APPENDIX H

Malawi Case Study

Linkages between Fisheries, Povertyand Growth

Case study of Malawi

A report prepared for the

Department for International Development (DFID)Project: ‘The Role of Fisheries in Poverty Alleviationand Growth: Past, Present and Future’

DFID/PASS Contract: AG0213

CONTENTS

PAGE1. BACKGROUND 12. POVERTY 63. ECONOMIC GROWTH 104. FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT 125. POLICY MAKING 25REFERENCES 30

H-1

1. BACKGROUND

1.1 History, structure and nature of government and national politics

Politically, Malawi became an independent state in 1964 from the British ruledfederation of Rhodesia (Zimbabwe) and Nyasaland (Malawi). Malawi became arepublic and a one-party state, with Dr. Hastings Kamuzu Banda as its first President in1966. Dr Banda later became Life President of Malawi in 1971 (Europa, 1993). Malawithen became a democratic multi-party state in 1994, with Bakili Muluzi as the firstdemocratic state President. Dr. Bingu wa Mutharika was elected as second democraticstate President of Malawi in 2004. The head of State is the democratically electedPresident, whose term of office is five years. The executive power is vested in thePresident and the legislative power in the National Assembly. Malawi’s economy isagro-based.

1.2 National Policy priorities

Malawi’s development policy expresses the need for reduction of poverty, ignoranceand disease by the achievement of rapid and sustained economic growth, animprovement in income distribution and a reduction in the instability of welfare forboth the individual and the nation. The policy recognises that if the welfare ofMalawi is to be further increased economic growth will have to exceed populationgrowth. The performance of agriculture will be critical, and other natural resources,will where viable, need to be exploited.

In recognition of this, several national policies have been developed andimplemented. These include Malawi’s Vision 2020, Malawi Poverty ReductionStrategy Paper (MPRSP) and National Strategy for Sustainable Development(NSSD).

To achieve meaningful poverty reduction and learn lessons from past experience, theGovernment of Malawi decided to develop the Malawi Poverty Reduction StrategyPaper (MPRSP). The Malawi Poverty Reduction Strategy (MPRS), which waslaunched in April 2002, is the overarching strategy that now forms the basis for alldevelopmental activities by all stakeholders, including Government. The MPRS isthe product of a highly consultative process involving a broad range of stakeholdersand represents a consensus about how Malawi can develop and achieve its coreobjective of poverty reduction.

The overall goal of the MPRS is to achieve “sustainable poverty reduction throughempowerment of the poor”. Rather than regarding the poor as helpless victims ofpoverty in need of hand-outs and passive recipients of trickle-down growth, theMPRS sees them as active participants in economic development (GoM 2002). TheMPRS also emphasises prioritisation and action.

The MPRS is built around four pillars. These pillars are the main strategiccomponents grouping the various activities and policies into a coherent frameworkfor poverty reduction. The first pillar promotes rapid sustainable pro-poor economic

H-2

growth and structural transformation. The second pillar enhances human capitaldevelopment. The third pillar improves the quality of life of the most vulnerable, andthe fourth pillar promotes good governance. The MPRS also mainstreams key crosscutting issues such as HIV/AIDS, gender, environment, and science and technology(GoM 2002).

After the launch of the MPRSP in April 2002, however, many stakeholders,including the private sector, observed that policies to fulfil this strategic objectivewere insufficient to achieve a sustained annual economic growth of at least 6 per centrequired to reduce poverty by half by the year 2015, primarily because the strategiesdid not encompass all sectors of the economy.

To close this gap, therefore, Cabinet directed that the Ministry of Economic Planningand Development (MEPD) should coordinate the formulation of the MalawiEconomic Growth Strategy (MEGS) in 2004. The main objective of the MEGS is togenerate high and sustainable broad-based economic growth of at least 6 per cent perannum over the long-term (GoM 2004). It aims at achieving high economic growththrough the stimulation of trade and investment and the restoration ofmacroeconomic stability. The approach is to stimulate economic growth throughpromotion of trade1 and investment. The Malawi Economic Growth Strategy hasbeen developed through a consultative process involving both the public and privatesectors. The Strategy also highlights the main constraints on economic growth, tradeand investment and identifies corrective measures.

It is argued that the MEGS has been based on a realistic assessment of the resourcesavailable. It focuses on strategies and actions that do not require substantialadditional spending by Government and instead can be achieved through refocusingof existing resources and by developing a more conducive set of policies that willstimulate private sector investment and trade in the immediate future. However, inthe medium term, donor organisations will have a key role to play in creating aconducive environment for economic growth by supporting policy reforms andproviding resources to support government during the transitional period.

1.2.1 Structural Adjustment Programmes (SAPS)

Malawi has implemented a series of structural adjustment programmes (SAPs) toaddress structural weaknesses and adjust the economy to attain sustainable growthand poverty reduction. The major areas of focus of the SAPs included theliberalisation of the agricultural sector, parastatal sector reform, privatisation, tradeliberalisation, financial sector reform, exchange rate liberalisation, interest rateliberalisation; and the rationalisation of the Budget. Nonetheless, the adjustmentprogrammes have had limited impact on economic growth and poverty reduction.

Between 1981 and 1994, Malawi implemented several structural adjustmentprogrammes supported by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the WorldBank (WB). From 1995 to date, Malawi has implemented three Fiscal Restructuring

1 Trade refers to export-oriented and import-substitution trade.

H-3

and Deregulation Programmes (FRDP) supported by the World Bank. Malawi hasalso been through a series of Enhanced Structural Adjustment Facilities (ESAF)supported by the International Monetary Fund (IMF). In parallel to the introductionof the PRSP approach internationally, the IMF adopted Poverty Reduction andGrowth Facilities (PRGF) as its main instrument in Malawi (GoM 2002).

Given that Malawi is an agro-based economy, many of the reforms were focussed onthe agricultural sector. The first key reform was price decontrol, which was aimed atallowing market forces to drive resource allocation in production. Secondly, marketliberalisation was intended to foster competition and ensure that smallholder farmersget good input and producer prices. In particular, the repeal of the Special Crops Actin 1995 lifted restrictions on smallholder production of burley tobacco and allowedsmallholder farmers to generate more income.

In the financial sector, the Reserve Bank of Malawi (RBM) and Banking Acts werereviewed in 1998/99 to allow, among other things, easy entry of new bankinginstitutions into the financial sector and to give the Reserve Bank greaterindependence in the formulation of monetary policy. The revision of the Acts alsostrengthened the RBM's powers to supervise the banking industry. The liberalisationof the financial sector also meant that monetary policy had to shift from direct toindirect instruments of monetary policy (GoM 2002).

Major industry and trade reforms were implemented in 1988 through the Industrialand Trade Policy Adjustment Programme. The programme eliminated quantitativerestrictions and rationalised trade taxes. The foreign exchange market was alsoliberalised to ensure efficiency in foreign exchange allocation.

Locally produced goods were exempted from surtax in 1992 as a way of offeringprotection to local producers. The rationalisation of trade taxes ensured that onlyimport duties were used as instruments of protection, while domestic taxesemphasised taxing consumption rather than production.

To promote Public Sector Management the Government also undertook civil servicereform. The Civil Service Reform programme included a census of civil servantsand the retrenchment of 20,000 temporary employees. In addition, strategic andfunctional reviews of Ministries formed the basis for rationalisation of Governmentthrough contracting out certain functions and removal of operational overlaps.

The impact of the wide ranging policy reforms implemented during the adjustmentperiod has been mixed and mostly unsatisfactory insofar as poverty reduction isconcerned. Although there have been periods of macroeconomic stability,sustainable growth has proved elusive. The instability has to a large extent arisenfrom external shocks, inconsistent implementation of reforms, fiscal policy slippagesand the narrow base of production capacity. The inability to sustain high rates ofgrowth over a long period has undermined any poverty reducing impact of growth.Furthermore, macroeconomic instability has aggravated the poverty situation.

H-4

1.3 Demographic trends

Malawi is a landlocked country with a total area of 118,484 km2, of which about20% (24, 405 km2) is covered by water (see figure 1, map of Malawi and majorwater bodies). According to the 1998 population census, Malawi had a totalpopulation of 9,934,000 people, with an annual population growth rate of 1.98% forthe period 1987 – 1998 (NSO 2002). For the period prior to 1998 census, thepopulation growth rate was estimated at 3.2% per annum. This indicates that thepopulation growth rate has decreased. From 1980 to 2000, the population of Malawigrew from some 6.2 million to slightly more than 10 million.

Malawi has an average population density of 105 persons per square kilometre ofland area (that is lake area excluded). The percentage of people living in urban areasincreased from 10.7% during the 1987 population census to 14.0% during the 1998census. Calculations based on the 1998 census indicate that about 10% of thecountry’s population live along the cost of lakes Malawi, Malombe, Chilwa andChiuta.

1.4 Economic structure

Malawi’s economy is predominantly rural and agricultural based. Its economicperformance is largely dependent on weather conditions and on an internationalcommodity prices. At the time of Independence in 1964, Malawi adopted an agro-baseddevelopment strategy due to the low potential of mineral resources and the small size ofthe domestic market (GoM 1993). To date, the Malawi economy still remains agro-based, with the agriculture sector accounting for over 38.6% of GDP (GoM 2004).Agricultural production accounts for about 90% of the Malawi’s exports (NSO, 1994).

Between 1974 and 1984 Malawi’s economy enjoyed vigorous economic growth.Gross Domestic Product in real terms increased at an average rate of 6% per year.This resulted in an annual average growth rate of per capita income of 3%. However,from the late 1970s, the Malawi economy started experiencing a series of externalshocks including deteriorating terms of trade, steep rise in the price of fuel followingthe oil crises and external transport problems. Consequently, growth in GDP fell inthe early 1980s (from 3.3% in 1979 to 0.4% in 1980). Since then economic growthhas not been stable and has fluctuated quite a lot, with a GDP annual growth rate of3.5% in 1999, 0.2% in 2000, -4.1% in 2001 and 1.8% in 2002.

Figure 1: Map of Malawi showing major water bodies

H-5

The extended family is the chief production unit and the main source of socialsupport. The village is organised under customary law with authority vested in atraditional village headman or chief helped by village elders. Malawi’s villages aregrouped under group village headmen, sub-chiefs, and traditional chiefs. Thetraditional authority plays a central role and its support is critical to any povertyalleviation efforts at the grass-roots level.

1.5 Development status

•••• Mangochi

L. Malawi

Lake Chiuta

H-6

From independence (1964) through to 1979, the Malawi economy registeredimpressive growth. Real output growth, mainly spurred by the agricultural sector,averaged 6.7 percent during this period. However, the benefits of this growth werepoorly distributed, as growth was narrowly based on estate agriculture. Starting from1979, Malawi suffered from a series of exogenous shocks, including high importcosts due to oil price shocks, disruptions in trade routes, the influx of refugees fromMozambique and droughts that disrupted the pattern of growth. In addition, policyweaknesses and slippages exacerbated the effect of these external shocks.

As a result of these internal and external factors, real GDP growth fluctuatedbetween 1979 and 1987, recovering to a high of 6.8 percent in 1984 followingdroughts in previous years. The agricultural sector continued to be the main sourceof growth and domestic saving.

Following another round of SAPs, Malawi started to experience relatively buoyanteconomic growth between 1988 and 1991. Real GDP growth rose from 3.3 percentin 1988 to 7.8 percent in 1991. However, the gains arising from this growth wereshort-lived as growth fluctuated through the 1990s, largely as a result of externalshocks such as droughts and the reduction of donor financial support between 1992and 1994. For example, the economy recorded growth rates of -7.9 percent in 1992and -11.6 percent in 1994, before recovering with a growth rate of 14.5 percent in1996. Growth has averaged 2.6 percent between 1997 and 2000 and was at 1.8percent in 2001.

This poor economic growth performance implied that the majority of the populationexperienced no change in their economic status. The situation was more seriousamong the poor whose household consumption even in times of relative growth hadstagnated. Thus economic performance during the adjustment period from 1981 todate had minimal impact on poverty reduction.

2. POVERTY

2.1 Poverty definition

Poverty in Malawi is widespread, deep and severe. Poverty, in general, Malawianscharacterise it as “…as a state of continuous deprivation or a lack of the basics oflife.” 2 In this analysis, poverty is taken as a condition characterised by seriousdeprivation of basic needs in terms of food, water, health, shelter, education; and lackof means and opportunities to fulfil these basic need. The poor, in this case, aredefined as those whose consumption of basic needs (both food and non-food) isbelow the minimum level estimated at MK 10.473 per day in 1998. Within thisnumber of the poor, 28.2 percent of the total population are living in dire poverty. In

2 Government of Malawi and United Nations Development Programme (1993) Situation Analysis ofPoverty in Malawi3 Average Exchange Rate in 1998 was MK31.1 = 1 US Dollar.

H-7

general, the poor have low levels of access to or acquisition of certain basic socialservices or capabilities.

Poverty in Malawi, therefore, has many dimensions including income poverty andhuman or capability poverty. Poverty exists, and is observable, at various levels: atthe individual, household, community and national levels, and has a genderdimension.

The level of inequality is well illustrated by the fact that in 1997/98, the richest 20%of the population consumed 46.3% while the poorest 20% consumed only 6.3% oftotal reported consumption of goods and services. In urban areas, the richest 20%consumed 58.4% while the poorest 20% consumed only 4.5%. Consumption wasalso more unequally distributed within urban areas where the Gini coefficient was0.52 as opposed to 0.37 in rural areas (see Table 1 below).

Table1: Indices of Inequality in Consumption

GiniCoefficient

Consumption of Group as Percentageof Total Consumption of Population

Poorest 20% Wealthiest 20%National 0.40 6.3 46.8Rural 0.37 6.7 44.3Urban 0.52 4.5 58.4

Source: Government of Malawi (2000) Profile of Poverty in Malawi: Poverty Analysis of the Integrated Household Survey

2.1.1 Demographic characteristics of the poor

In terms of household composition, poor households in Malawi are considerablylarger than non-poor households, with larger proportions of females and dependents.On average, poor households have 1.5 more persons than non-poor households. Thesame pattern of household size is maintained in both rural and urban areas.

In terms of heads of households, studies have shown that just under 25% ofhouseholds in Malawi are female headed and that such households aredisproportionately poor GoM 2000). It was also reported that 27.4% of all poorhouseholds are headed by women. Fewer households in urban areas are headed bywomen as compared to those in rural areas.

2.2 Causes of poverty

Poverty in Malawi is caused by a number of factors. Many of these factors areconstraints on the economic productivity of land, labour, capital, and technology.Constraints on the productivity of land include rapid environmental degradation andlimited or inadequate access to land. Constraints on labour include generally lowlevels of education, poor health status including HIV/AIDS, lack of or limited off-farm employment, rapid population growth, and gender inequalities. The keyconstraint on capital is lack of access to credit. All of these factors causing povertyare exacerbated by generally weak institutional capacity within the country.

H-8

The Conceptual Framework of Poverty analysis in Malawi is hinged on four mainelements as low agricultural production, low non-farm income, low education andpoor health. Two additional elements impact on the each of the four elements above,and these are rapid population growth, and weak institutional structure. Theframework is merely a simple schematic presentation of a complex issue that wasdeveloped by GoM and UN (GoM/UN 1993) to guide in the inquiry on poverty. Theframework is presented as figure 2 below.

Population growth will exert strong pressures on land and natural resources, resultinginto changes in patterns and levels of agricultural productivity. Population pressurewill also impact on labour market, employment situation and productivity.Institutional structure and systems reflect the political and social organisation inMalawi, and play a key role in decision making process both at policy level and inthe allocation of resources. These institutions formally organised as CentralGovernment, Local Government, and Traditional Authorities permeate at all levels ofsociety. Their pivotal role determines policies and programmes that affect all levelsof the population. All these institutions have been hampered by a centralisedapproach which has been unable to delegate adequate authority and resources to thelocal level.

A number of studies on poverty in general have been carried out in Malawi. The firstone was carried out in 1993 by the Government of Malawi and the United Nations,where a report titled “ Situation Analysis of Poverty in Malawi” was produced.Following this was an Integrated Household Survey (IHS) that was carried out in1997 and 1998 with a view of understanding the conditions under which Malawianswere living. Two reports were produced from that survey, titled “Profile of Povertyin Malawi, 1998 – Poverty Analysis of the Malawi Integrated Household Survey,1997-98”, and “A Relative Profile of Poverty in Malawi, 1998 – A quintile-basedpoverty analysis of the Malawi Integrated Household Survey, 1997-98”. This study(IHS) was a follow-up to the adoption of the Poverty Alleviation Programmes bygovernment in 1994 and the institution of the Poverty Monitoring System to provideinformation on poverty and poverty trends in Malawi. Sector specific, like fisheries,has had no studies that looked at poverty per se.

H-9

Copied from: Situation Analysis of Poverty in Malawi (GoM/UN 1993)

Low Agricultural Production Low Income Low Education Poor Health

Limited Land LowProductivity

ClimaticFactors

UnequalDistribution

PoorQuality

LowTechnology

InadequateInputs

LimitedExtension

LimitedCredit

Malnutrition Disease

InsufficientHousehold FoodSecurity

Inadequate Materialand Child Care

Insufficient HealthServices and UnhealthyLiving Environment

RapidPopulation

Growth

Unequal Distributionof Income

Limited developmentof Small & Micro

Enterprises

Limited EmploymentOpportunities

MarketPricing

LowWages

InadequateTransport

LimitedFinancialSupport

LimitedVocationalTraining

Low Enforcement Poor Quality

Lack ofSchool Fees

LimitedFacilities

InadequateResources

InappropriateCurricula

WeakInstitutionalStructuresInadequate Domestic and other

External ResourcesSocial and Cultural Factors

Figure 2 Conceptual Framework of Poverty in Malawi

H-10

3. ECONOMIC GROWTH

3.1 Economic base

The Malawi economy remains agro-based. The agriculture sector accounts for over38.6% of GDP, employs about 84.5% of the labour force, and accounts for 82.5% offoreign exchange earnings. Agriculture is characterised by a dual structure consistingof commercial estates that grow cash crops and a large smallholder sub-sectorengaged in mixed subsistence farming. Maize, the staple food, accounts for 80% ofcultivated land in the smallholder sub-sector. The main agricultural export crop istobacco, followed by tea, sugar and coffee. The manufacturing sector is small at 11%of GDP and declining. Manufacturing comprises mainly agro-processing activities,including of tobacco, tea and sugar. Distribution and services represented about 22%each over the 1998-2002 period. The fishing sector was estimated to contribute about4% to the GDP.

In the medium-term (2004–2008), economic growth is estimated to continue bedriven by the agriculture sector. With increased investment in infrastructure,improved credit and marketing, agricultural production is expected to increasesubstantially. This, in turn, is expected to stimulate economic activity in themanufacturing, transport and distribution sectors. Therefore, the structure of theeconomy in terms of sectoral shares to GDP is projected to remain the same in themedium term. Overall growth for the agriculture sector is estimated at 7.8 per centper annum over the entire period. Tables 2 and 3 show the selected macroeconomicindicators between 1995 and 2004 and changes in GDP between 1999 and 2002respectively.

Table 2: Selected Macroeconomic Indicators, 1995- 2004(Annual percentage changes, unless otherwise stated)

Indicator Average1995-2001 2002 2003 2004

GDP at 1994 factor cost 4.4 1.8 4.4 4.9Real Exports of Goods and Non-factorServices

5.5 -0.9 1.4 9.2

Real Imports of Goods and Non-factorServices

3.5 28.3 -0.6 -0.9

Real Gross Fixed Capital Formation -3.2 -19.7 0.7 4.1Gross Savings as Share of GDP* 13.7 10.1 9.1 8.6 of which: Domestic Savings as Share of GDP

2.9 -7.1 -6.6 -4.7

National Savings as Share of GDP** 7.6 -2.6 -2.6 -1.6 Foreign Savings as Share of GDP 6.1 12.7 11.6 10.3Gross Investment as Share of GDP 13.7 10.1 9.1 8.6Inflation 37.4 14.8 10.0 8.0

������������ �����������������������������

H-11

Table 3: Changes in GDP between 1999 and 2002

1999 2000 2001 2002Gross Domestic Product (GDP) at factorcost (MK ‘million)

13,091 13,117 12,582 12,808

GDP at current market prices (MK ‘million) 79,818 103,425 123,075 147,581GDP per capita (MK) 8,220 10,380 15,006 12,900GDP annual growth rate (%) 3.5 0.2 -4.1 1.8

Source: National Statistical Office (NSO), Zomba

3.2 The Fisheries Sector

The fisheries sector plays a key role in poverty reduction through the provision ofrural employment and, more importantly, through its contribution to household foodsecurity. The sector provides employment opportunities to over 350,000 peopledirectly and has a multiplier effect of about 1:5.

Fish provides a major source of protein supply, estimated at approximately 70% ofanimal protein and 40% of the total protein intake for the majority of the rural poor.Fish also provides essential minerals and vitamins, is available throughout the year,is accessible to the vast majority of the people, is available in times of drought andremains largely within the purchasing power of the majority of the population.

3.3 Fishing sector definition

The fisheries sector in Malawi is sub-divided into two, capture fisheries andaquaculture sub-sectors. The capture fisheries sector being the major sector. Malawihas five major water bodies important for fish production. The annual catch fromMalawi’s major fisheries is in the region of 40 to 80 thousand tons. In 2003, Malawiproduced an estimated total catch of 48,200 tonnes. Lake Malawi is the largest andmost significant water body. The fish catch from Lake Malawi contributed over 75percent to the total annual catch from Malawi waters in 2003. The other water bodiesbeing: Lake Chilwa (about 750km2), Lake Malombe (about 390km2), Lake Chiuta(about 200km2), and two sections of the Shire River (upper and lower). In terms offish production in 2003, Lake Chilwa contributed about 14% to the total catch, LakeMalombe about 1.2%, Lake Chiuta about 2.4%, Upper Shire River less than 1% , andthe Lower Shire River about 4.2%. All these water bodies are of high localimportance socio-economically.

The fisheries are multi-species and multi-gear, involving a number of exploitationtechniques to harvest numerous species. They are categorically divided into two, theartisanal or traditional fisheries and the small-scale commercial fisheries. On average,the artisanal fisheries contribute about 85 – 90% of the total fish landings and thesmall-scale commercial fisheries contribute about 10 – 15% of the total fish landings.

3.3.1 The artisanal fisheries

Artisanal fisheries are open access, highly complex, scattered in all water bodies andmainly operate between 0-20m in Lake Malawi while in other water bodies all depthranges are covered. The artisanal fisheries comprises of a wide range of fishing units,ranging from traditional fishing gears and crafts, such as fish traps and handlines

H-12

operated from dugout canoes to relatively modern gears and craft, like the seine netsoperated from planked boats powered by outboard motors, and employ a lot of people.

The main target fish species for the artisanal fisheries, depending on the fishing gear,are chambo (Oreochromis species), Kambuzi (Haplochromis species), Usipa(Engraulicypris sardella), Utaka (Copadichromis species), Kampango (Bargrusmeridionalis) and Mlamba (Clariid gariepinus). The main fishing gears are gillnets,chambo beach seine nets, kambuzi beach seine nets, nkacha seine nets, chilimira seinenets, longlines, handlines and fish traps. Nkacha and chilimira seine nets are open waterseines

The 2003 frame survey results indicated that there were 15,542 gear owners and 42,312crew members that fished with 15,316 fishing craft. Of the fishing craft, 493 wereplanked boats operated with engines, 2,999 were planked boats operated withoutengines, and 11,824 were canoes. A summary of the survey results are given in annex 1.

3.2.2 The small scale commercial fisheries

The small scale commercial fisheries are mechanised, capital intensive and usemainly trawling and purse seining (‘ring net’) and are confined in the southern partof Lake Malawi. The fishery consists of pair trawlers units (wooden boats about 8mlong with a 20-40 hp inboard engine), stern trawler (90-385 hp) units and ring nets(90 hp) which are confined to the southern part of the lake. Thirty-seven commercialfishing vessels have been recommended for this fishery, but the number of operatingfishing vessels have fluctuated between 10 to 25 in the last decade. Thirteen trawlers,eight stern and five pair trawlers are currently operational. The pair trawlers fish inwaters between 18m and 50m deep and the stern trawlers are restricted in deepwaters greater than 50m. All the stern trawlers except one are bottom trawlers. Onestern trawler operate a midwater trawl.

In addition to the small-scale commercial fisheries is the aquarium trade that is basedon the exploitation and exportation of highly coloured territorial cichlids locallyknown as mbuna. The ornamental fishing operations are confined to two licenseesonly and fish in rock areas of not more that 100m deep.

4. FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT

4.1 Principal fish resources

The Lake Malawi fisheries is a multi-species fisheries with distinct fisheries namedafter fish species or gears. Chambo4 (Oreochromis spp) is one of the main sixcommercially important fish species that are commonly fished in lakes Malawi andMalombe, and the chambo fishery is named after the fish. The fishery is made up ofthree main Oreochromis species namely Oreochromis karongae, Oreochromis lidole,and Oreochromis squamipinnis. Research records indicate that the chambo fishery ofLake Malawi has existed for over forty years, even before the start of keeping catchstatistics in Malawi. The fishing gears involved in the fishery have ranged from thepair trawlers, through ring nets to less sophisticated gears like beach seines, gill nets

4 Chambo is a local name for the Oreochromis species

H-13

and fish traps. Although the fishery experiences such a wide range of gears, much ofchambo catch comes from gillnets (about 51%).The other commercially important fish species include Kambuzi (Haplochromisspecies), Usipa (Engraulicypris sardella), Utaka (Copadichromis species), Kampango(Bargrus meridionalis) and Mlamba (Clariid gariepinus). The haplochrominesdominate the beach seine net catches, whereas, Engraulicypris sardella andCopadichromis species dominate the open water seine net catches. Kampango (Bargrusmeridionalis) and Mlamba (Clariid gariepinus) are either caught by gillnets orlonglines.

4.2 Historical trends of landed catches and their values

The annual fish catches have varied widely between 40,000 and 80,000mt, withlandings in most years between 50,000 and 60,000mt. Lakes Malawi, Malombe,Chilwa, Chiuta, and two sections of the Shire River (upper and lower) form the basisof Malawi’s fish production. Lake Malawi is the largest and most significant waterbody in terms of fish production. Most of the catch (85 - 90%) is landed by artisanalfishermen.

The size and range of small-scale fishing fleet has declined as government boatbuilding facilities were withdrawn in an attempt to encourage the emergence ofprivate sector support enterprises, and the level of technology applied to the fisherieshas fallen visibly over the past two decades.

Table 4 shows the estimated annual fish landings for all water bodies in Malawibetween 1978 and 2002)

Table 4: Estimated annual fish landings for all waters bodies in Malawi (1978– 2002)

TOTALYear L. MalawiArtisanal

(tons)

L. MalawiCommercial

(tons)

L. MalawiTotal(tons)

LakeMalombe

(tons)

LakeChilwa(tons)

LakeChiuta(tons)

Lower andMiddleShire(tons)

(tons)

1978 26,400 7,200 33,600 6,100 17,800 1,700 8,600 67,8001979 15,300 7,100 22,400 3,600 25,800 1,600 6,400 59,8001980 23,000 7,200 30,200 6,500 19,400 800 3,900 60,8001981 17,700 7,600 25,300 8,500 8,600 900 4,000 47,3001982 17,800 6,400 24,200 12,100 15,500 1,400 5,200 58,4001983 23,400 7,800 31,200 9,700 16,800 1,100 6,100 64,9001984 25,000 7,600 32,600 11,300 14,600 2,000 4,900 65,4001985 21,000 8,000 29,000 8,600 15,200 1,700 7,600 62,1001986 29,200 7,200 36,400 13,400 13,800 800 9,200 73,6001987 41,800 8,200 50,000 13,000 8,400 3,300 7,100 81,8001988 40,400 6,700 47,100 11,500 7,400 2,000 8,200 76,2001989 33,800 4,900 38,700 6,200 12,600 1,300 10,300 69,1001990 31,600 6,200 37,800 12,200 20,300 2,400 7,500 80,2001991 30,000 5,700 35,700 9,625 7,400 1,700 9,000 63,4251992 35,500 4,900 40,400 7,600 10,459 2,687 3,000 64,1461993 38,200 3,569 41,769 5,811 10,810 3,532 2,900 64,8221994 29,461 4,775 34,236 4,134 10,186 3,350 2,011 53,917

H-14

1995 21,470 5,211 26,681 2,653 1,328 1,159 2,074 33,8951996 36,716 2,988 39,704 3,573 - 4,035 2,173 49,4851997 25,154 3,662 28,816 2,790 4,510 2,733 1,586 40,4351998 28,381 1,370 29,751 4,789 4,973 3,250 1,756 44,5191999 29,051 3,674 32,725 3,717 4,742 1,519 2,146 44,8492000 36,310 3,698 40,008 620 15,987 1,575 9,056 67,2462001 32,013 4,928 36,941 512 536 1,058 2,140 41,1872002 21,920 3,767 25,687 693 6,650 1,275 2,173 36,478

Source: Department of Fisheries

Despite the fluctuating pattern in the total landings, the total value of the landedcatch has shown an increasing pattern (see table 5). This is an indication that theprice of fish has been rising over the years. This could be explained in terms ofincreasing fish demand versus fish supply. It is also worth noting that fish caught isbasically for consumption. There is nothing like by-catches to be discarded or fishfor fish meal.

Table 5: Annual total fish landings in Malawi and their values

Year Total Landings(tons)

Landed value(MK’000)

1978 67,800 8,7901979 59,800 8,3721980 60,800 10,5211981 47,300 8,2201982 58,400 9,3461983 64,900 17,6491984 65,400 20,5131985 62,100 27,6461986 73,600 37,1281987 81,800 40,5801988 76,200 71,7061989 69,100 77,3451990 80,200 65,0001991 63,425 89,8041992 64,146 96,2191993 64,822 130,9161994 53,917 215,6681995 33,895 203,3701996 49,485 742,2751997 40,435 808,7001998 44,519 1,023,9371999 44,849 1,123,9152000 67,246 1,931,9782001 41,187 1,253,3202002 36,478 1,140,667������������ ����������������

In Malawi, fishing gears are usually named after the fish they target, and sometimesin loose terms, a fishery is defined according to the fish species caught. Table 6 gives

H-15

the total annual landings of selected fish species/fisheries that dominated the catchesbetween 2000 and 2003. Table 7 gives the corresponding monetary values of thelanded catches of the selected fish species.

Table 6 Estimated annual total landings of selected dominant fish species

Annual total landings by speciesSpecies 2000 2001 2002 2003

Chambo 3,349.71 2,389.98 3,175.41 6,202.63Kambuzi 3,454.50 2,698.15 1,765.24 1,948.42Kasawala 592.95 2,163.12 66.79 228.92Kampango 1,086.17 1,268.28 929.34 1,615.12Mlamba 9,211.82 6,713.03 3,320.59 3,898.65Mbaba 1,283.39 3,928.82 2,575.02 3,277.69Mcheni 649.98 1,277.79 1,715.43 1,081.66Ntchila 11.13 17.83 8.78 27.86Sanjika 45.67 18.53 7.24 22.78Usipa 8,751.73 3,726.62 4,293.08 4,986.87Utaka 16,638.20 11,329.10 7,146.33 15,061.80Chisawasawa 360.44 1,272.41 338.12 403.55Ndunduma 3.31 13.94 131.04 166.62Mpasa 84.51 37.64 214.24 482.46Nkholokolo 58.43 281.94 13.34 148.74Other tilapia 433.98 171.86 460.09 1,517.74

Table 7: Estimated annual total monetary values of selected fish species (inMK '000)

Annual total values by species (MK '000)Species 2000 2001 2002 2003

Chambo 191,262.86 156,005.94 164,253.37 537,230.46Kambuzi 46,647.27 52,029.33 33,774.93 64,041.32Kasawala 10,290.65 31,412.11 1,038.03 10,589.46Kampango 24,587.27 29,411.41 15,493.65 61,942.54Mlamba - 108,762.27 71,608.52 92,079.62Mbaba 39,258.90 109,077.14 61,989.31 150,713.65Mcheni 13,466.50 28,784.35 47,214.35 45,325.16Ntchila 64.94 - 131.70 92.87Sanjika 228.35 58.83 - -Usipa 144,578.58 78,209.33 96,372.49 178,862.40Utaka 289,005.53 264,156.85 157,123.98 564,491.16Chisawasawa 2,343.46 6,665.31 2,272.73 1,394.94Ndunduma - 22.65 335.46 662.31Mpasa 745.38 123.46 - -Nkholokolo 423.13 1,595.31 70.19 1,482.19

Of these fish species, eight of them have shown that they are commercially importantas they bring in a lot of revenue to the fishers and fish traders. Table 8 gives a list of

H-16

the top eight commercially important fish species over a period of four years, from2000 to 2003.

Table 8 Estimated annual total monetary values by species of commerciallyimportant fish species ('000)

Annual total values by species (MK '000)Species 2000 2001 2002 2003

Utaka 289,005.53 264,156.85 157,123.98 564,491.16Chambo 191,262.86 156,005.94 164,253.37 537,230.46Usipa 144,578.58 78,209.33 96,372.49 178,862.40Mbaba 39,258.90 109,077.14 61,989.31 150,713.65Kambuzi 46,647.27 52,029.33 33,774.93 64,041.32Mlamba - 108,762.27 71,608.52 92,079.62Kampango 24,587.27 29,411.41 15,493.65 61,942.54Mcheni 13,466.50 28,784.35 47,214.35 45,325.16

4.3 Fisheries sector and food security

Fish plays a vital and unique role in nutritional status of many Malawians as a sourceof protein, vitamins, minerals and other micronutrients. The nutritional benefits fromfish are even higher among the poor because fish offers the only affordable optionfor obtaining these nutrients. In this regard, fish is crucial for addressing some of themost important concerns about nutrition security in Malawi, which include: childmalnutrition, maternal malnutrition, nutritional anaemia, vitamin A deficiency andother nutrition related diseases. In addition, the high nutritional value of fish providesan important tool for mitigating the health impact of HIV infection.

Because fish is on high demand, it is easily traded in both rural and urbancommunities. As a result, the sector is employing a significant proportion of thepopulation as fishers, processors and traders enabling them to earn income forpurchase of food to meet their household food and nutrition security. Householdswhich vend in fish find it advantageous to sell fish and purchase other food items toimprove their household food security and nutritional status and studies have shownthat fish farmers and fishing communities are better off in terms of meal frequency,meal composition, meal diversity and availability of household assets.

Because of the role fish can play in mitigating against food security at householdlevel, among other factors, the estimated per capita fish consumption in Malawi hasbeen declining over the years. Table 9 below gives population trends against annualfish catches and the estimated per capita fish consumption.

Table 9: Malawi Population, Estimated Total fish catch and per capita fishconsumption

H-17

Year Population Total Catch (tons) Fish supply/kg/person/year

1980 6,200,000 60,800 9.8

1981 6,400,000 47,300 7.4

1982 6,700,000 58,400 8.7

1983 6,900,000 64,900 9.4

1984 7,200,000 65,400 9.1

1985 7,400,000 62,100 8.4

1986 7,700,000 73,600 9.6

1987* 8,000,000 81,800 10.2

1988 8,100,000 76,200 9.4

1989 8,300,000 69,100 8.3

1990 8,500,000 80,200 9.4

1991 8,600,000 63,425 7.4

1992 8,800,000 64,146 7.3

1993 9,000,000 64,822 7.2

1994 9,200,000 53,917 5.9

1995 9,400,000 33,895 3.6

1996 9,500,000 49,485 5.2

1997 9,700,000 40,435 4.2

1998* 9,934,000 44,519 4.5

1999 10,100,000 44,849 4.4

2000 10,300,000 67,246 6.5

*1987 and 1998 are actual NSO survey years. The population increased at an annual rate of 3.8% until 1987 andsubsequently decreased to around 2% between 1988 and 1998 (NSO, 2000). Incremental growth rate wasprojected based on NSO 2000 data.

4.4 Fisheries Management approach

Fisheries have a number of characteristics that suggest that management will benecessary in order to avoid overexploitation of fish stocks. Fisheries managementpolicies in Malawi have for a long time been guided by the conservation paradigm, thatis a biologically based philosophy, focusing on the protection of fish stocks. Theapproach to fisheries management in Malawi has been the conventional governmentcentred, with the Department of Fisheries (DoF) as the only management authority. Oflate the approach has shifted from the government centred to community participationor co-management in some areas.

Functionally, the Department of Fisheries has 6 major sections namely: FisheriesAdministration, which covers issues of Policy and Planning; Research; Extension;Enforcement; Training; and Aquaculture. The Fisheries Administration section is basedat the Departmental Headquarters in Lilongwe, while Research has its main base atMonkey Bay, and Training at Mpwepwe in Mangochi, where the Malawi College ofFisheries is based. Extension and Enforcement have centres in all fishing districts alongthe major water bodies in Malawi.

H-18

The Department of Fisheries is mandated to protect and conserve the national fishheritage of Malawi through appropriate control mechanisms. Currently, theoperations of the Department are guided by the Fisheries and Aquaculture Policy of2001, the Fisheries Management and Conservation Act of 1997, and the FisheriesFive Year Strategic Plan (2002-2007) that outlines the major strategies for thedevelopment and management of the sector. The Fisheries Policy and Strategic Plandevelopment took into account the provisions of the FAO Code of Conduct forResponsible Fisheries.

In a bid to fulfil its mandate, the Department of Fisheries developed its operationalgoal and objectives as follows: The Departmental goal is “to provide professionalservices to ensure sustainable fisheries resource utilisation and enhanced aquaculturethrough principles of good governance”.

The Departmental operational objectives are:

a) To ensure that all fisheries are managed according to operational managementprocedures.

b) To restructure, reorganize and strengthen Department of Fisheries for effectiveinternal, national and international communication.

c) To strengthen user institutional capacity for fisheries resource management andgovernance, and

d) To update legislation and policy in line with other national policies and legalinstruments.

4.4.1 Basic fishery management structure

As stated above, in Malawi, the Department of Fisheries’ management policies havebeen influenced by the principles of the conservation paradigm, i.e. a centralisedbiologically led approach that has its roots in the theories of Maximum SustainableYield (MSY). The approach is centred at the national level, with lower degrees or noneat all of user5 participation. It is documented that in principle, the approach is less costlyand less time consuming in establishing, but it tends to be less sustainable and morecostly over time. The major costs of this kind of fishery management approach are thetransaction costs (Hanna, 1995), and these involve the costs of gathering information,designing regulations, co-ordinating participants, monitoring conditions and enforcingregulations. In the short-run, this approach is said to be less time consuming and lesscostly to establish, because in the establishment phase, the approach relies on a smallnumber of experts to gather the initial information, design the regulations, and involvesvery little participation by resource users. In the long-run, the approach is more costlyand less sustainable, because there is a shift in the transaction costs. The transactioncosts of monitoring and enforcement are high since the approach creates an incentive tothe users to sabotage the programme because uncertainty about the goals of the processtends to shorten time horizons of users, encouraging short-term actions at the expenseof long-term sustainability (ibid. p65).Based on this approach, the research section of the Department carries out plannedresearch activities annually in the fields of Stock Assessment, Limnology, Frame 5The term user(s), or resource user in this paper will be used to mean the fishing communities, and therefore, theterms may be interchangeable.

H-19

Surveys (annual census of fishers, fishing craft and gears), Catch and Effortmonitoring, as well as demand-driven research to address specific fishing communityproblems. Results from these research activities are used to review the managementplan developed in the previous year and develop one for the forth-coming year. Someof the information is developed into extension messages for the target groups.Research – Extension meetings and in some cases Research – Extension – Fishermeetings are held to share information on the fishery.

4.4.2 Development of fisheries legislation in Malawi

The first fishing regulations in Malawi, the then Nyasaland, were introduced in 1930,by adding a section (Section 3: Fishing Rules MP.437 of 1930) to the Game Ordinance(Chirwa, 1996). The ordinance statutorily enabled the Ministry of Natural Resources toimplement, through the Department of Fisheries6, regulations with regard to the sector.In 1949 the objectives of these regulations mainly aimed at controlling fisheries, toregulate commercial fishing, to assure its taxation, and to provide, as far as it waspossible, an equitable return to the largest possible number of fishermen and all thoseengaged in the fishing industry.

By 1973, the Malawian political institutions noted the need to formulate a new FisheriesAct. It became necessary to take into account: a) the need to conserve fishing stocks togive a long term optimum catch; b) to adapt fishing methods regulations to modernisedgear; and c) the dangers of pollution.

Consequently, a completely new statute, namely the Fisheries Act, 1973, replaced theFisheries Ordinance of 1949. By mid 1990s, there was a gradual shift in the fisheriesmanagement philosophy from the conservation paradigm to the social/communityparadigm, i.e. focusing on fisher community involvement in fisheries management. Assuch, the Fisheries Act of 1973 was reviewed with the intention of includingcommunity participation in fisheries management. A new act known as FisheriesConservation and Management Act, 1997, was then passed in parliament in October,1997 to replace the 1973 Fisheries Act.

Current fishing regulations for the various water bodies in Malawi include a series oftechnical restrictions of fishing gears, i.e. type, mesh size, head line length,prohibition of fishing periods and times. Consequently, the chambo fishery has hadthe greatest impact on the development of management measures for most of thefishing areas in lakes Malawi and Malombe. Closed seasons and areas have beeninstituted in the areas that were found to be breeding areas for chambo.

The following are some of the practical regulations that are being used, which target theartisanal fishers in the chambo fishery.

a) Closed Fishing Season and Area: This regulation was designed to protectchambo stocks during their spawning period. Selected fishing gears that targetchambo (especially beach seines) are prohibited to be used in the closed areasand during the closed season. The closed season runs from 1st November to31st December of each year in Lake Malawi for all beach seines and ring nets,

6The Department of Fisheries in Malawi was established in 1946 (Chirwa, 1996, p 369)

H-20

and from 1st January to 31st March of each year in Lake Malombe for all seinenets and from 1st November to 31st March in the Upper Shire River.

b) Mesh size restrictions: This regulation was formulated to supplement the one onclosed season and areas, in order to protect juvenile chambo from being caughtbefore they are mature to breed. Minimum mesh sizes for various types offishing gears are set based on the size at maturity information for chambo.

c) Minimum takeable size of fish: Based on size at maturity information, thisregulation was designed to supplement the mesh size restriction regulation byprotecting juvenile fish. Apart from chambo, different fish species haveminimum allowed takeable sizes.

For the small-scale commercial fishers, the following regulations apply:

a) Code end minimum mesh size for trawl nets should be one inch (1 inch)b) Trawl nets to be operated in waters not less than 1.8km (1 nautical mile) from

the shorec) A fishing unit has to have a valid fishing licence and fish in prescribed

fishing zones. The license fee depends on the fishing gear, the power of thefishing vessel and the fishing zone.

d) Fishing licences are not transferable.e) Closed season for ring nets, these are the same as those for the beach seine

nets, i.e. The closed season runs from 1st November to 31st December of eachyear in Lake Malawi for all ring nets.

As can be observed from the fishing regulations above, they are all biologicallybased. None of these regulations addresses the initial ideas that led to thedevelopment of management regulations of assuring fisheries taxation to provide, asfar as it can be possible, an equitable return to the largest possible number of fishermenand all those engaged in the fishing industry.

Prior to 1993, the fisheries management regime in Malawi was entirely based on thetop-down approach with central government agencies deciding on the issues andneeds for the industry. Compliance with management regulations, however, has beenlow due to inadequate enforcement of fisheries regulations exacerbated by financialconstraints and the “open-entry” nature of the traditional fisheries. The collapse ofthe Chambo stocks in Lake Malombe and the Upper Shire River in the early 1990srevealed the ineffectiveness of the centralised management measures used hitherto.

In response to this, a management plan based on conventional technical measureswas formulated by the Chambo Project in 1993 and was to be implemented through amore consultative and participatory approach referred to as Participatory FisheriesManagement (PFM) approach. The objective of the PFM approach was to restore andsustain the collapsed stocks in Lake Malombe and the Upper Shire River system.Again, the approach in this case was biologically based.

The PFM initiative, which was envisaged as an alternative fisheries managementarrangement was introduced by Government in Lake Malombe on a pilot scale in1993. Since this concept was not supported by a policy statement and legal

H-21

framework when it was introduced, it became necessary that a policy statement beformulated and incorporated in the new National Fisheries and Aquaculture Policyand Legislation. The PFM sub-policy which was approved in 2001 has the followingkey objectives:

1. To achieve the active participation of local fishing communities in themanagement of the fish resources

2. To promote legal instruments and procedures for the participation of localfisheries management authorities in the management of the fish resources,and

3. To develop and maintain the capacity to monitor, support and conductresearch on participatory fisheries management within the Department ofFisheries.

4.4.3 Participatory Fisheries Management (PFM)

Participatory Fisheries Management (PFM) or co-management as understood in theDepartment of Fisheries in Malawi refers to the participation of fishing communitiesin the management of fishery resources. It is worth noting that communityparticipation in natural resource management can take different forms ranging fromwhere the government (or managing authority) takes much of the control, in what iscommonly termed top-down or instructive to where the communities take full controlof resource management, in what is commonly termed community basedmanagement.

The participatory fishery management system in Malawi, does involve all the keystakeholders. Basically the key stakeholders are the fishers, the DoF, and the donorsof projects in the fisheries sector.

Following the conceptual requirements of the PFM approach of the need to assignresource ownership rights and user rights for effective resource management andsustainability of the PFM programme, it became necessary that fishing areas bedemarcated into fishery management units (FMU) based on biological or ecologicalindicators. An example of this is that of Lakes Malombe, Chilwa and Chiuta. Thisdeveloped from the provisions in the Fisheries Management and Conservation Act of1997, where these FMUs are supposed to be managed by Fisheries ManagementAuthorities (FMAs). According to the Fisheries Act, the FMAs are provided for inthe PFM section.

Based on lessons learnt in the PFM pilot areas, there is an on going debate ofwhether the demarcation of the FMUs should basically be on the premise ofecological zones, or it should also take into account the socio-cultural background ofthe fishing communities around the ecological zones. The debate was sparkedrealising that the FMU concept, in the case of Malawi, falls under the ParticipatoryFisheries Management approach, and brings into play the issues of property rights,access rights and controlled access to the fishery, especially in the artisanal fisheriessub-sector.Since the PFM approach is yet to spread to Lake Malawi, the Department ofFisheries is in the process of designing various studies that will generate bothbiological and socio-cultural information for the FMU demarcation and development

H-22

of FMU management plans. It will be based on these management plans, that fisheryresource management agreements will be signed between the FMAs and the DoF.

4.4.4 Access to the fishery

The Malawi fisheries can be described as a regulated open-access fishery. Asindicated above, the small scale fisheries are divided into two categories of fishers,the traditional fishers (artisanal fishers) and the semi-commercial fishers. Based onthe fishing efficiency of the gears used by each category of fishers, the traditionalfishers do not have any serious harvesting control measures or access to the fisheryas opposed to their colleagues in the semi-commercial group. The measures that arein place that control the harvest levels in the traditional category are hinged on thecontrol of fishing effort, that is the size of the fishing gear, in terms of net length, andobservation of closed seasons. In addition to this, the traditional fishers are free tojoin or exit the fishery. While in the semi-commercial fishers category, the controlmeasure is through the acquisition of a fishing licence and allocation of such fishersin designated fishing zones. Each zone has a prescribed number of fishing units thatcan be allowed to fish there.

The quota system of catch control in the semi-commercial fisheries is currently underdiscussion but has not been finalised. The potential problem that has been identifiedwith the quota system is the implementation of a mechanism that will enableeffective monitoring and enforcement of the system. This is in view of the fact thatsome crew members of the trawl units sell the fish while in the fishing grounds, andwhen they land the catch, it is recorded less the fish sold off-shore. These crewmembers do this to beat their masters due to low wages.

There are management provisions that are backed by the legislation that areas withstocks that show a serious decline can be closed to fishing for a prescribed period oftime. Similarly, the legislation empowers the Director of Fisheries and the Ministerresponsible for Fisheries to cancel or re-allocate licensees from areas that have highfishing efforts to areas with low fishing pressure. The provisions in the Fisheries Actdo not allow the semi-commercial fishing licences to be transferable.

However, the licensing system has not been used as a tool to restrict entrants and toconvey exclusive and limited fishing rights. Consequently, there are no legalinstruments to empower fisheries management authorities such as Beach VillageCommittees (BVCs) to limit entry into the fishery. This has resulted in conflictsbetween resource users whereby fishers migrate from one beach to another.

4.4.5 Economically Rational Management

The management system currently in place does not include subsidies to the fishers.In the past the government used to control the fish prices at the markets. It was laterdiscovered that this approach to fish marketing was disadvantaging the fishers. Tocreate an enabling environment for the fishers and to earn as they should from thefishery, the government liberalised the fish trade. All capable fishers survive in thefishing industry at their own cost.

H-23

Government has never seriously looked upon fisheries as a source of revenue. Theonly way that government collects revenue from the fishery is through sales offishing licences and sales of fish from research vessels. It is very unfortunate thatsales of fishing licences to artisanal fishers has not seriously been enforced, and inmost cases only about 20% of the fishers renew their fishing licences annually. On asimilar note, efforts to calculate resource rents from the fishery have never beentaken serious. This could be attributed to the way fishery managers seriously think ofthe other benefits the nation could get from the fishery apart from contributingtowards food security and at microeconomic level the benefits to the fishing families.If careful considerations could be given to the issue of estimating the resource rentand how this could be utilised for effective fisheries management, appropriatemanagement measure could be developed. However, it should be remembered thatthe management approach in fisheries has for a long time been dominated by theconcepts of MSY. This is evidenced from the fishing regulations that were developedand are currently in use. It is only of late that new dimensions in fisheriesmanagement are beginning to incorporate socio-economic factors.

5. POLICY MAKING

In line with the National Development Policies, the National Environmental Policy(NEP) and National Fisheries and Aquaculture Policy (NAFAP) were formulated.The NEP was prepared in 1994 in response to the Rio Summit under Agenda 21. Itaimed at: a) promoting the efficient utilisation and management of natural resources;b) facilitating the rehabilitation and management of essential ecosystems andecological processes; c) enhancing public awareness of the importance of soundenvironmental management; and d) promoting cooperation among Government, localcommunities including women groups, non-governmental organisations and theprivate sector in the management and utilisation of the natural resources and theenvironment.

The Fisheries Policy (NAFAP) aims at maximising the sustainable yield from thenational waters of Malawi with emphasis on local community participation. Thesecondary objectives are to improve the efficiency of exploitation, processing andmarketing, promote investment in the fishing industry, promote rural fish farmingunits, exploit all opportunities to expand existing and develop new aquatic resources.NAFAP supports the development of the fisheries management strategies as guidedby the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (Article 7).

Fish drives the commercialisation of rural economies, with a multiplier effect of 1:5,between the point of production and consumption, thus improving food marketing.Within the agricultural and natural resources sector, fisheries is the second largestemployer, second from the crop sector. It has the largest number of employees (4)per enterprise, compared to 3.8 under crops; it generates the largest profit peremployee per hour (K50.15) compared to mining (K16.64) and crops (K5.94).

In addition to capture fisheries production, the Department is mandated to increaseand sustain fish production from rural small scale farmers as well as large scalecommercial aquaculture (fish farming) operations in order to improve fish supplywithin the country and for export.

H-24

The commitment of the government, therefore through the Department of Fisheries isto promote fish production so that the standard of living of the rural communities isimproved through income generation.

5.1 Fisheries and Economic Growth Strategies

Fish Production is identified as one of the sources of pro-poor growth in the MalawiPoverty Reduction Strategy Paper (MPRSP) and falls under Pillar 1 (Promotion ofrapid sustainable pro-poor economic growth and structural transformation). Underfish production, the aim is to maximize the sustainable yield from the waters ofMalawi and man-made water bodies. As indicated earlier, this approach targets theindividual fishing community households, rather than through the resource rents at amuch higher level of development.

For positive contribution to Pillar 1 of the PRSP, the Department of Fisheriesadvocates for enhanced fish production from both Capture fisheries and FishFarming. Recent research studies have indicated that there is about 30-35,000 tonnesof fish that can be caught annually from the unexploited deep waters.

The Malawi Economic Growth Strategy (MEGS) which was developed in 2004 aimsat achieving high economic growth through the stimulation of trade and investmentand the restoration of macroeconomic stability as a follow-on to the PRSP. In theMEGS framework, the fisheries sector has not been considered as one of the sectorsthat could contribute to economic growth through investment (see figure 3), instead,under natural resources, it is the mining sub-sector that has been highlighted.

H-25

Figure 3: The Framework for the Malawi Economic Growth Strategy

Domestic/International Trade

Services

Tourism

Manufacturing

Text/Garment, Agro-processing

Natural Resources

Mining

AgricultureTobacco, Tea, Sugar, Cotton,

M aize & cassava

Trade Bodies/ Agreements

Utilities/Communications/Infrastructure/Finance/IrrigationSupporting

Supportive Legal/ Reg. Framework

Macro-economic conditions for growthOpportunities & Incentives for:

Political Will

Resources PoliciesPr

ivat

e Se

ctor

In

vest

men

t

De velo pm

e nt P art ners

Public Sector Investment Programme

Distribution/Import/Export/Wholesale/Retail/Transport

Growth of at least 6% per annum

Source: MEPD/Task Force

This Malawi Economic Growth Strategy recognises that Government resources arelimited. It, therefore, seeks to deliver higher growth rates by stimulating investmentin high growth sectors. Generally, an improved business climate would result in anincreased revenue base for Government with which it can meet additionalexpenditure requirements. Due to current fiscal gaps, Malawi requires budgetarysupport by development cooperating partners to finance a large portion of itsdevelopment programmes. The Malawi Economic Growth Strategy also relies onmobilising the resources within the private sector at micro, small, medium and large-scale levels (GoM 2004). It is envisaged that the Malawi Economic Growth Strategywill seek, as a central theme, to improve the business climate in Malawi so as tounlock and attract new investment and trade.

The Department of Fisheries has undertaken some strategic steps in order to ensurethat the sector contributes positively to the national economy so as to make a dent inpoverty reduction as well as food security.

Therefore its priority focus is to achieve the following objective:

Stimulate contribution of the fisheries sector to sustainable economic growth

The major strategies include:• Promote sector investment program• Enhance post harvest utilization of fish and fisheries products• Enhance aquaculture production

H-26

• Carry out resource assessment programs of unexploited stocks• Promote sustainable production in capture fisheries through the development

of sound management plans• Disseminate research findings to all stakeholders• Implement and ensure effective enforcement

Supplementary strategies include:

• Develop and maintain human capacity to manage fisheries resources.• Enhance timely information exchange at all levels• Clearly define roles, targets and responsibilities of DoF Officers.• Review of DoF activities in research, management interventions and project

objectives and activities• Develop and implement performance plan management system• Enhance capacity of DoF administration.• Increase knowledge and skills base for both private and public sector.• Review and implement DOF devolution plan• Develop fisheries management agreement with communities• Policy review and harmonization• Legislation review and harmonization• Master plan production• Conduct economic sectoral study

The strategies outlined above will be achieved by implementing activitiessummarised in the departmental strategic plan. The Departmental Strategic Planplaces much priority and emphasis on fisheries and Aquaculture Development formaximum impact. Specific areas of emphasis on fisheries include enhancing post-harvest utilization of fish and fisheries products; sector investment and development;enhancing aquaculture production; carrying out resource assessment programmes ofunexploited stocks; promote sustainable production in capture fisheries; implementand ensure effective enforcement and reviewing of fisheries policy and legislation.

6. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The preceding sections allude to the fact that the fisheries sector has the potential tocontribute towards national economic growth and poverty reduction. There are anumber of issues in the case of Malawi, that have prevented the sector to make fullcontribution towards these developmental goals.

The original fisheries management approach the Department of Fisheries had in the1940s were going to pave way for the fisheries sector to effectively contributetowards economic growth and poverty reduction. This led to the development of thefirst fishing regulations that aimed at controlling the fisheries, regulating commercialfishing, ensuring its taxation, and providing, as far as it was possible, an equitable returnto the largest possible number of fishermen and all those engaged in the fishingindustry. The problem came in when the fisheries sector was reviewed in the early1970s following the production of a new fisheries act in 1973. The new managementapproach was only biologically based with its roots in the MSY concept. Since then thefisheries management approach has been biologically based.

H-27

However, the Malawi fisheries sector has the potential to make a substantialcontribution towards economic development and poverty reduction. This is based onthe fact that, despite the government taking the biological approach to fisheriesmanagement, the sector still employs and supports the livelihoods of a substantialamount of people, as well as contributing about 4% to the GDP. In view of this, thefollowing recommendation are made that can, if implemented, enable the fisheriessector contribute effectively to economic growth and poverty reduction.

The fishery management approach has to shift from the conservation approach to eitherthe rationalisation paradigm or social paradigm approaches. The rationalisationapproach focuses on economic efficiency and wealth creation in the fishery. Thisrequires reduction to optimal level the number of fishers, and instituting privateproperty rights. The social paradigm approach focuses on community welfare,distributional equity and other social and cultural fishery benefits.

For a meaningful switch from the conservation approach to either of the two above,there is need to carry out a number of studies that should provide backgroundinformation for the formulation of the new management approach. Such studies includein general terms, a fishery sector study review. Within the armpits of the review,fisheries sector investment profiles will be developed based on socio-economic andcultural studies, the impact of the fisheries sector on the national economy and povertyreduction based on different management scenarios and approaches.

Finally, the current desk study has been of great benefit in the sense that it has sparkedan interest in reviewing the current fisheries management approach in line witheconomic growth and poverty reduction. The major challenges in the review will be thegeneration or capturing of adequate data for such a review, considering that there are alot of gaps in data and information at hand; secondly, the creation of awareness andconvincing the policy makers that the fisheries sector has a high potential to contributetowards national economic growth and poverty reduction.

H-28

REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL READING

Chirwa, W.C. (1996) Fishing rights, Ecology and Conservation along Southern LakeMalawi, 1920 – 1964. African Affairs, 95, p351 – 377.

Europa (1993) The Europa World Yearbook. Vol. II, Europa Publications Limited

GoM/UN (1993) Situation Analysis of Poverty in Malawi

GoM (2000) Profile of Poverty in Malawi, 1998, National Economic Council(Poverty Monitoring System)

GoM (2002) Malawi Poverty Reduction Strategy paper

GoM (2004) Malawi Economic Growth Strategy

Hanna, S. (1995) Efficiencies of User Participation in Natural Resource Management.In Property Rights and the Environment - Social and Ecological Issues. BeijerInternational Institute of Ecological Economics and The World Bank. Washington DC.

NSO (2002) National Statistical Office, Malawi – An Atlas of Social Statistics

H-29

Annex 1

Table 1: 2003 Frame Survey counts of fishing craft, gear owners,crewmembers and fishing gears by District Fisheries Office.

Indicator District MH7 MH SA KK NB KA LA ZA LS Total

L. Me L. Mw (2003)Fishers resident 449 1431 697 2102 2109 1871 387 895 1828 11769Fishers non-resident 39 478 451 118 128 347 21 1534 657 3773Crewmembersresident. 3170 8318 2489 5962 4794 3974 1410 884 800 31801Crew non-resident 527 3860 1446 1082 782 1080 207 1235 292 10511Plank boats withengine 0 270 74 128 21 0 0 0 0 493Plank boats withoutengine 372 1087 318 541 230 7 35 407 2 2999Dug out canoe 56 1634 968 1454 2218 2471 326 1451 1246 11824Gill nets 568.5 10633 7719 19040 7618.5 8440 2580 16500.5 4568 77668Chilimira nets 0 640 218 442 728 818 233 0 0 3079Chambo seines 28 6 1 35 0 1 0 0 0 71Longlines 65 322 387 369 180.3 483 89 504.8 487 2884Kambuzi seines 1 78 26 107 95 78 0 0 0 385Mosquito nets 80 185 7 56 3 10 0 2 19 362Fish traps 1001 10 116 72 0 95 0 20472 5305 27071Beach seine nets 0 0 21 0 3 11 8 19 36 98Scoop nets 0 0 1 46 1 0 0 2 33 83Nkacha nets 184 100 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 309Cast nets 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 759 766Handlines 0 100 139 223 477 376 16 11 41 1383Kandwindwi 3 37 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 42Matemba seinesnets 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 276 0 276Ndoloma 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1Chomanga 0 0 0 0 0 0 24350 0 24350

7 These are abbreviations for fishing districts : MH = Mangochi, L. Me = Lake Malombe, L. Mw = Lake Malawi,SA = Salima, KK = Nkhotakota, NB = Nkhata Bay, KA = Karonga, LA = Likoma, ZA = Zomba, LS = LowerShire