

production in the current market conditions.The team discussion on establishing the attributes of the

matrix was a fertile process towards the integration ofknowledge. The results suggest that, with low effort, the

methodology has a great potential for offering interdisciplinaryinterpretations on fishery dynamics, especially in situations ofscant information and ⁄ or a large number of systems or

fisheries to compare. The consistency of the results from thepolitical evaluation field with the other evaluation fieldsworked as a test for corroborating this appraisal, as this

aspect had not been considered in previous works (Andrigu-etto-Filho, 2002, 2003). It is important to note, however, thatthe risk of tautological interpretations is always present with

this type of methodology, and it is directly proportional to theamount of existing information for the integrated comprehen-sion of the systems.The analysis of sustainability proved meaningless and

strongly affected by the choice of attributes. The objective ofthis analysis was to gain a better understanding of factors andprocesses associated to the sustainability of a system that could

be the target of management actions. This did not occur in thecase of Parana. The finding that all the systems were groupednear the bad extreme only reflects the existing knowledge

regarding the risks that all systems present to their ownsurvival, which in turn are a particular case of the generalpredicament experienced by fisheries worldwide. The explica-tive attributes failed to contribute towards an understanding of

the development problems of the systems, as they constitute asmall, oversimplifying fraction of reality, even an artifact ofthe method. Also, the kite diagrams seem to be the product of

the choice of attributes and failed to offer new insights,particularly in the form of trade-offs among evaluation fields.No clear pattern emerges opposing a systematically good

performance in one field against a bad performance in others.The most �sustainable� position of the bay systems is partic-ularly dubious, even if they are only the best among the worst,

for they contain extremely poor human populations incapableof managing or better exploiting an environment that issuffering increasing impacts from human activities other thanfishing.

It is possible to learn some lessons regarding managementfrom this study. Firstly, the conventional approach employedin Brazil of a (supposed) protection of resources and economic

activity through technical intervention is both simplistic andinsufficient. Management should seek a broader considerationof the complexity of socioeconomic and natural processes that

govern the performance of fisheries. Secondly, the fisherysystems, as conceived here, should be used as managementunits. Finally, each system has its own specificities and critical

points that should be the focus of management. Particularly inthe case of the barcos or trawler systems, it is evident that the

same set of conventional management measures (licensing,closed seasons, spatial restrictions) and of equipment financinghas different effects on the same fleet as a result of social

characteristics. At the very least, the extension and educationactivities on the part of the government or managementagencies should be differentially directed.A new conception of management based on these lessons

obviously poses challenges to those in charge, but could befacilitated if used together with co-management and adaptivemanagement. The greater participation of stakeholders in

management would greatly facilitate the understanding of thespecificities and particular needs of the systems. Furthermore,the dynamic feedback mechanisms involved in adaptive

management would also serve for the continual improvementof the recognition of systems and their functioning, consider-ing that systems overlap and are not isolated, and that reality,and its understanding, changes continually.

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the Brazilian National Councilfor Scientific and Technologic Development (CNPq) of theMinistry for Science and Technology of Brazil (Project

�RECOS� Nr. 620065 ⁄ 01-0 ⁄ Programa Institutos doMilenio ⁄ PADCT ⁄ CNPq).

References

Andriguetto-Filho, J. M., 2002: Sistemas tecnicos de pesca no litoraldo Parana: caracterizacao e tipificacao. In: Desenvolvimento eMeio Ambiente – em busca da interdisciplinaridade. C. Raynaut,M. Zanoni, P. C. Lana, D. Floriani, A. D. D. Ferreira and J. M.Andriguetto-Filho (Eds). Editora da UFPR, Curitiba, Brazil,pp. 213–233.

Andriguetto-Filho, J. M., 2003: Technical change and differentiationof small-scale fisheries production systems in the coast of Parana,Brazil. Desenvolvimento e Meio Ambiente, 8, 43–58.

Andriguetto-Filho, J. M.; Chaves, P. T.; Santos, C.; Liberati, S. A.,2006: Diagnostico da pesca no litoral do estado do Parana. In:A pesca marinha e estuarina do Brasil no inıcio do seculo XXI:recursos, tecnologias, aspectos socioeconomicos e institucionais.V. J. Isaac, A. S. Martins, M. Haimovici, J. M. Andriguetto-Filho(Eds). Universidade Federal do Para, Belem, Brazil, pp. 117–140.

Blanc-Pamard, C.; Deffontaines, J.-P.; Friedberg, C., 1992: Techniqueset pratiques: a la jonction du naturel et du social. In: Sciences de lanature, sciences de la societe. M. Jollivet (Ed.). CNRS Editions,Paris, 590 p.

Borges, L. M. M.; Maulin, G. C.; Andriguetto-Filho, J. M., 2006:Analysis of income sources of fishers� families on the coast of thestate of Parana, Brazil. J. Coastal Res. SI39, 1268–1272.

Caddy, J. F.; Griffiths, R. C., 1995: Living marine resources and theirsustainable development: some environmental and institutionalperspectives. FAO Fish. Tech. Pap. 353, 167.

Chaves, P. T.; Pichler, H.; Robert, M., 2002: Biological, technical andsocioeconomic aspects of the fishing activity in a Brazilianestuary. J. Fish Biol. 61(Suppl. A), 52–59.

Clarke, K. R., 1993: Non-parametric multivariate analyses of changesin community structure. Aust. J. Ecol. 18, 117–143.

Clarke, K. R.; Warwick, R. M., 1994: Change in marine communities:an approach to statistical analysis and interpretation. PlymouthMarine Laboratory, Plymouth, UK, 144 p.

Corlay, J. P., 1995: Le concept d�espace halieutique: reflexions degeographe sur les peches maritimes a partir du cas danois. In:Questions sur la dynamique de l�exploitation halieutique.F. Laloe, H. Rey and J.-L. Durand (Eds). ORSTOM Editions,Collection Colloques et Seminaires, Paris, pp. 125–140.

Cormier-Salem, M.-C., 1992: Gestion et evolution des espaces aqua-tiques: la Casamance, Collection Etudes et Theses. Editions del�ORSTOM, Paris, 583 p.


Correa, M. F. M., 1987: Ictiofauna da Baıa de Paranagua eAdjacencias (Litoral do Estado do Parana – Brasil). Levanta-mento e Produtividade. Master thesis. Universidade Federal doParana, Curitiba, Brazil, 396 p.

Diegues, A. C. S., 1988: Mitos e realidades sobre pescadoresartesanais. Programa de Pesquisa e Conservacao de AreasUmidas no Brasil, Serie Trabalhos e Estudos, 11 p.

Haimovici, M.; Rossi-Wongtschowski, C. L. D. B.; Cergole, M. C.;Madureira, L. S.; Bernardes, R. A.; Avila-da-Silva, A. O., 2006:Recursos pesqueiros da regiao Sudeste-Sul. In: Programa REVI-ZEE: Avaliacao do Potencial Sustentavel de Recursos Vivos daZona Economica Exclusiva: Relatorio Executivo, Capıtulo 6.Ministerio do Meio Ambiente, Brasılia, Brazil, pp. 207–242.

Isaac, V. J.; Martins, A. S.; Haimovici, M.; Andriguetto-Filho, J. M.,2006: A pesca marinha e estuarina do Brasil no seculo XXI:recursos, tecnologias, aspectos socioeconomicos e institucionais.Editora Universitaria da UFPA, Belem, 186 p.

Kruskal, J. B., 1964: Nonmetric multidimensional scaling: a numericalmethod. Psychometrika 29, 115–129.

Laloe, F.; Rey, H.; Durand, J.-L., 1995: Questions sur la dynamique del�exploitation halieutique. Avant-propos. ORSTOM Editions,Collection Colloques et Seminaires, Paris, pp. 15–24.

Lana, P. C.; Marone, E.; Lopes, R. M.; Machado, E., 2001: Thesubtropical estuarine complex of Paranagua Bay, Brazil. In:Coastal marine ecosystems of Latin America. U. Seeliger andB. Kjerfre (Eds). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 131–145.

Legendre, P.; Legendre, L., 1998: Numerical ecology. Elsevier,Amsterdam, ND, 853 p.

Longhurst, A., 2006: The sustainability myth. Fish. Res. 81, 107–112.Natividade, C. D.; Pereira, M. J. C. F.; Andriguetto-Filho, J. M., 2006:

Small-scale fishing landings on the coast of the state of Parana,Brazil, from 1975 to 2000, with emphasis on shrimp data.J. Coastal Res. SI39, 1273–1276.

Nielsen, K. N.; Holm, P., 2007: A brief catalogue of failures: framingevaluation and learning in fisheries resource management. Mar.Policy 31, 669–680.

Pitcher, T. J.; Preikshot, D., 2001: Rapfish: rapid appraisal techniqueto evaluate the sustainability status of fisheries. Fish. Res. 49,255–270.

Pitcher, T. J.; Bunty, A.; Preikshot, D.; Hutton, T.; Pauly, D., 1998:Measuring the unmeasurable: a multivariate interdisciplinarymethod for rapid appraisal of health of fisheries. In: Reinventigfisheries management. T. J. Pitcher, P. J. B. Hart and D. Pauly(Eds). Chapman and Hall, London, UK, pp. 31–51.

Author�s address: Jose Milton Andriguetto-Filho, Animal ScienceDepartment, Universidade Federal do Parana,Rua dos Funcionarios, 1540, CEP 80035-050,Curitiba, PR, Brazil.E-mail: [email protected]


Analysis of natural and social dynamics of fishery production systems in Paraná, Brazil:...

Documents

Transcript of Analysis of natural and social dynamics of fishery production systems in Paraná, Brazil:...