| View Thread | Return to Index | Read Prev Msg | Read Next Msg | |
---|
Wise Coastal Practices for Sustainable Human Development Forum
Posted By: Gillian Cambers
Date: Wednesday, 18 August 1999, at 7:59 p.m.
In Response To: Community-based management of subsistence fisheries / Samoa (Jennifer Kallie and Autalavou Taua)
I was very interested in your example wise practice, and particularly in your 'General Discussion' where you described how to deploy limited government services. The approach you have taken is to provide some support to high scoring villages and encourage them to completely self-manage, to provide maximum support to average scoring villages and to withdraw support for poorly performing villages.
WHICH GROUPS TO HELP: HIGH, MEDIUM, LOW PERFORMING GROUPS?
I work with a regional project in the Caribbean relating to beaches, we cover thirteen countries/territories and also have the problem how best to deploy limited project services/funds. We have concentrated on the high performing countries/territories, like you in the hope that they will be able to become self-sufficient, and I think that this approach is paying off. But we have also concentrated project services/funds on the poorly performing countries/territories in the belief that they needed more help. Reading your wise practice, I think we might achieve better results if we concentrate on the middle (average) group. For we have spent a lot of time and effort on a couple of poorly performing countries, with minimal results.
RESPONSE TO WITHDRAWL OF ASSISTANCE
I wondered how did the poorly performing villages respond when you withdrew support? Did they mind, or complain or feel left out?
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
One other question, in your evaluation you mentioned how the Fisheries Division evaluates village performance using a quantitative questionnaire. Does this questionnaire also evaluate the status of the fisheries resources?
SEND YOUR REACTION/RESPONSES TO THE .
| View Thread | Return to Index | Read Prev Msg | Read Next Msg | |
---|