Balancing Sustainable Livelihoods and Conservation …
23
of dialogue within the interview were used to better illustrate participant thoughts and
opinions about various issues, in addition to individual participant responses. The
data was analysed according to an adaptation of the approach identified by Vaughn
et al. (1996):
• identifying the big ideas
• unitising the data
• categorising the units
• identifying themes and use of theory.
4.1 Main Themes
From the interview study a number of categories started to emerge, and after further
analyses, the general stakeholder responses were categorised in the following main
themes:
• Perceived Shortcomings in Current MPAs
• Blaming Game—Need to build bridges
• Enforcement and Livelihoods
• Visions of Sustainability
• New MPAs and possible effects on livelihoods
• Suggestions for Improvement.
4.1.1 Perceived Shortcomings in Current MPAs
All the stakeholders to varying degrees consider that the current MPAs are not functioning. They state that rules are non-existent as is enforcement. Ten stakeholders
did not want to comment on the proposed MPAs due to current issues surrounding
the existing ones which are not considered acceptable by them.
Nothing has ever been done to protect marine species in Malta. Nothing.
We were voted best marine diving in Europe…but there are no fish.
(Dive Club Association 1)
No one cares about the MPAs. You can fish everywhere – Fishermen should understand that
when MPAs work, fishing will become better for them. How can we propose another eight if
we are not even taking care of the current ones we have. We do not need reports and books
so everything remains on paper.
(NGO 1)
Others stated that the existing rules and regulations have not been communicated
clearly.
We started with Marine protected areas some years back, and I am speaking on the existing
ones. What can I do, can I throw a net? I do not know what can be done. None of the MPAs
are working.
(Recreational Fishermen Association 1)
23
of dialogue within the interview were used to better illustrate participant thoughts and
opinions about various issues, in addition to individual participant responses. The
data was analysed according to an adaptation of the approach identified by Vaughn
et al. (1996):
• identifying the big ideas
• unitising the data
• categorising the units
• identifying themes and use of theory.
4.1 Main Themes
From the interview study a number of categories started to emerge, and after further
analyses, the general stakeholder responses were categorised in the following main
themes:
• Perceived Shortcomings in Current MPAs
• Blaming Game—Need to build bridges
• Enforcement and Livelihoods
• Visions of Sustainability
• New MPAs and possible effects on livelihoods
• Suggestions for Improvement.
4.1.1 Perceived Shortcomings in Current MPAs
All the stakeholders to varying degrees consider that the current MPAs are not functioning. They state that rules are non-existent as is enforcement. Ten stakeholders
did not want to comment on the proposed MPAs due to current issues surrounding
the existing ones which are not considered acceptable by them.
Nothing has ever been done to protect marine species in Malta. Nothing.
We were voted best marine diving in Europe…but there are no fish.
(Dive Club Association 1)
No one cares about the MPAs. You can fish everywhere – Fishermen should understand that
when MPAs work, fishing will become better for them. How can we propose another eight if
we are not even taking care of the current ones we have. We do not need reports and books
so everything remains on paper.
(NGO 1)
Others stated that the existing rules and regulations have not been communicated
clearly.
We started with Marine protected areas some years back, and I am speaking on the existing
ones. What can I do, can I throw a net? I do not know what can be done. None of the MPAs
are working.
(Recreational Fishermen Association 1)