Submitted:
19 January 2023
Posted:
19 January 2023
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
Materials and Methods
2.1. Tuna Traceability Framework
2.2. Description of the Study Sites
2.3. Data Collection
2.4. Data Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Fishing Characteristics of the Fishers
3.2. Factors Affecting Daily Fish Catch of Fishers
3.3. Factors Influencing Full Implementation of Tuna Traceability
Fishers’ Communication in the Fishing Ground
Tuna Traceability Implementation
Possible Benefits of Full Implementation
Market Benefit
Foresee Problems
Favor Having a Traceability App
4. Discussion
4.2. Factors Affecting Fish Catch
4.2. Factors Affecting the Implementation of Traceability
4.2.1. Factors Affecting Fisher’s Communication
4.3. Importance of Communication in Social Network in Fisheries
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Beulens, A. J. M., Folstar, P., & Hofstede, G. J. (2005). Food safety and transparency in food chains and networks Relationships and challenges. Food Control, 16, 481–486. [CrossRef]
- Bush, S. R., Bailey, M., Zwieten, P. Van, Kochen, M., Wiryawan, B., Doddema, A., & Mangunsong, S. C. (2017). Private provision of public information in tuna fisheries. Marine Policy, 77(June 2016), 130–135. [CrossRef]
- Lewis, S. G., & Boyle, M. (2017). The Expanding Role of Traceability in Seafood : Tools and Key Initiatives. 82. [CrossRef]
- Seto, K., & Fiorella, K. J. (2017). From Sea to Plate: The Role of Fish in a Sustainable Diet. Frontiers in Marine Science, 4(74). [CrossRef]
- Willette, D. A., & Cheng, S. H. (2018). Delivering on seafood traceability under the new U . S . import monitoring program. Ambio, 47(1), 25–30. [CrossRef]
- Kresna, B. A., & Seminar, K. B. (2017). Developing a Traceability System for Tuna Supply Chains. 6(October), 52–62.
- Mai, N. (2010). Benefits of traceability in fish supply chains – case studies. British Food Journal, 112, 976–1002. [CrossRef]
- Golan, E., Krissoff, B., Kuchler, F., Calvin, L., Nelson, K., & Price, G. (2004). Traceability in the U . S . Food Supply : Economic Theory and Industry Studies Library Cataloging Record : 830.
- Pouliot, Sebastien & Sumner, D. A. (2008). T , l , i f s q. 90(February), 15–27. [CrossRef]
- Smith, G. C., Tatum, J. D., Belk, K. E., Scanga, J. A., Grandin, T., & Sofos, J. N. (2005). MEAT Traceability from a US perspective. 71, 174–193. [CrossRef]
- Macusi, E. D., Rafon, J. K. A., & Macusi, E. S. (2021). Impact of COVID-19 and closed fishing season on commercial fishers of Davao Gulf, Mindanao, Philippines. Ocean & Coastal Management, 217(C), 105997. [CrossRef]
- BFAR. (2020). Philippine Fisheries Profile 2019. Retrieved from Quezon City, Philippines.
- Macusi, E. D., Abreo, N. A. S., & Babaran, R. P. (2017). Local Ecological Knowledge ( LEK ) on Fish Behavior Around Anchored FADs : the Case of Tuna Purse Seine and Ringnet Fishers from Southern. 4(June), 1–13. [CrossRef]
- Tolentino-Zondervan, F., Berentsen, P., Bush, S. R., Digal, L., & Lansink, A. O. (2016). Fisher-level decision making to participate in Fisheries Improvement Projects (FIPs) for yellowfin tuna in the Philippines. PLoS ONE, 11(10), 1–22. [CrossRef]
- Doddema, M., Spaargaren, G., Wiryawan, B., Bush, S. R., Doddema, M., Spaargaren, G., Wiryawan, B., & Bush, S. R. (2020). Fisher and Trader Responses to Traceability Interventions in Indonesia Fisher and Trader Responses to Traceability Interventions. Society & Natural Resources, 33(10), 1232–1251. [CrossRef]
- Grantham, A., Pandan, M. R., Roxas, S., & Hitchcock, B. (2022). Overcoming Catch Data Collection Challenges and Traceability Implementation Barriers in a Sustainable , Small-Scale Fishery. 1–16.
- World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) Philippines. (2020). Applying electronic catch documentation and traceability technologies to small-scale tuna handline fisheries: A case study from Mindoro and Bicol, Philippines. Jun.
- Auld, G., Renckens, S., & Cashore, B. (2015). Transnational private governance between the logics of empowerment and control. Regulation and Governance, 9(2), 108–124. [CrossRef]
- Macusi, E. D., Kay, A., Liguez, O., Macusi, E. S., & Digal, L. N. (2021). Factors influencing catch and support for the implementation of the closed fishing season in Davao Gulf , Philippines. Marine Policy, 130(May), 104578. [CrossRef]
- Macusi, E. D., Morales, I. D. G., Macusi, E. S., Pancho, A., & Digal, L. N. (2022). Impact of closed fishing season on supply, catch, price and the fisheries market chain. Marine Policy, 138, 105008. [CrossRef]
- Sarmiento, J. M. P., Mendez, Q. L. T., Estaña, L. M. B., Giray, E. S., Nañola Jr., C. L., & Alviola IV, P. A. (2021). The role of motorized boats in fishers’ productivity in marine protected versus non-protected areas in Davao Gulf, Philippines. Environment, Development and Sustainability 23, 16786–16802.
- Pauly, D. (2006). Major trends in small·scale marine fisheries, with emphasis on develop-. Maritime Studies, 4(2), 7–22.
- Close, C. H., & Hall, G. B. (2006). A GIS-based protocol for the collection and use of local knowledge in fisheries management planning. Journal of Environmental Management, 78(4), 341–352. [CrossRef]
- Lepofsky, D., & Caldwell, M. (2013). Indigenous marine resource management on the northwest coast of North America. Ecological Processes, 2(1), 1–12. [CrossRef]
- Caddy, J. F., & Carocci, F. (1999). The spatial allocation of fishing intensity by port-based inshore fleets: A GIS application. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 56(3), 388–403. [CrossRef]
- Daw, T. M. (2008). Spatial distribution of effort by artisanal fishers: Exploring economic factors affecting the lobster fisheries of the Corn Islands, Nicaragua. Fisheries Research, 90(1–3), 17–25. [CrossRef]



| Study Site | Total Respondents | Owner | Operator | Passenger | Crew |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mati | 56 | 42 | 11 | 3 | |
| Lupon | 56 | 54 | 2 | ||
| Governor Generoso | 27 | 20 | 6 | 1 | |
| Santa Cruz | 16 | 10 | 2 | 4 | |
| Samal | 28 | 21 | 6 | 1 | |
| Malita | 47 | 28 | 14 | 5 | |
| Santa Maria | 34 | 28 | 4 | 2 | |
| Total | 264 | 203 | 45 | 12 | 4 |
| Variables | Definition | Mati | Lupon | GovGen | Sta. Cruz | Samal | Malita | Sta. Maria |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (Yr) | Age of individual fishers | 42 (18, 82) | 48 (27, 78) | 46 (22, 88) | 53 (36, 65) | 48 (25, 73) | 46 (29, 74) | 42 (18, 71) |
| Household size (HHS) | Numbers of individual members of the family | 5 (1, 18) | 5 (1, 15) | 5 (1, 9) | 5 (1, 11) | 4 (2, 8) | 5 (1, 10) | 4 (1, 9) |
| Years community (Yr) | Number of years resident of the fishing community | 34 (1, 82) | 40 (6, 68) | 36 (6, 60) | 44 (2, 61) | 44 (15, 73) | 35 (10, 72) | 36 (13, 70) |
| Years fishing (Yr) | Number of years of fishing experience | 22 (1, 67) | 29 (2, 60) | 23 (2, 62) | 30 (12, 48) | 28 (5, 50) | 25 (3, 60) | 23 (5, 50) |
| Catch per trip (kg/trip) | The volume of number of fish caught per fishing trip | 9 (2, 50) | 9 (2, 30) | 9 (2, 45) | 15 (3, 40) | 16 (5, 40) | 21 (1, 50) | 21 (3, 50) |
| Number of fishing hours (hr) | Number of fishing hours from the time of arrival in the fishing ground up to the last catch catch | 10 (2, 24) | 14 (3, 24) | 11 (2, 24) | 13 (7, 24) | 9 (3, 16) | 16 (2, 24) | 10 (5, 24) |
| Boat capacity !!!!!(kg) | Boat capacity of each respondent | 198 (100, 200) | 79 (20, 200) | 122 (10, 300) | 549 (30, 5000) | 266 (70, 1000) | 273 (20, 1000) | 167 (40, 500) |
| Catch per unit effort (CPUE: kg/hr) | Catch per unit effort is based on the normal of fish catch (kg) per trip divided by the number of fishing hours | 1.2 (0.21, 7.5) | 0.8 (0.08, 2.5) | 1.2 (0.21, 6.67) | 1.3 (0.17, 4.3) | 1.9 (0.42, 6.3) | 1.7 (0.04, 5) | 2.2 (0.3, 6) |
| Monthly income (Php) | Monthly income of fishers in fishing | 6473 (500, 15000) | 7161 (1000, 15000) | 3741 (2000, 10000) | 7672 (2250, 17500) | 7366 (3000, 15000) | 6420 (2000, 13500) | 7462 (5000, 15000) |
| Variables | df | MS | F-Value | P-Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Household size (HHS) | 1 | 0.593 | 6.06 | 0.014 |
| Monthly income | 1 | 0.285 | 2.91 | 0.089 |
| Years in community | 1 | 0.586 | 5.99 | 0.015 |
| Number of fishing trip (hrs) | 1 | 0.695 | 7.11 | 0.008 |
| Fish sold | 1 | 3.869 | 39.56 | 0.001 |
| Fishers’ communication | 1 | 0.693 | 7.08 | 0.008 |
| Variables | df | MS | F-Value | P-Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Household size (HHS) | 1 | 0.291 | 2.71 | 0.101 |
| Number of fishing trip (hrs) | 1 | 0.882 | 8.19 | 0.005 |
| Boat capacity | 1 | 0.885 | 8.23 | 0.004 |
| Fishers’ communication | 1 | 0.699 | 6.50 | 0.011 |
| Benefits in traceability | 1 | 0.249 | 2.31 | 0.130 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).