See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/225191102

The Intensification of Fishing and the Rise of Tourism: Competing Coastal

Livelihoods in the Calamianes Islands, Philippines

Article  in  Human Ecology · June 2010

DOI: 10.1007/s10745-010-9329-z

CITATIONS READS

108 1,823

1 author:

Michael Fabinyi
University of Technology Sydney
85 PUBLICATIONS   2,218 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Horizon Scan on Community-based Conservation View project

Assessing the Governance of Tuna Fisheries: Case studies from the Indian and Pacific Oceans View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Michael Fabinyi on 19 May 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Hum Ecol (2010) 38:415–427
DOI 10.1007/s10745-010-9329-z
The Intensification of Fishing and the Rise of Tourism:
Competing Coastal Livelihoods in the Calamianes
Islands, Philippines
Michael Fabinyi
Published online: 14 April 2010
# Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010
Abstract Research on agrarian changes in Southeast Asia
has paid comparatively less attention to the processes of
livelihood change in coastal regions. In the context of
declining profitability in the fishing industry due to
environmental degradation and overfishing, governments
at multiple levels are heavily promoting tourism in the
Philippines. This paper considers the ways in which coastal
residents in the Calamianes Islands, Palawan province,
negotiate these changes in the fishing and tourism indus-
tries. Despite the push for tourism as a more sustainable
alternative to fishing, the experiences and priorities of
coastal residents complicate this shift. The paper demon-
strates that fishing is marked by increasing levels of
intensification, and that tourism has the potential to exclude
fishers from many of its purported benefits. These are two
important trends that need to be taken into account when
analysing livelihood change in coastal regions of Southeast
Asia.
Keywords Livelihood . Tourism . Fishing . Palawan .
Philippines . Live reef fish trade
Introduction
Throughout Southeast Asia, livelihoods are progressively
being transformed through a process commonly referred to
as the “agrarian transition”. Scholars have described the
ways in which residents have been shifting from predom-
inantly rural, farming livelihoods to livelihood strategies
M. Fabinyi (*)
ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies,
Townsville, Australia
e-mail: fabinyi@gmail.com
marked by intensification, diversification into “off-farm”
activities, and increasing levels of engagement with global-
isation, new markets and urbanisation (Cramb et al. 2009;
Eder 1999; Rigg 2005, 2006). Compared to those studies
dealing with upland and agricultural areas, comparatively
fewer studies have examined whether or to what extent
similar processes are unfolding in coastal regions of
Southeast Asia.
In many regions of coastal Southeast Asia, fishing
livelihoods are frequently marked by both processes of
capital intensification, and increasing levels of environmen-
tal degradation (BFAR 2004; Eder 2008; Fougerès 2005;
Gaynor 2005; Salayo et al. 2008). In this context, tourism is
increasingly being presented by many governments and
some analysts in Southeast Asia as a key future livelihood
for coastal regions. In many parts of Southeast Asia, the
Philippines, and in Palawan province in particular, “eco-
tourism” has become the new buzzword as governments try
to both cash in on the financial windfall of tourist profits,
and to emphasise various forms of eco-tourism as a way of
shifting local engagement with marine resources away from
purely extractive uses.
In this paper I investigate the ways in which local
residents of the municipality of Coron, in the Calamianes
Islands of Palawan province, negotiate livelihood changes
in a context marked by declines in the profitability of the
live reef fish for food trade (LRFT)—the most economi-
cally important fishery in the region—and the growth of
tourism. As a municipality that has an extremely active
fishing industry, significant environmental problems and a
boom in tourism, Coron offers a perfect vantage point from
which to analyse the relationships between the broader
trends of capital intensification in fisheries, environmental
degradation and increasing tourism in Southeast Asia.
Based on long-term fieldwork and using an ethnographic
416
perspective, I explore how some fishers are engaging with
the potential of tourism, and how other fishers are
continuing to commit to the LRFT in a range of ways. I
argue that the focus on tourism as an alternative livelihood
is problematic for two broad reasons. Firstly, I will show
how in many instances, despite the increased levels of risk
and difficulty involved in the LRFT and the clear declines
in fish stocks, capital intensification of the LRFT is
increasing. Secondly, I demonstrate that while tourism
offers the potential for some fishers to adopt a successful
alternative livelihood, this potential is strongly influenced
by a range of local geographical and social factors, and, for
some people, tourism has created significant problems,
particularly with regard to the security of land tenure.
Although tourism is being promoted heavily by some
analysts and governments, the livelihood focus of many
coastal residents in the Calamianes seems to be more
closely linked to an expansion of fishing effort through
capital intensification, rather than a shift to an ostensibly
more sustainable form of tourism. Any shift from fishing to
tourism, I suggest, needs to be understood firmly within the
context of these priorities and experiences of local
residents.
After a description of fieldwork methods and a
background to the study site, the paper first examines
the academic and theoretical context of these issues.
Engaging with the work of scholars who have examined
livelihood transitions in coastal Southeast Asia, the focus
here is on the possibilities of tourism. The two main
sections of the paper then describe the historical
development and current engagement with fishing in
the Calamianes, and how local fishers are responding to
the growth of tourism.
Methods and Background to the Study Site
The Calamianes Islands are a group of islands lying off the
north of mainland Palawan, divided into four municipal-
ities: Coron (pop. 32, 243), Culion (14, 302), Busuanga
(16, 287), and Linapacan (9198)1 (see Map). Coron, the
municipality in which I was primarily based, has a land
area of 94, 952 ha or 949.526 sq km. In 2000, there were
6519 people in the five barangays2 of the major town,
Coron, while a further 25, 724 lived in the eighteen rural
barangays. Similar to Palawan more generally (Eder and
1
These population figures are drawn from the 2000 census (cited in
Palawan Provincial Government 2000).
2
Barangay is the smallest political unit in the Philippines; but the
term ‘community’ is used in this paper instead because in the
Calamianes Islands barangays can sometimes to refer to multiple
communities spread across several islands.
Hum Ecol (2010) 38:415–427
Fernandez 1996), the Calamianes Islands have long been
considered a resource frontier for other more overpopu-
lated and degraded parts of the Philippines, and are
populated today by a range of different ethnic groups
who have migrated from all over the Philippines.
Agriculture and fishing remain the most common live-
lihoods. While there are numerous small-scale and
commercial fisheries operating in the area, the LRFT is
currently the most important fishery, and is used for
analysis in this paper because it marks a typical example
of capital intensification.
The fieldwork for this paper is based on ongoing, long-
term ethnographic fieldwork on perceptions and practices
related to fishing and marine resource regulation, undertak-
en since 2005 in Esperanza, a migrant community in Coron.
I was based for 12 months between 2005 and 2007 in
Esperanza; more recent research in 2009 included semi-
structured interviews with 115 live fish collectors from
Esperanza and four other predominantly migrant commu-
nities in Coron. Questions focused on the extent and type of
alternative livelihoods, experiences with and ideas about
tourism, the location of fishing grounds, ideas about
regulations, and the costs of fishing trips. Interviews were
also conducted with fish traders, tourism operators, and
government and non-government institutions involved with
the LRFT and tourism in Coron town and in Puerto
Princesa, the provincial capital.
Livelihood Change and the Coasts in Southeast Asia
In Southeast Asia and the Philippines, scholars have
analysed how livelihoods have been progressively trans-
formed from predominantly small-scale rural activities to
more intensified agricultural and to diversified, “off-
farm” activities (Cramb et al. 2009; Eder 1999; Rigg
2005, 2006). While scholars have been careful not to
assume the same dynamics are necessarily at work in
coastal environments (Fougerès 2005; Gaynor 2005), they
have noted the closely linked processes of capital
intensification and declining fisheries; indeed these are
both worldwide trends in fisheries (McGoodwin 1990;
Pauly et al. 1998). Particular examples of these two broad
trends in Southeast Asia include the expansion of high-
value commodity fisheries into formerly remote areas
(Eder 2008; Fougerès 2005; Lowe 2000), the intensifica-
tion of aquaculture (Fougerès 2005; Pomeroy et al. 2006;
Sheriff et al. 2008), and the declining state of marine
ecosystems and related environmental problems in fisher-
ies (Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources [BFAR]
2004; Salayo et al. 2008). The LRFT is an example of a
fishery that is closely linked to all of these three general
trends. Noted for its rapid expansion throughout Southeast
Hum Ecol (2010) 38:415–427
Asia (Scales et al. 2006), the LRFT is increasingly
adopting aquaculture (Pomeroy et al. 2006) and is closely
associated with high levels of overfishing and the
destruction of coral reefs (Sadovy et al. 2003).
Correspondingly, a highly important trend in many of these
coastal regions has been the growth of tourism (ASEAN
2009; Wong 1998). As tourism has increased in many of the
417
same coastal regions that face fisheries problems, some
analysts have suggested that this trend can be effectively
harnessed to provide alternative livelihoods to fisherfolk.
Cruz-Trinidad et al., commenting on fisheries decline and
tourism growth in another area of the Philippines, argue that
“[c]ompared to aquaculture, fishers will find it easier to shift
to tourism-based alternative livelihoods such as transport,
418
tour guides, and other related services” (2009: 179). White et
al. (2000) have argued that the widespread practices of
overfishing and coral reef destruction in the Philippines are
the cause of large-scale economic losses, which could be
addressed through small-scale coastal tourism. White and
Rosales (2003) go on to explore several successful case
studies of this form of tourism, advocating its expansion. A
range of studies have also argued that the user fees generated
through MPAs linked with dive tourism can successfully
compensate local fishers, and potentially lead to long-term,
sustainable management (Alcala and Russ 2006; Arin and
Kramer 2002; Depondt and Green 2006). Commenting
broadly on the links between eco-tourism and conservation
in the Philippines and Indonesia, Christie et al. argue that
“[t]he emerging consensus is that eco-tourism and conser-
vation are mutually supporting” (2005: 225). Less cautiously
than many of these scholars, governments in the Philippines
have been enthusiastically involved in promoting the
benefits of tourism. How they have done so in the
Calamianes will be discussed at length later in the paper.
Other scholars are less enamoured of the possibilities of
tourism in coastal Southeast Asian contexts. Elsewhere in
the Philippines, scholars have drawn attention to the mixed
experiences of coastal tourism. In Boracay, an island in the
Central Philippines famous for its bright white beaches and
dominated by tourism since the 1970s, analysts have
pointed to the problems of poor governance, environmental
degradation and the disparities involved in the distribution
of benefits (Nicholson 1997; Trousdale 1999). Given that
Coron has been explicitly marketed as a “new Boracay”,
but as one which will avoid many of Boracay’s well-
publicised environmental and social problems (Celebria
2009), it will be important to see how Coron’s recent
experiences with tourism do or do not diverge from those of
Boracay.
Scholars have also pointed out some of the practical
difficulties of instituting alternative coastal income projects
for fisherfolk in the context of rural Southeast Asia, arguing
that many projects end up as “supplemental” income rather
than “alternative” income projects (Sievanen et al. 2005).
Such “supplemental” income projects by themselves fre-
quently do not actually take existing pressure off resources
(see Fisher 2001: 84–85 for a discussion of this issue in
relation to protected areas generally). Sievanen et al.
(2005), for example, show that in many cases in Indonesia,
the introduction of seaweed farming did not lead to reduced
fishing effort. Anthropologists have also argued that new
livelihoods need to be much more realistically and closely
integrated with the priorities, needs and conditions of local
residents (Eder 2008: 148). For Eder, whether or not
tourism can ultimately work as a successful alternative
livelihood in Palawan and the Philippines is highly
dependent on the particular sort of tourism that is
Hum Ecol (2010) 38:415–427
concerned. He contrasts community-based tourism with
the increasingly popular trend in Palawan towards “large,
high-end resorts” (2008: 151). Such resorts, he suggests,
“might become popular with tourists and make a lot of
money for its owners but would not likely be as well rooted
in the local community” (2008: 151). Other analysts have
pointed to the tensions that can arise between the fishing
and tourism sectors during the development of MPAs in the
Philippines (Fabinyi 2008; Lucas and Kirit 2009; Majanen
2007; Oracion et al. 2005; Thiele et al. 2005). Elsewhere,
eco-tourism has been depicted as form of neoliberalism; “an
exercise in power that can shape the natural world and the
people who live in it in ways that contradict some of the
values that it is supposed to express” (West and Carrier
2004: 483).
Building on the work of these critical scholars, the focus
of this paper is to show how local fishers in the Calamianes
are responding to the changes taking place in both the
fishing and tourism industries. I suggest that despite the
declines in fishing, it remains irreplaceably important to
most fishers, as evidenced by increasing levels of capital
intensification in the LRFT. Correspondingly, there is the
emerging danger that any potential benefits of tourism for
fishers will be strongly restricted. I begin the case study
with an examination of the LRFT in the Calamianes and the
major trends taking place in this fishery.
The Live Reef Fish for Food Trade (LRFT)
Background
Responding to rapidly growing international demand from
the rapidly industrializing regions of Asia—in particular
China—the value of the LRFT has increased steadily
(Pomeroy et al. 2008: 56). In Palawan, the LRFT began
in the late 1980s and early 1990s, and has more recently
spread throughout the province. Palawan is now the
primary source location of the LRFT in the Philippines
(Padilla et al. 2003); current production from Palawan
alone is estimated to be worth more than $25 million
(Province and Municipalities of Palawan et al. 2009: 7).
The incentives for small-scale fishermen to engage in the
LRFT are clear; prices for individual fish frequently fetch
more than P2000 (about $40). This is a large amount of
money in a region where the average monthly income
among fishing households is often less than P5000 (about
$100). Although several species are traded, catch is
concentrated on P. leopardus (the coral trout, or leopard
coral grouper) as the species of highest-value. Communities
in the Calamianes Islands were among the first in Palawan
to start fishing for live fish; by the late 1990s more than
60% of coastal communities were involved in live fish
Hum Ecol (2010) 38:415–427
collection (Padilla et al. 2003: 24) and it currently remains
a key focal point of the trade in Palawan. Fishers fish
throughout the islands and sell their fish to roving
middleman based in the islands, or to traders based in
Coron town.
There have been various attempts at regulating the live
reef fish trade in Palawan. Numerous reports have
indicated highly unsustainable levels of over fishing, and
the high use of sodium cyanide, which fishers will
frequently use to catch fish (Dalabajan 2005; Padilla et
al. 2003, Pomeroy et al. 2008). As a report from 2003
pointed out, “the industry is mining and degrading its
resource base” (Padilla et al. 2003: 8). Mostly, attempts at
regulation have concentrated on stopping the use of
sodium cyanide. As Dalabajan (2005) has demonstrated,
however, various problems with the judicial context of the
Calamianes and a lack of resources render monitoring and
enforcement ineffective. Criminal cases for fisheries
offences generally have to be filed in the provincial
capital, Puerto Princesa. Similarly, Puerto Princesa has
the only laboratory in the province to test for cyanide,
which means that by the time fish from Coron reach the
capital for testing, the cyanide has frequently worked its
way out of the fish. Law enforcement agents such as the
Philippine National Police and the Coastguard are all
hampered by a severe lack of resources. As an indication
of the scale of the problem, Dalabajan pointed out that
despite an estimated 250,000 individual cyanide fishing
trips between 1999 and 2002 in the Calamianes Islands,
there was not one conviction for using cyanide between
2001 and 2005 (Dalabajan 2005). More recently, there
have been attempts at introducing a closed season and a
quota system for the LRFT (Dalabajan 2009; Fabinyi
2009); by mid-2009 both had had limited success.
Reports about the increasing difficulties of live fish
collectors in the Calamianes Islands have been documented
since at least 2003, when Padilla et al. reported that 78% of
the live fish collectors they surveyed from across the
islands were fishing further away in 2001 than in 1996, and
that 58% of fishers were fishing for a longer duration over
each trip (2003: 41). Fishers expressed to me in 2009 that
more recently, declines in fish stocks had been particularly
swift. As one live fish collector described it to me: in 2006
he would be happy with a catch of 20–25 pieces per trip; in
2007 18–20 pieces, and 2008 until now 15–18 pieces. This
may not necessarily be broadly representative, but more
likely it reflects the fact that many fishers around the
Calamianes began to move into this fishery around 2006,
and that fishfinders were introduced during this time as
well. Without detailed stock assessments it is impossible to
map the extent of stock decline with any high level of
accuracy, but the clear picture from talking to live fish
collectors throughout Coron was that fish catch was
419
steadily deteriorating. This is mirrored in assessments of
coral reef damage in the Calamianes (Padilla et al. 2003).
Although fishers perceive clearly the problems with the
fishery, the earlier discussion of the history of failed
attempts at regulation gives an indication of how fishers
have usually responded. Fishers typically represent the
problems as confined to the use of sodium cyanide, and are
wary of any attempt to regulate the fishery more broadly
(Fabinyi 2009; see also Eder 2008: 112–113, Galvez et al.
1989; Russell and Alexander 2000 for how fishers typically
assign the blame for overfishing to different groups of
fishers in the Philippines). The extent to whether or not this
is an accurate assessment is not the focus of this paper; here
I focus on the actual practices of fishers in terms of
continuing engagements with the LRFT.
Increasing Engagement with the LRFT and Forms
of Capital Intensification
Fishers are responding to stock declines by increasing their
effort in various ways. Fishing further and longer, using
new technologies, transferring from other fisheries and
geographical expansion of the LRFT are all ways in which
the LRFT can be seen as intensifying.
Lower fish catch is reflected in the fact that fishers
choose to travel to further locales now to catch their fish.
Currently, fishers in Coron municipality are targeting
waters in Linapacan municipality as the most productive
fishing grounds. These trips typically take a minimum of
several days to complete, and often can last up to 2 weeks.
Expenses for these trips—primarily fuel—are therefore
high as well because of the time and distance covered;
often up to P10,000 (US$200). By contrast, poorer fishers
who do not have enough money and a large boat with the
powerful engine that is required to travel to these remote
fishing grounds are forced to fish closer to their bases in
Coron. This has led to a situation where poorer fishers fish
in less productive waters, while richer and more well-
equipped fishers are quickly exploiting the more productive
regions. Essentially, fishers are increasing their effort to
keep up with declining catches.
Investment in new technologies is another example of
intensification of the fishery. The development of fish-
cages for the grow-out of wild-caught juvenile fish
appears to be increasing rapidly. While there are no
detailed statistics on exact trends from year-by-year
throughout Palawan, some evidence indicates that the
use of fish-cages is expanding (Province and Municipal-
ities of Palawan et al. 2009: 9). In one community in
Coron for example, there were three fish-cages in 2006;
by June 2009 there were 16. In another community
surveyed, in the first six months of 2009 alone 15 fish-
cages were developed. Other new technologies such as
420
fishfinders have been increasingly supplied to fishers by
financiers since 2006 in the Calamianes.
Another indication of growing investment in the LRFT is
the way that fishers from other fisheries are transferring to
the LRFT. In different places around Palawan, the LRFT
has only developed relatively recently and is still expand-
ing. In Quezon municipality, for example, most fishers did
not take it up until the early 2000s. Other fisheries are
declining in a similar manner to the LRFT, and so even
while the profitability of LRFT declines, it remains a
comparatively attractive option for fishers. In many
communities across Coron there has been a marked
increase in people transferring to this fishery, especially
over the last three years: despite the decreasing levels of
fish catch and threats of greater regulation, it is still the
most profitable fishery for small-scale fishers. Geronimo,
for example, was a fisher in Esperanza who previously
worked on net fishing boats (primarily for rabbitfish,
Siganid sp.) and on commercial fusilier (Caesionidae sp.)
boats. Faced with increasing fuel costs and declining fish
catches that have rendered fusilier and net fishing less cost-
effective, he has chosen to devote more of his time and
energy to the LRFT. In 2006 he related that:
Fishing for fusiliers is not really good anymore. Back
when I started in the 1980s, it was great, nobody had
any debts and we only fished for short periods. But
live reef fishing and fresh grouper fishing, they are
the two methods that I want to get into now.
By 2009 Geronimo had established his livelihood in the
LRFT, and although he said that the profitability was
declining even since he had started just 3 years earlier, “it’s
better than net fishing because even if you only get ten or
fifteen pieces you have hit the jackpot.”
As Geronimo’s last comment indicates, another factor
behind the increasing interest in the LRFT is simply the
increasing price: shortly before the 2009 Chinese New Year
in Coron, prices for fishers reached P3100 per kg (US$62).
This potential for high profits in the LRFT is in stark
contrast to the low returns in most other fisheries. When
asked what their alternative fishing options were, fishers
would nominate threadfin bream, fusiliers, rabbitfish,
parrotfish, sweetlips, or squid, all of which usually bring a
fisher well under P100 per kg (US$2). The only other fish
approaching the price for live grouper is fresh (i.e., dead)
grouper, at P600 per kg (US$12). While fishers involved in
the LRFT often have other fisheries that they engage in as a
“sideline”, for many small-scale fishers the LRFT remains
as the most important. Any form of regulation of the LRFT
is therefore seen as having a massive economic impact.
Ricardo, for example, had been heavily engaged in the
LRFT since 1989 on a small, remote island in Coron. He
described the LRFT as the main reason why he could send
Hum Ecol (2010) 38:415–427
his ten children to school. Before the malaking tulong (big
help) provided by the LRFT, he pointed out, he and his
family were living in complete poverty, “sagwan lang
kami” (we just fished on oar-powered canoes). When I
asked Ricardo what he did during 2008 when the LRFT
was closed for two months in Coron, he told me how he
fished for squid, but “mahina na din” (it has declined now
also), ensuring that he went into considerable debt with his
buyer and financier. When I asked him what he would do if
the LRFT were banned, a common fear among many
fishers, he gave a long sigh before simply saying “eywan ko
lang po” (I just don’t know). He suggested maybe he would
return to his homeland of Bohol, but then reconsidered as
he pointed out that all of the good land around Bohol had
been taken a long time ago. “Many people on this island
will become pitiful if they ban buhay-buhay (the LRFT),”
he concluded.
Other fishers had similar experiences of the closed
season and similar expectations about what would happen
if the LRFT were to be heavily regulated. Playing with
words, one fisher joked that during the closed season, he
became a lugisyo instead of a negosyo (lugi is to make a
loss; negosyo is a businessman). Another related how he
had reverted to just eating one meal of lugaw (rice
porridge) every day, without an accompanying side dish.
Most simply described a lower quality of life and the need
to go into debt with their financiers.
Fishers are also responding to the challenges of the
LRFT decline through increased levels of migration, in
order to maintain access to good fishing grounds and
better prices. This can be seen as part of a continuing
tradition among many Visayan migrants, who are
popularly renowned in the Philippines as having a
nomadic, sea-going lifestyle. While this view of Visayans
has the danger of simplification and essentialization
(Eder 2003), a range of anthropological studies have
documented the ways in which Visayan fishing livelihoods
and migration are frequently closely linked (Seki 2004;
Zayas 1994). In Coron, inhabitants from San Juan Island—
originally from Bohol—have recently been migrating, some
seasonally and some permanently, to the neighbouring
Cuyo Island group. In contrast to the relatively remote
San Juan, Cuyo has an airstrip that is well connected to
Manila, and is therefore a step further along the commod-
ity chain of the LRFT; traders based in Cuyo offer better
prices than the middlemen do in San Juan. Frustrated with
the low prices offered to them in San Juan, a group of
residents moved to Cuyo in 2006 to investigate the
opportunities for the LRFT there. One fisher, Jerry, who
went over to Cuyo for one season, described his
experiences: “Most people went over to Cuyo because
we thought it would give us a better price than just selling
here in San Juan. That was the good thing about going
Hum Ecol (2010) 38:415–427
there with my father and uncle. But then the fish are
already declining there as well. So I’m not sure if I will go
back next year”.
Similarly, residents of Santo Rosario, on the eastern
coast of Busuanga Island have been migrating seasonally
(during the northeast monsoon, typically lasting from
around October to May) to an area on the northwestern
coast of Busuanga Island. Predominantly Waray-speaking
fishers who migrated from Samar Island in the early
1980s, the residents of Santo Rosario have strong kin ties
to other Warays living on the northwestern coast. While
the prices are no better for the those fishing on the
northwestern coast, the fishing grounds are better—the
relatively low population densities in the area mean that
the fish stocks are comparatively less exploited, and the
location of the northwestern coast of Busuanga Island in
relation to the northeast monsoon mean that the weather
conditions are comparatively more favourable for fishing
during this time.
Supporting the findings of Cruz-Trinidad et al. (2009)
from Lingayen Gulf elsewhere in the Philippines, live fish
collectors in the Calamianes are continuing to fish despite
significant declines in profitability. Further, the growing
trend of migration is an important indication that suggests
when the LRFT becomes less profitable for local fishers,
people are more likely to move to other locations and
continue in the LRFT, rather than to transfer to a less
economically beneficial occupation. The relatively signifi-
cant investments fishers have made in gear, equipment and
knowledge are likely a strong factor behind their decisions
to stay in the fishery. The problem though is that when
fishers “stand still” or are prevented from increasing
intensification through regulation, their return declines in
the short-term. These experiences show how fishers in the
LRFT currently need to continually invest in new ways of
intensifying their fishing practices simply in order to keep
up with the declining yields.3
Tourism
Tourism in Palawan and the Calamianes Islands
Tourism in the Calamianes Islands, and in Palawan more
broadly, has been closely connected to the identity of the
region as an ecological paradise. Indeed, the official
website of Coron features a message from the Mayor:
“Welcome to our very own slice of paradise! I’d like to
invite you to enjoy our beautiful lagoons, beaches and
3
While this situation of increasing intensification may change if new
regulations are implemented, the responses of fishers when asked
about alternative livelihoods during the closed season of 2008 indicate
the expansion of effort into other fisheries.
421
limestone cliffs. Experience the captivating beauty of our
lakes and coral reefs and the breathtaking adventure of
Coron WW2 wrecks that have made our Municipality
unique and simply unforgettable.” (Municipal Government
of Coron 2009). Seen as beautiful, “unspoilt” and ripe for
development, Coron is being heavily promoted by munic-
ipal, provincial and national governments as a new tourist
location.
Tourism did not really develop in Coron until the late
1980s, and was mostly linked with SCUBA diving. There
are fourteen Japanese shipwrecks, bombed by US planes in
1944, in diveable depths around Coron Bay and Busuanga
Island. For SCUBA divers who enjoy wreck diving, it is
marketed as one of the most appealing locations in all of
Asia. More recently, tourism in Coron has been broader
than the previous sole focus on SCUBA diving. Lodging
houses other than those associated with dive operators have
sprung up, and tourism businesses are trying to promote a
broader array of activities for tourists. These are mostly still
outdoor-based attractions, such as “beach-hopping” (visit-
ing multiple beaches), kayaking, yachting, fishing, and
rock-climbing.
Importantly, the local municipal government in Coron
elected in 2004 (and re-elected in 2007) has decided to
make tourism a priority. Many of the Mayor’s public
speeches during 2006 were marked by references to Coron
as a booming place, as evidenced by the building of new
hotels and guesthouses. The provincial government is just
as enthusiastic: in 2008, Palawan Governor Joel Reyes
allocated for Coron more than P235 million out of the total
P966 million fund deriving from the Malampaya gas
project (Villanueva Jr. 2008). This was the largest share of
any municipality in Palawan, with Governor Reyes arguing
that this was justified because of the high tourism potential
of Coron. The provincial government has also collaborated
on a waterfront reclamation project with the municipality,
and Governor Reyes has been quoted as saying that he
considers this as part of his “responsibility to create a
growth area based on tourism destinations” in Coron
(Celebria 2009). Even the President of the Philippines,
Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, noted the activities of investors
from Boracay in Coron in her state of the nation address in
2007 (Arroyo 2007). Other officials in other municipalities
of the Calamianes were just as optimistic about tourism,
talking about the potential of the stunning beaches in some
of the more remote islands. They argued that it was
necessary to “develop” the beaches in order “to prepare
for when the tourists come”. While some foreign donors
have also been involved, the central push behind tourism
promotion in Coron has come from governments at the
municipal, provincial and national levels.
After long negotiations, redevelopment of the Coron
Airport finally began in June 2007, aiming to support larger
422
numbers of tourist arrivals. Improvements to achieve this
included the concreting and expansion of both the runway
and the apron. The new airport was officially opened in
November 2008, allowing for the landing of 50-seater
planes, and tourist arrivals have increased rapidly since
then: the total number of arrivals who passed through the
airport in 2008 were 13,980, and in 2009 until May, they
had already logged 18,555 visitors (Palawan Times 2009).
The development of several large-scale resort projects
around the Calamianes has resulted in further increases in
the tourism profile of the region. In particular, a large-scale
resort being built by investors from Singapore has been
showcased by the provincial and national governments as
having the capacity to turn Coron into a “new Phuket”
(Calleja 2009). As the President herself told a fisherman
from Coron at the groundbreaking ceremony of the resort,
fishers in the nearby resort of Amanpulo no longer had to
fish; instead they worked for the resort. Or, as one Boracay-
based investor put it, he envisages the “Manila-Boracay-
Coron” tourism triangle as the “Bahamas of the East”
(Navasero 2009).
When I interviewed local municipal officials in Coron
about tourism, it was clear that many of them viewed the
industry as a healthy, relatively risk-free alternative to
fishing and farming. The Mayor, for example, explicitly
said that he would aim to promote tourism as the central
economic activity during the reduced-fishing season of
amihan from October to May. More specifically, tourism
and fishing have been linked through the development of
marine protected areas (Fabinyi 2008). By instituting user
fees, the local government has attempted both to capitalise
more fruitfully on the benefits of dive tourism, and to
ensure that fishers who are displaced as a result of the
MPAs are able to gain access to an alternative financial
source.
Clearly, it is important to differentiate different types of
tourism and to acknowledge how locals might engage with
eco-tourism and resort-based tourism in different ways
(Eder 2008: 151). Some small-scale eco-tourism initiatives
have had some success in attracting environmentally-
minded tourists, and much of the dive tourism has a focus
on working with local people and on protecting the
environment. The language of the government has focused
on “eco-tourism” and on avoiding the “mistakes” of
Boracay (Celebria 2009). Importantly, however, while the
rhetoric of eco-tourism is often used in the Calamianes, this
is often shorthand for a broader version of tourism that
includes the environment (including the development of
high-end resorts) (cf West and Carrier 2004).
What is common to all of these tourism developments is
the way in which local governments have extolled and
promoted all of these forms of tourism as a sustainable and
highly beneficial pathway for economic growth, in an area
Hum Ecol (2010) 38:415–427
where most livelihoods are currently based on agriculture
and fishing. Tourism is presented as an industry that can
provide the impetus for an economic boom, and do this in a
way that engages the livelihoods of fisherfolk in ecologi-
cally and socially sustainable ways. This is in contrast to
the fishing industry, where to some extent the local
government has recognised the problem of overfishing,
and through this, the related problems of environmental
degradation and poverty. While government officials
acknowledge that fishing will inevitably remain an impor-
tant local economic activity for some time yet, the long-
term future of fishing is often viewed pessimistically
because of the declining resource base. Key here therefore
is the ways in which the Calamianes Islands are conceived
of as a changing natural resource “frontier” (Tsing 2005).
While historically the region has been viewed as a fishing
frontier (Herre 1948: 278), the Calamianes Islands are now
seen as a frontier for tourism; a place where opportunities
for tourism-based economic investment are ripe. The next
section scales down to document the ways in which fishers
have experienced this growth in tourism.
Experiences with Tourism Among Fishers
Experiences with tourism among the fisherfolk of Coron
have varied, and are differentiated according to a range
of geographical and social factors. While tourism has
brought some benefits for some fishers in terms of
additional employment and an increased market for fish,
for many fishers it has represented a threat because of
the increased pressure for development and the strongly-
held notion that fishers will be excluded from these
developments. For Bong, a fisher from Esperanza, he
said his personal experiences with tourism had worked
out well, “because I have got extra work from fishing. I
bring the fish to my buyer who prepares it for the tourist
restaurants in town.” Similarly, Gary described tourism
as a personal boon for his livelihood. During the
northeast monsoon season when fishing was curtailed
because of the strong winds associated with that weather
pattern, he planned to use his boat to take tourists
“beach-hopping”: “That way I can keep fishing during
habagat [the southwest monsoon, lasting from late May
until September, which is more conducive for fishing] and
still have plenty of work during amihan [the northeast
monsoon].” Some other residents of Esperanza have been
employed as assistants on dive boats, or as waitresses in
tourist restaurants and bars in town. Others saw future
opportunities to open souvenir shops.
But while some residents of Esperanza had gained
additional income or employment through tourism, for
many this was overshadowed by some of the more broadly-
held fears about tourism. The story of Ed serves as an
Hum Ecol (2010) 38:415–427
illustration of how these fears were sometimes realised. Ed
was a fisherman in his twenties who decided to capitalise
on the increase in tourism by registering his boat with the
municipal authorities as a tourist boat. After two months of
taking tourists out, in the middle of one trip he encountered
a problem when his engine failed on him, with tourists on
the boat. Unable to restart the engine and continue the
beach-hopping expedition, the foreign owner of the resort
where the tourists were staying confiscated the boat and
refused to return it, demanding P23,000 (US$460) as
payment for the supposed losses he had incurred. Despite
numerous pleas made to the local municipal government,
the boat remained in the resort owner’s hands. For many
residents of Esperanza, this was indicative of the power
imbalances between the tourism industry and local fisher-
folk. The general perception among residents of Esperanza
was that the local government was afraid to confront the
foreign resort owner because of the influence he wielded
over local tourism revenues.
The increasing trend of tourism was seen as closely linked
to the purchase and development of coastal land by wealthy
local Filipino elites and foreigners, two social groups strongly
involved in tourism in Coron. Following the trend throughout
the Philippines of attracting older retirees from around the
world, this form of investment has recently become more
common in Coron, and property prices throughout the
municipality are increasing rapidly. Small islands around
Coron, for example, are now selling for several million US
dollars (Coron Best Realty 2009). In nearby San Vicente, on
the Palawan mainland, Eder found that good locations were
extremely expensive, and that “more than half of San
Vicente’s prime beachfront property, both along the coast
and on the various offshore islands, is under the ownership
of foreigners and a handful of wealthy provincial politicians”
(2008: 55). In other regions of the Philippines with well-
developed tourism industries, such as parts of Negros, these
trends are even stronger (Knudsen 2008).
The purchase of land by wealthy elites and foreigners is
linked to broadly-held fears about the ways in which
tourism and coastal development was seen to increase the
pressure on local fisherfolk to leave. While considerable
academic attention has been paid to problems of land tenure
and redistribution in agrarian regions of the Philippines (e.g.
Borras 2009), less work has examined the insecure situation
faced by coastal populations (but see Austin 2003: 172–76;
Knudsen 2008). Many fisherfolk in many places of the
Philippines, especially the sorts of migrant fisherfolk
commonly living around Palawan, have very little secure
land tenure (cf Austin 2003: 172). As well as reducing the
possibilities for farming as a livelihood strategy, this has
meant that when tourism and the growth of economic
opportunities along the coastline increase, this strengthens
the pressure to develop coastal land in ways that facilitate
423
this economic development. As Knudsen has documented
in great detail for another coastal area of the Philippines, in
a context where the value of coastal land is escalating,
eviction cases flourish and poorer, more recent migrants are
often among those who get squeezed out first (Knudsen
2008).
The residents of Esperanza, for example, had been
involved in a long-running land dispute with a wealthy
family that claimed to own title to the land dating back
from early in the 20th century. With the growth of tourism,
similar sorts of claims had increased—including an attempt
to build a hotel on the beach in Esperanza—and fisherfolk
in the area were fighting multiple legal battles in order to
stay on their land. Located close to town and to a marine
park established in 2005 for dive tourism, Esperanza is an
appealing site for coastal tourism development. Labelled as
“squatters” despite the fact that some families have been
living in the area since 1968, residents of Esperanza are
now facing the stark prospect of eviction. Fisher Gary
expressed the feelings of many fishers in Esperanza when
he described how “before, nobody really cared about the
area. But now with the marine park, people are thinking it
is a good location for tourism. And this has made our
problem with the land dispute much worse.”
There are historical patterns of land insecurity for
marginalised groups in the Calamianes and throughout the
Philippines that give substance to these claims. In partic-
ular, the indigenous Tagbanua communities of the Calam-
ianes have a long history of dispossession by local elites.
While they have attained recognition more recently through
“Ancestral Domain”4 title on and around Coron Island, the
history of engagement with the local government and local
elites has been one of marginalisation and contestation.
Tagbanua communities were evicted from areas throughout
the Calamianes as local political leaders and tourist
developers cooperated to grant the rights to use lands for
development (Philippine Association for Inter-Cultural
Development [PAFID] 2000: 51–52). PAFID argue that
“[f]rom the early ’90s, the pressure on Tagbanwa5 to leave
their island and give way to tourist resort owners and
developers began to intensify” (2000: 52).
Poorer migrant fisherfolk argue that they are in a
similarly powerless and marginalised situation, and are at
the mercy of the allegedly corrupt government. As fisher
Bong argued, even though he had himself benefited from
tourism because of employment opportunities, he was
cynical about the general trajectory of tourism in the
Calamianes Islands: “This government does not work for
the people; it is corrupt—it gets a commission on every
4
Ancestral Domain Title refers to state recognition of customary
forms of land and sea tenure in the Philippines.
5
Tagbanua is sometimes spelt as Tagbanwa.
424
new development.” Notions about the corruption of
government in the Philippines are very strongly held,
especially among poorer fisherfolk; governance is often
expressed as a system that enriches elites while feeding on
the misery of the poor (Fabinyi 2009). In the way this
system is understood by locals, elite politicians are seen to
engage in nepotism and patronage, providing the political
support to developers and other powerful clients who
provide funds. In Boracay, Trousdale (1999) has reported
similar perceptions of favouritism with regard to tourism
development among local government.
Thus, the perception among many fishers was that
whatever benefits tourism would bring, these would be
appropriated by the rich and powerful. As Esperanza-based
fisher Geronimo emphatically argued:
The benefits of tourism will only go to the LGU [local
government unit]. It will bypass all the fishers. It’s
fine if you have a relative in the LGU, but most
fishers don’t have that of course. We are poor people
here. If tourism keeps growing, our livelihood will
suffer. You come back in five years time and see what
will have happened: banned, banned, banned!
This concern was linked to the experiences fishers had
with MPAs that were linked with dive tourism. These
experiences have been mixed, and have depended on both
the level of MPA enforcement and the extent to which
fishers used the MPA previously as a fishing ground
(Fabinyi 2008). In many MPAs in the Calamianes, as
elsewhere in the Philippines, genuine enforcement has
proved to be difficult, and so the impact on fishing practices
has not been as intense. In these cases, fishers have
promoted a form of territoriality as they have used MPAs
as a means of excluding outsiders from their fishing
grounds and obtaining income through user fees (Fabinyi
2008). Where MPAs were well-enforced, however, their
impacts were felt most keenly by the poorest fishers. As
MPAs were often located close to the shore, this meant that
those fishers with pumpboats or access to them were not
greatly disadvantaged by the creation of the MPA. Instead,
it was only those poorer fishers who paddled out to do their
fishing who had to travel further to fish in different grounds
(cf Eder 2005: 159).
For other fishers who live in the more remote areas of
the Calamianes, their engagement with tourism has been
more limited. Further away from the tourist centre of Coron
town or the MPAs located nearby, many of these residents
have seen little effects of tourism, good or bad. Living on
small, highly densely populated islands with little farming
opportunities either, residents living here have few other
options than to engage in commodity fishing.
These mixed experiences and expectations about the
future indicate that the engagement between fishers
Hum Ecol (2010) 38:415–427
involved in the LRFT and the tourism industry has been
ambiguous. While tourism has offered alternative sources
of income for some fishers—in the form of transport/
guiding, employment in town at the restaurants, lodging
houses, and diveshops, or user fees generated through
MPAs—another general consequence is that it has in-
creased the pressure on coastal spaces, which are increas-
ingly under pressure to facilitate the development of
business opportunities for local elites. These experiences
of local fishers draw attention to the need to maintain a
critical perspective on the ways in which tourism engages
with fisherfolk. While governments enthusiastically pro-
mote tourism as a “win–win” solution to the problems of
overfishing and a responsible form of “sustainable devel-
opment”, research indicates that the benefits of tourism for
local fisherfolk are less clear.
In an article on the implementation of a coastal resource
management program elsewhere on Palawan, Eder has
argued that “new institutions” such as coastal resource
management often get absorbed into what he terms “the
principal structural fault lines of lowland Philippine
society” (2005: 149): class, gender and ethnicity. He shows
how the “burdens of conservation” are distributed unequal-
ly through these structural fault lines, and that much of the
work of the coastal resource management project he
analysed was eventually absorbed into these pre-existing
social and political inequalities. In a similar manner, I see
the real potential for the costs and benefits of tourism to be
distributed through the structural fault lines that operate in
the Calamianes Islands. While I have not analysed the role
of gender in the nexus of fishing and tourism, there are
certainly class and ethnic issues at play. Poorer inshore
fishers are typically disadvantaged by the construction of
MPAs linked to dive tourism, and ethnic Tagbanua groups
have been marginalised through tourism-led pressure for
development. The role of tourism in the privatisation of and
pressure to develop land occupied by poorer fisherfolk is
one in particular that will need to be critically scrutinised as
it continues to grow.
Conclusion
In this paper I have examined the livelihood implications of
growing levels of coastal tourism in a region where the
most important fishery, the LRFT, is facing significant
challenges. In the context of declining fisheries due to
overfishing and habitat destruction, tourism has increasing-
ly been promoted by governments and some analysts as a
sustainable industry that fishers will and should turn to. The
reality of the relative costs and benefits of fishing and
tourism as experienced by local fishers, however, indicates
that the transition from fishing to an economy based more
Hum Ecol (2010) 38:415–427
on tourism is neither simple, nor necessarily turning out in a
way that is completely beneficial for fishers. Firstly,
because of the high prices for live grouper, fishing itself
continues to provide significant economic incentives. While
fish stocks in the Calamianes have been declining since at
least 2001 (Padilla et al. 2003), the increasing market price
for live grouper—driven by the voracious Asian market—
and the lack of alternative options that are as economically
appealing mean that fishers are continuing to see their
future in the LRFT. In order to stay engaged with the LRFT,
fishers are travelling further and for longer, investing in
new technology such as fishfinders and fish-cages, and
even migrating in order to gain access to better markets and
fishing grounds.
By contrast, the promises of tourism have so far had
mixed outcomes for fishers involved in the LRFT. While
some have gained through alternative income opportunities,
some seasonally and others permanently, for others living in
more remote areas tourism is yet to become an everyday
reality. In addition to these geographical determinants,
however, many fishers see the development of tourism
as something that actively threatens their livelihood.
Confident that the benefits of tourism will be siphoned
off by greedy elites and foreigners, these fishers express
concern about the implications of coastal tourism for the
security of both their land tenure and their rights to fish
in nearby waters.
Different experiences with fishing and tourism reflect to
some extent the inherent characteristics of the natural
resources that they use (cf Fougerès 2005). While enclosure
does exist to some extent in the form of fish-cages and
marine protected areas, wild capture fisheries are generally
very open to new entrants. Tourism, based mostly in coastal
land, is more closely associated with the development of
private property and hence possibilities for exclusion. It is
also more explicitly associated with government regulation
and the involvement of wealthy businessmen, and thus in
the context of deep cynicism about the role of government
(Fabinyi 2009), is viewed with suspicion. Despite the
environmental problems associated with overfishing, mar-
ginalised groups may find it easier to engage with the less
regulated fisheries than with the forms of tourism more
closely associated with elites.
This research has important implications both for those
seeking to promote tourism in coastal areas, and for
analyses of broader patterns of livelihood change and
transformation. The remainder of the paper will briefly
look at each in turn. In relation to the first point, while this
paper has not intended to deliver a simple one-way critique
of the promotion of tourism, policymakers need to be aware
of the ways in which tourism can interact in both positive
and negative ways for local fisherfolk. Elsewhere in the
academic literature, researchers have noted that tourism
425
does not always create “win–win” solutions for environ-
mental management and livelihoods, and can indeed
sometimes create negative local impacts (McAlpin 2008;
Trejos and Chiang 2009; West and Carrier 2004). In the
Philippines, many such negative effects of tourism for local
fisherfolk are bound up with larger questions of class, land
tenure insecurity and governance patterns in Philippine
society. Importantly, while some tourism operators in the
region are strongly calling for more restrained, small-scale
forms of eco-tourism, this has the potential to be over-
shadowed by the acceleration of more large-scale tourism
with less engagement with fisherfolk.
From a livelihood perspective, this analysis has looked
secondly at tourism in the context of coastal livelihood
transformations occurring throughout much of Southeast
Asia. While tourism is often viewed as a more sustainable
livelihood, especially forms of eco-tourism, and is being
promoted as such by some analysts and governments, the
social and political contexts detailed in this paper compli-
cate this livelihood shift. The capital intensification of
fishing—marked by fishing further and longer, the transfer
from more small-scale fisheries to high-value export
fisheries such as the LRFT, and the use of new technologies
and migration—is a trend which, as well as the obvious
consequences on the environment and fish stocks, indicates
that fishers are not necessarily shifting away from this
livelihood.
This somewhat pessimistic picture of ceaseless, uninhib-
ited expansion and intensification of the LRFT is not the
only process occurring in the fishery, of course. Firstly,
some evidence suggests that many young people, as
elsewhere in Southeast Asia with regard to farming (Kelly
2000: 103; Rigg 2006: 189), are less keen on adopting
fishing as a lifelong livelihood (Fabinyi 2007). The
diversification of coastal livelihoods and how fishing is
often combined with other opportunities for income is also
an important aspect that needs to be noted (Eder 2003).
Similarly, moves to institute regulation of the LRFT suggest
that this pattern of uninhibited expansion of the LRFT may
not necessarily continue for much longer, at least in the
Calamianes Islands and Palawan Province. However, the
well-documented problems of enforcement and governance
in the Philippines (Dalabajan 2005, Fabinyi 2009), com-
bined with the likelihood of consequential pressure to
harvest other high-value fish (such as fresh [dead] grouper),
suggest that the trend towards capital intensification of
fisheries will continue to be one significant component of the
general trends in coastal livelihoods occurring in this region.
Tourism, while offering important opportunities for
alternative employment, is also marked by significant
shortcomings in terms of the consequences for various
groups of marginalised coastal residents. While tourism
initiatives of various forms and scales are being developed
426
in the Calamianes, the effects on fishers are ambiguous.
Rather than the desired shift in coastal regions of Southeast
Asia from overfishing to sustainable tourism, therefore,
present trends as detailed in the Calamianes Islands indicate
the capacity for both increased levels of capital intensifica-
tion in the fishing industry, and the development of a form
of tourism that does not necessarily offer the sorts of social
benefits that are hoped for.
Acknowledgements Funding was provided for fieldwork in part by
the PADI Foundation and an Australian Postgraduate Award from the
Australian National University. Thanks to Sarinda Singh and two
anonymous reviewers for helpful comments on an earlier version of
the paper, and to Wolfram Dressler and Magne Knudsen for valuable
discussions on these issues. All errors and omissions remain the
author’s own.
References
Alcala, A. C., and Russ, G. R. (2006). No-take Marine Reserves and
Reef Fisheries Management in the Philippines: A New People
Power Revolution. Ambio 35(5): 245–254.
Arin, T., and Kramer, R. A. (2002). Divers’ Willingness to Pay to Visit
Marine Sanctuaries: An Exploratory Study. Ocean & Coastal
Management 45: 171–183.
Arroyo, G. M. A. (2007). State of the Nation Address. http://halalan-
2007.blogspot.com/2007/07/president-arroyo-state-of-nation.html
(accessed 26 July 2007).
ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations). (2009). Tourism
Statistics. http://www.aseansec.org/5167.htm (accessed 13th
October 2009).
Austin, R. (2003). Environmental Movements and Fisherfolk Partic-
ipation on a Coastal Frontier, Palawan Island, Philippines.
Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Georgia, Athens.
BFAR (Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources) (2004). In
Turbulent Seas: The Status of Philippine Marine Fisheries.
Coastal Resource Management Project, Bureau of Fisheries and
Aquatic Resources, Department of Agriculture, Cebu City.
Borras, S. M. (2009). Competing Views and Strategies on Agrarian
Reform: Volume 2—Philippine Perspective. Ateneo de Manila
University Press, Quezon City.
Calleja, N. C. (2009). Coron islet to be next Asian tourism jewel.
Philippine Daily Inquirer March 26.
Celebria, L. S. (2009). Coron, Northern Palawan: The Future of
Philippine Tourism. The News Today, September 28. http://www.
thenewstoday.info/2009/09/28/coron.northern.palawan.html
(accessed 21st October 2009).
Christie, P., Lowry, K., White, A. T., Oracion, E. G., Sievanen, L.,
Pomeroy, R. S., Pollnac, R. B., Patlis, J. M., and Eisma, R.-L. V.
(2005). Key Findings from a Multidisciplinary Examination of
Integrated Coastal Management Process Sustainability. Ocean &
Coastal Management 48: 468–483.
Coron Best Realty. (2009). Viewed online 21st October 2009 at http://
coronrealty.com/.
Cramb, R. A., Colfer, C. J. P., Dressler, W., Laungaramsri, P., Le, Q.
T., Mulyoutami, E., Peluso, N. L., and Wadley, R. L. (2009).
Swidden Transformations and Rural Livelihoods in Southeast
Asia. Human Ecology 37: 323–346.
Cruz-Trinidad, A., Geronimo, R. C., and Aliño, P. M. (2009).
Development Trajectories and Impacts on Coral Reef Use in
Hum Ecol (2010) 38:415–427
Lingayen Gulf, Philippines. Ocean and Coastal Management 52:
173–80.
Dalabajan, D. (2005). Fixing the Broken Net: Improving Enforcement
of Laws Regulating Cyanide Fishing in the Calamianes Group of
Islands, Philippines. SPC Live Reef Fish Information Bulletin 15:
3–12.
Dalabajan, D. A. (2009). Of crimes and no punishments: fisheries law
offences and the criminal justice system in Calamianes Group of
Islands in the Province of Palawan. In Anda, R. D., and
Dalabajan, D. A. (eds.), Against the Tide: Enforcement and
Governance in the Sulu Sulawesi Seas. Futuristic Printing Press,
Puerto Princesa City, pp. 50–64.
Depondt, F., and Green, E. (2006). Diving User Fees and the Financial
Sustainability of Marine Protected Areas: Opportunities and
Impediments. Ocean & Coastal Management 49: 188–202.
Eder, J. F. (1999). A Generation Later: Household Strategies and
Economic Change in the Rural Philippines. Ateneo de Manila
University Press, Quezon City.
Eder, J. F. (2003). Of Fishers and Farmers: Ethnicity and Resource
Use in Coastal Palawan. Philippine Quarterly of Culture &
Society 31: 207–225.
Eder, J. F. (2005). Coastal Resource Management and Social Differences
in Philippine Fishing Communities. Human Ecology 33: 147–169.
Eder, J. F. (2008). Migrants to the Coasts: Livelihood, Resource
Management, and Global Change in the Philippines. Cengage
Learning, Wadsworth.
Eder, J. F., and Fernandez, J. O. (eds.) (1996). Palawan at the
Crossroads: Development and the Environment on a Philippine
Frontier. Ateneo de Manila University Press, Quezon City.
Fabinyi, M. (2007). Illegal Fishing and Masculinity in the Philippines:
A Look at the Calamianes Islands in Palawan. Philippine Studies
55(4): 509–529.
Fabinyi, M. (2008). Dive Tourism, Fishing and Marine Protected
Areas in the Calamianes Islands, Philippines. Marine Policy 32:
898–904.
Fabinyi, M. (2009). The Politics of Patronage and Live Reef Fish
Trade Regulation in Palawan, Philippines. Human Organization
68(3): 258–268.
Fisher, R. J. (2001). Experiences, challenges and prospects in
collaborative management of protected areas: an international
perspective. In Buck, L. B., Geisler, C. G., Schelhas, J., and
Wollenberg, E. (eds.), Biological Diversity: Balancing Interests
Through Adaptive Collaborative Management. CRC, Boca
Raton, pp. 81–96.
Fougerès, D. (2005). Aquarian Capitalism and Transition in Indonesia.
Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of California Berkeley.
Galvez, R. E., Hingco, T. G., Bautista, C., and Tungpalan, M. T.
(1989). Sociocultural dynamics of blast fishing and sodium
cyanide fishing in two fishing villages in the Lingayen Gulf
Area. In Silvestre, G. T., Miclat, E., and Thia-Eng, C. (eds.),
Towards Sustainable Development of the Coastal Resources of
Lingayen Gulf, Philippines. International Center for Living
Aquatic Resources Management, Makati.
Gaynor, J. (2005). The Decline of Small-Scale Fishing and the Reorgani-
zation of Livelihood Practices Among Sama People in Eastern
Indonesia. Michigan Discussions in Anthropology 15(1): 90–149.
Herre, A. W. C. T. (1948). Outlook for Philippine Fisheries. Far
Eastern Survey 17: 277–278.
Kelly, P. F. (2000). Landscapes of Globalisation: Human geographies
of economic change in the Philippines. Routledge, London.
Knudsen, M. (2008). Appropriation of coastal space and community
formation on a Philippine Island. Paper presented at the
Association of Social Anthropologists of the UK and Common-
wealth Conference, Auckland, 8–12 December 2008.
Lowe, C. (2000). Global markets, local injustice in Southeast Asian
seas: the live fish trade and local fishers in the Togean Islands. In
Hum Ecol (2010) 38:415–427
Zerner, C. (ed.), People, Plants, & Justice: The Politics of Nature
Conservation. Columbia University Press, New York.
Lucas, E. Y., and Kirit, R. (2009). Fisheries–Marine Protected Area–
Tourism Interactions in Moalboal, Cebu, Philippines. Coastal
Management 37: 480–490.
Majanen, T. (2007). Resource Use Conflicts in Mabini and Tingloy,
the Philippines. Marine Policy 31: 480–487.
McAlpin, M. (2008). Conservation and Community-Based Develop-
ment Through Ecotourism in the Temperate Rainforest of
Southern Chile. Policy Sciences 41: 51–69.
McGoodwin, J. R. (1990). Crisis in the World’s Fisheries: People,
Problems and Policies. Stanford University Press, Stanford.
Municipal Government of Coron. (2009). Message from the Munic-
ipal Mayor. http://corontourism.info/ (accessed 22 October
2009).
Navasero, M. (2009). Cruising the Philippine Seas. Philippine Daily
Inquirer, February 28.
Nicholson, T. (1997). Tourism Development and Community: four
Philippine case studies in Boracay, Samal, Marinduque and
Davao. VSO Philippines, Quezon City.
Oracion, E. G., Miller, M. L., and Christie, P. (2005). Marine Protected
Areas for Whom? Fisheries, Tourism, and Solidarity in a Philippine
Community. Ocean & Coastal Management 48: 393–410.
Padilla, J. E., Mamauag, S., Braganza, G., Brucal, N., Yu, D., and
Morales, A. (2003). Sustainability Assessment of the Live Reef-
Fish for Food Industry in Palawan Philippines. WWF-
Philippines, Quezon City.
PAFID (Philippine Association for Intercultural Development)
(2000). Mapping the ancestral lands and waters of the
Calamian Tagbanwa of Coron, Northern Palawan. In Benna-
gen, P. L., and Royo, A. G. (eds.), Mapping the Earth,
Mapping Life. Legal Rights and Natural Resources Center,
Inc, Quezon City.
Palawan Provincial Government (2000). Human Development
Report. Provincial Planning and Development Office, Puerto
Princesa City.
Palawan Times. (2009). Coron airport in Northern Palawan attracts
more tourists. August 4. Viewed 13 October 2009 at: http://
thepalawantimes.wordpress.com/2009/08/04/coron-airport-in-
northern-palawan-attracts-more-tourists/.
Province and Municipalities of Palawan, WWF-Philippines, Palawan
Council for Sustainable Development and Palawan State Univer-
sity. (2009). Palawan Live Reef Fish for Food Trade: Sustain-
ability Plan 2009–2013, Draft.
Pauly, D., Christensen, V., Dalsgaard, J., Froese, R., and Torres Jr.,
F. (1998). Fishing Down Marine Food Webs. Science 279:
860–863.
Pomeroy, R. S., Parks, J. E., and Balboa, C. M. (2006). Farming the
Reef: is Aquaculture a Solution for Reducing Fishing Pressure on
Coral Reefs? Marine Policy 30: 111–130.
Pomeroy, R. S., Pido, M. D., Pontillas, J., Francisco, B. S., White,
A. T., Ponce De Leon, E. M. C., and Silvestre, G. T. (2008).
Evaluation of Policy Options for the Live Reef Food Fish
Trade in the Province of Palawan, Western Philippines.
Marine Policy 32: 55–65.
Rigg, J. (2005). Poverty and Livelihoods After Full-Time Farming: A
South-East Asian View. Asia Pacific Viewpoint 46(2): 173–184.
Rigg, J. (2006). Land, Farming, Livelihoods, and Poverty: Rethinking the
Links in the Rural South. World Development 34(1): 180–202.
Russell, S. D., and Alexander, R. T. (2000). Of beggars and
thieves: customary sharing of the catch and informal sanctions
View publication stats
427
in a Philippine fishery. In Durrenberger, E. P., and King, T. D.
(eds.), State and Community in Fisheries Management: Power,
Policy and Practice. Bergin & Garvey, Connecticut, pp. 19–
40.
Sadovy, Y. J., Donaldson, T. J., Graham, T. R., McGilvray, F.,
Muldoon, G. J., Phillips, M. J., Rimmer, M. A., Smith, A., and
Yeeting, B. (2003). While Stocks Last: The Live Reef Food Fish
Trade. Asian Development Bank, Manila.
Salayo, N., Garces, L., Pido, M., Viswanathan, K., Pomeroy, R.,
Ahmed, M., Siason, I., Sengh, K., and Masaei, A. (2008).
Managing Excess Capacity in Small-Scale Fisheries: Perspectives
from Stakeholders in Three Southeast Asian Countries. Marine
Policy 32: 692–700.
Scales, H., Balmford, A., Liu, M., Sadovy, Y., and Manica, A. (2006).
Keeping Bandits at Bay? Science 313: 612–613.
Seki, K. (2004). Maritime migration in the Visayas: a case study of the
Dalaguetenon Fisherfolk in Cebu. In Umehara, H., and Bautista,
G. M. (eds.), Communities at the Margins: Reflections on Social,
Economic and Environmental Change in the Philippines. Ateneo
de Manila University Press, Quezon City, pp. 193–221.
Sheriff, N., Little, D. C., and Tantikamton, K. (2008). Aquaculture and
the Poor—Is the Culture of High-Value Fish a Viable Livelihood
Option for the Poor? Marine Policy 32: 1094–1102.
Sievanen, L., Crawford, B., Pollnac, R., and Lowe, C. (2005).
Weeding Through Assumptions of Livelihood Approaches in
ICM: Seaweed Farming in the Philippines and Indonesia. Ocean
and Coastal Management 48: 297–313.
Thiele, M. T., Pollnac, R. B., and Christie, P. (2005). Relationships
Between Coastal Tourism and ICM Sustainability in the Central
Visayas Region of the Philippines. Ocean and Coastal Manage-
ment 48: 378–392.
Trejos, B., and Chiang, L. N. (2009). Local Economic Linkages to
Community-Based Tourism in Rural Costa Rica. Singapore
Journal of Tropical Geography 30(3): 373–387.
Trousdale, W. J. (1999). Governance in Context: Boracay Island,
Philippines. Annals of Tourism Research 26(4): 840–867.
Tsing, A. L. (2005). Friction: An Ethnography of Global Connection.
Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Villanueva, Jr., A. (2008). Coron, San Vicente Towns Emerge as
Palawan’s Tourism Growth Centers. The Palawan Times. http://
thepalawantimes.wordpress.com/2008/05/18/coron-san-vicente-
towns-emerge-as-palawans-tourism-growth-centers/ (accessed 21
October 2009).
West, P., and Carrier, J. G. (2004). Ecotourism and Authenticity: Getting
Away from It All? Current Anthropology 45(4): 483–498.
White, A. T., and Rosales, R. (2003). Community-oriented marine
tourism in the Philippines: role in economic development and
conservation. In Gössling, S. (ed.), Tourism and Development in
Tropical Islands: Political Ecology Perspectives. Edward Elgar
Publishing, Northampton, pp. 237–262.
White, A. T., Vogt, H. P., and Arin, T. (2000). Philippine Coral Reefs
Under Threat: The Economic Losses Caused by Reef Destruc-
tion. Marine Pollution Bulletin 40(7): 598–605.
Wong, P. P. (1998). Coastal Tourism Development in Southeast Asia:
Relevance and Lessons for Coastal Zone Management. Ocean
and Coastal Management 38: 89–109.
Zayas, C. N. (1994). Pangayaw and Tumandok in the Maritime
World of the Visayan Islanders. In Ushijima, I., and Zayas, C.
N. (eds.), Fishers of the Visayas: Visayas Maritime Anthropo-
logical Studies 1: 1991–1993. CSSP Publications and Univer-
sity of the Philippines Press, Quezon City, pp. 133–164.