Comprehensive National Fisheries Industry Development Plan (2021-2025)

1.Strategies 84

2.Priority Actions 85 Chapter 5: POST-HARVEST 102 A. Overview and Status 103 B. Current Issues and Concerns 119 C. Recommended Provisions in the CNFIDP 2021-2025 123 Chapter 6: TRADE AND MARKETING 151 A. Fisheries Economics, Marketing and Trade Sub-Sectoral Situationer 152 B. Economic Status and Activities of Traders and Fishery-Dependent 158 Stakeholders C. Assessment of the Trade and Marketing Sub-sector Targets 176 D. Problems and Constraints in Fish Trade and Marketing 185 E. Sub-sectoral Strategies and Action Plans 187 Chapter 7: POLICY AND INSTITUTIONS 192 A. The Fisheries Sector 193 B. Fisheries Institutions and Policies 194 C. Fisheries Policy and Institutional Issues 196 Chapter 8: FINANCING FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE DEVELOPMENT 203 A. Background 204 B. Issues and Concerns on Financing the Fisheries Sector 205 C. Current Available Financing 209 D. Proposed Financing Framework 221 E. Targets 2021–2025 224 F. Strategies and Action Plan 226 vii Chapter 9: STRATEGIC COMMUNICATION 227 A. Background 228 B. Situation Analysis 229 C. Communication Goals 230 D. Target Audiences 231 Chapter 10: PERFORMANCE MONITORING AND EVALUATION 235 ANNEX A 241 ANNEX B 261 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1. Overall Sectoral Targets for the CNFIDP 2016-2022 (BFAR 2016) Figure 1.2. OneDA Reform Agenda: Key Strategies Figure 1.3. The Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management (EAFM) Planning Process Figure 1.4. General Planning Process Figure 1.5. Concepts underlying the identification/selection of strategies and priority actions Figure 1.6. EAFM Principles Figure 2.1. Contribution of the sub-sectors to volume and value of production. Figure 2.2. Socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents for the survey on CNFIDP 2016-2020 Figure 2. 3. Satisfaction of respondents on the reporting compliance and database Figure 2.4. Registration of Fish Workers and Boat Owners Figure 2.5. Types of Boat and Fishing Gears Figure 2.6. Fish Catch and Household Consumption Figure 2.7. Change in the volume of Fish Catch for the last five years Figure 2.8. Channels and Location of Fish Market Figure 2.9. Perception on Fishery Habitat Figure 2.10. Effectivity of Fisheries Management Actions Figure 2.11. Impact of Fisheries Management Figure 2.12. Understanding and Perception of BFAR Programs and Projects Figure 2.13. Distribution of respondents on the type of aqua-farm, culture technique and culture system Figure 2.14. Volume of Production of Respondents Figure 2.15. Value of Production of Respondents Figure 2.16. Platform of dissemination and sources of information. Figure 2.17. Quantity, Quality and Timeliness of Government Programs Figure 2.18. Efficiency and Effectiveness of Programs and Projects in Aquaculture Figure 2.19. Platform of Dissemination and Number of Respondents who Accessed Marketing Assistance Figure 2.20. Platform of Information and percentage of respondents who benefitted from credit facilitation Figure 2.21. Gender and Development Figure 2.22. Level of Awareness Figure 2.23. Participation in CNFIDP Figure 3.1. Marine capture fisheries production (in MT) by sector from 1950-2014. Figure 3.2. Decadal average percent (%) change in annual landings for commercial and municipal sectors. Figure 3.3. The distribution of mean annual landings by sector in each region from 2002-2012. Figure 3.4. Catch composition of catches from commercial and municipal mean landings from 2002-2012. Figure 3.5. The geographical distribution of landings of major resource groups caught by each sector from 2002-2012 and the trend in annual production from 2002-2012. a) Yellowfin tuna b) Skipjack tuna and c) Tuna-like. Figure 3.6. The geographical distribution of landings of major resource groups caught by each sector from 2002-2012 and the trend in annual production from 2002-2012. a) Sadine b) Small pelagics and c) Small mackerels. Figure 3.7. The geographical distribution of landings of major resource groups caught by each sector from 2002-2012 and the trend in annual production from 2002-2012. a) Nemipterids b) Squids and c) Blue crabs. ix Figure 3.8. Surplus production of small pelagics from the commercial sub-sector (1950’s-1987). Adapted from Dalzell and Ganaden, 1989. Figure 3.9. Surplus production of demersal resources from the commercial sub-sector (~1946-1984). Adapted from Silvestre and Pauly, 1986. Figure 3.10. Annual production of commercial ring net and converted annual catch rates from 1978-1987. Adapted from Barut (2004). Figure 3.11. Catch rates (MT/HP) plotted against fishing effort. Figure 3.12. Annual production of demersal resources from the country’s trawling grounds from 1946-1987 and fishery independent estimates of demersal biomass at various depth strata in various fishing grounds in the country from the late 1940s-1993. Adapted from Armada, 2004. Figure 3.13. Changes in demersal biomass in Sorsogon Bay (a) and Manila Bay (b). Adapted from Hilomen et al., 2002; Armada, 2004; Green et al., 2003. Figure 3.14. MSY of blue swimming crab in Western Visayan Sea (Ingles, 2004) Figure 3.15. Trend in catch rates (catch/trip) of blue swimming crab in the 1990s. Figure 3.16. Catch rates of various municipal gear types based on interviews in various sites around the country. A) Honda Bay, Palawan B) Cebu and Zamboanga-Sibugay. Figure 3.17. Mean catch rates (kg/day) of fishers in coral reef areas in the Philippines during different time periods (1950s-1990s). Adapted from Dalzell, 1996; Uychiangco and Torres, 2002; MSU-Naawan., 2003) Figure 3.18. Historical trend in catch rates (MT/HP) of small pelagics in the municipal fisheries of several fishing grounds from 1948 to 1988. Figure 3.19. Comparison of catch rates (kg/fisher/day) of various gear types in (a) Lingayen Gulf (above) between 1985/88 and 2000/01. The increase in number of fishers in the Gulf is also shown; and (b) Sogod Bay, Southern Leyte between 1993/94 and 2001/02. Figure 3.20. Mean daily catch rates of (a) fish corrals in 9 fishing grounds, and (b) mean catch rates of drift gillnets covered by the FSP/FRMP REAs. Figure 3.21. Overall relationship between mean catch rates of various gear types and fisher density (fishers/km2) in various reef sites in the country Figure 3.22. Geographical distribution of fishing grounds where reports of decreasing resource abundance have been documented. Figure 3.23. Distribution of fishing effort based on data from the 1980s (Tandog-Edralin et al., \ 1987). Figure 3.24. Distribution of fishing effort based on data from the FishR (2014/15). Figure 3.25. Trend in mean daily catch rates (catch per vessel per trip) of ringnet operations in Northern Zamboanga presented by month based on logbooks of a single buyer (Campos et al., 2014). Figure 3.26. Targets for Capture Fisheries, 2021-2025 Figure 4.1. Status and type of aquafarms (PSA 2012) Figure 4.2. Distribution of fishtanks and hatcheries throughout the country (PSA 2012) Figure 4.3. Regional distribution of aquafarms and aquaculture operators (PSA 2012) Figure 4.4. Proportion of the various aquaculture species produced (PSA 2020) Figure 4.5. Volume and value of aquaculture production, 2014-2020 Philippines (PSA 2016, 2018, 2021) Figure 4.6. Aquaculture targets for the CNFIDP 2016-2020 (BFAR 2016) Figure 4.7. Production performance of milkfish and tilapia, 2014-2020 Philippines (PSA 2016, 2018, 2020) Figure 4.8. Production performance of shrimps, 2014-2020 Philippines (PSA 2016, 2018, 2020) Figure 4.9. Production performance of seaweeds 2014-2020 Philippines (PSA 2016, 2018, 2020) Figure 4.10. Production performance of shellfish, 2014-2020 Philippines (PSA 2016, 2018, 2020) x Figure 4.11. Concepts underlying the identification/selection of strategies and priority actions Figure 5.1. Locations of the different regional fish ports that are being managed by the Philippine Fisheries Development Authority (PFDA) Figure 5.2. The municipal fish port in Barangay Barra, Dipolog City (Source: Islam et al., 2021) Figure 5.3. The Community Fish Landing Center in Ilocos Norte (Source: Islam et al., 2021) Figure 5.4. Locations of the different laboratory testing facilities of the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (Source: Yap, 2021) Figure 5.5. Different activities / functions and support service providers along a typical fisheries value chain Figure 6.1. Supply chain of aquaculture commodities adapted from CNFIDP 2016-2020 Figure 6.2. Supply chain of commodities from capture fisheries adapted from CNFIDP 2016-2020 Figure 6.3. Supply chain of Milkfish, Tilapia, Shrimp and Seaweed Figure 6.4. Milkfish Farmgate, Wholesale and Retail Prices, 2015-2019 Source: PSA; Philippine Fisheries Profile 2015-2019 Figure 6.5. Tilapia Farmgate, Wholesale and Retail Prices, 2015-2019 Source: PSA; Philippine Fisheries Profile 2015-2019 Figure 6.6a. Endeavor Prawn Wholesale and Retail Prices, 2015-2018 (Source: Philippine Fisheries Profile, 2015-2018) Figure 6.6b. Endeavor Prawn Wholesale and Retail Prices, 2015-2018 (Source: Philippine Fisheries Profile, 2015-2018) Figure 6.7. Wholesale and Retail Prices of Frigate Tuna, 2015-2018 Source: Philippine Fisheries Profile 2015-2018 Figure 6.8. Fisheries Production and Volume of Imports and Exports of the Philippines (MT), 2010-2019 Source: Philippine Fisheries Profile, 2010-2019 Figure 6.9. Major Fishery Exports of the Philippines in terms of Volume (MT), 2015-2019 Source: Philippine Fisheries Profile, 2015-2019 Figure 6.10. Major Fishery Exports of the Philippines in terms of Value (‘000 Php), 2015-2019 Source: Philippine Fisheries Profile, 2015-2019 Figure 6.11. Major Fishery Imports of the Philippines in terms of Volume (MT), 2015-2019 Source: Philippine Fisheries Profile, 2015-2019 Figure 6.12. Major Fishery Imports of the Philippines in terms of Value (‘000 Php), 2015-2019 Source: Philippine Fisheries Profile, 2015-2019 Figure 7.1. Volume of fisheries production and annual growth rate, Philippines: January to December 2018-2020 (Source: PSA) Figure 7.2. Poverty incidence among the basic sectors in 2015 and 2018 Figure 8.1. Projected Loan Demand from the Small Fishers (Source: DA-ACPC) Figure 8.2. High estimates for the projected loan extended to the aquaculture sub-sector. Figure 9.1. Communication goals for the CNFIDP Figure 9.2. Initial identification of key messages for the CNFIDP Figure 10.1. Trends on the Volume of Production in the Fisheries Sector, 2016-2020 (Source: PSA) Figure 10.2. Trends on the Value of Fisheries Production, 2016-2020 (Source PSA) Figure 10.3. Volume of Production of Aquaculture (Source: PSA) xi LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1. Area and Location of Major Fishing Grounds Table 2.2. Regional Total Food Fish Supply and Demand Analysis, 2020 Table 2.3. Identification and characterization of stakeholder groups in the fisheries sector in the Philippines (Source Stakeholders Analysis conducted during Capacity Building) Table 3.1. Targets for Capture Fisheries, 2021-2025 Table 4.1. Distribution of aquafarms in various environments (PSA 2012) Table 4.2. World ranking of the Philippines in aquaculture production (FAO 2020) Table 4.3. Comparison between current targets and accomplishment within CNFIDP 2016-2020 and proposed targets of the aquaculture sector Table 4.4. Strategies for CNFIDP 2021-2025 (based on CNFIDP 2016-2020, PDP 2017-2022, Consultations, and Commodity Maps) Table 4.5. Priority actions that may apply to all strategies (from consultations)Table 2.6 Strategies for CNFIDP 2021-2025 (based on CNFIDP 2016-2020, PDP 2017-2022, Consultations, and Commodity Maps) Table 5.1. Results of the studies conducted on the assessment of post-harvest losses in the different parts of the Philippines Table 5.2. Status of the Community Fish Landing Centers (CFLCs) in the different regions of the country, as of September 2021 (Source: BFAR 2021) Table 5.3. Status of refrigeration and ice plant facilities housed at the regional fish ports, including their capacities (as of 2015; see CNFIDP 2016) Table 5.4. Number of post-harvest equipment and facilities under the Special Areas for Agricultural Development (SAAD) Program of BFAR Table 5.5. Number of accredited/recognized post-harvest facilities / establishments in the Philippines, per region (Source: BFAR 2021) Table 5.6. List of Philippine National Standards for Fish and Fishery Products, as of 31 December 2020 (Source: BAFPS 2021) Table 5.7. List of major programs, activities and technical assistance provided by BFAR to the different MSMEs in the Philippines from 2017 to 2021 (Source: BFAR 2021) Table 5.8. Numbers of accredited/recognized post-harvest establishments in the Philippines as of 2015 and 2021 Table 6.1. Volume and Value of Fisheries Output by Region, 2015 and 2020 Table 6.2. Regional Total Food Fish Supply and Demand Analysis, 2020 Table 6.3. Regional Total Food Fish Supply and Demand Analysis, 2015 Table 6.4. Small-scale fish vendors and processors in the Philippines, 2018 and 2020 Table 6.5. Fish Processing Establishments in the Philippines, 2015 and 2017 Table 6.6 Seaweed Traders, Buying Stations and Processors/Exporters in the Philippines, 2018 Table 6.7. Community Fish Landing Centers, September 2021 Table 6.8. Inventory of Post-harvest, Trade and Marketing Equipment Distributed in CLFCs, June 2021 Table 6.9. Fish Distribution and Transport Facilities, 2017 Table 6.10. Relative Financial Position of Value Chain Players in Fresh P. Monodon, Domestic Market Table 6.11. Relative Financial Position of Value Chain Players in Fresh P. Vannamei, Domestic Market Table 6.12. Relative Financial Position of Value Chain Players of Seaweed Industry, Luzon Table 6.13. Relative Financial Position of Value Chain Players of Seaweed Industry, Visayas Table 6.14. Relative Financial Position of Value Chain Players of Seaweed Industry, Mindanao Table 6.15. Number of BFAR Approved and EU Approved Fishery-based Establishments in the Philippines per Region, 2015 and 2021 (As of 31 May 2021) Table 6.16. BFAR Approved and EU Approved Establishments for Tuna, Shrimps, Milkfish and Tilapia, May 2021 xii Table 6.20. Assessment of the Trade and Marketing Targets Table 6.21. Sectoral Strategies and Action Plans, 2021-2025 Table 7. Fisheries management problems in the Philippines (Source: FISH 2000) Table 8.1. Performance of Bank Lending to Agriculture and Fisheries, as per Agri-Agra Reform Credit Act of 2009 Table 8.2. Financing scheme for the development of agriculture and fisheries xiii ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ABC Agro-Industrial Business Corridor ACEF Agricultural Competitiveness Enhancement Fund ACPC Agricultural Credit Policy Council BFAR Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources CALABARZON Southern Tagalog Mainland or Region IV-A CBO Community-based organization CFPC Camaligan Fish Port Complex CLEA Capital Loan Easy Access Program CNFIDP Comprehensive National Fisheries Industry Development Plan COVID-19 Corona Virus Disease 2019 CPHMAIP Comprehensive National Fisheries Post-Harvest, Marketing and Ancillary Industries Plan CRM/IFM Community-based Resource Management/Integrated Fisheries Management CSO Civil society organizations CTI-CFF Coral Triangle Initiative on Coral Reefs Fisheries and Food Security DA-BAFS Department of Agriculture-Bureau of Agriculture and Fisheries Standards DA-BAR Department of Agriculture-Bureau of Agricultural Research DBP Development Bank of the Philippines DOST Department of Science and Technology DTI Department of Trade and Industry EAFM Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone FARMC Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Management Council FishCORE Fisheries and Coastal Resiliency Project FMA Fisheries Management Area FRPG Fisheries Resource Protection Group GDP Gross Domestic Product IEC information, education and communication materials IPCS ice plants and cold storage IUUF illegal, unreported, unregulated fishing MSME micro-, small, and medium enterprises LBP Land Bank of the Philippines NFRDI National Fisheries Research and Development Institute NGA National Government Agency NGO Non Government Organization PAFES Province-led Agriculture and Fisheries Extension Systems PCRA Participatory Coastal Resource Assessment PFDA Philippine Fisheries Development Authority PLEA Production Loan Easy Access Program RA Republic Act RLECC Regional Law Enforcement Coordinating Council SEAFDEC Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Center SFMP Sustainable Fisheries Management Plan SUC State Universities and Colleges SUREAid Survival & Recovery Aid Program WB World Bank WG Working Group xiv Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION 1 INTRODUCTION A. Background and Rationale The Comprehensive National Fisheries Industry Development Plan (CNFIDP) was initially developed for the years 2006 to 2025 to provide a comprehensive framework for promoting the optimal development and long-term sustainability of benefits derived by the nation from its fisheries. It aimed to provide strategic directions for the Philippine fisheries over the said years, as well as, identify priority projects for implementation over the first medium-term period from 2006 to 2010. Building on the gains of the previous national fisheries plans, the plan was a product of extensive consultations at all levels of governance. Further, the CNFIDP is science-based, taking into account the best available scientific and technical information. Since then, the CFNIDP has undergone various revisions in response to changes in the industry, as well as in the policy environment. The latest Comprehensive National Fisheries Industry Development Plan (CNFIDP 2016-2020) was developed and adopted in 2016. Additionally in 2018, the Comprehensive National Fisheries Post-Harvest, Marketing and Ancillary Industries Plan (CPHMAIP) 2018-2022 was crafted. The said CPHMAIP is intended to reduce fisheries post-harvest losses and increase the competitiveness of Philippine fish and fishery products in terms of domestic and foreign trade and marketing. To attain the vision of a sustainable and competitive fisheries industry, the CNFIDP 2016-2020 has identified the following important components: (1) sufficient contribution to national food security, (2) inclusive growth within the industry, (3) sustainable, science- based fisheries and aquatic resource management practices, (4) compliance to international laws, policies and standards, and enforcement of local laws and regulations, (5) strengthened capacities in infrastructure,, technologies, human resource, and information sharing, and (6) resilience to environmental hazards. These components then drove the identification of specific targets for the plan (Figure 1.1). The advent of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 required the Philippine government to focus its full attention on urgent responses to: (i) keep the food supply lines open (from domestic sources and imports); (ii) ensure that farmers and fisherfolk continue to have access to inputs and services needed to prepare for the next harvest; and (iii) prevent primary producers and workers all along the value chain from suffering devastating income losses due to measures intended to reduce the spread of the virus. In 2021, the Department of Agriculture launched the “One DA Approach to Agriculture and Fisheries Transformation (Figure 1.2), with an updated 18 strategies, namely: (1) Bayanihan Agri Clusters, (2) Province-led Agriculture and Fisheries Extension Systems, (3) Collective Action/Cooperative Development, (4) Mobilization and Empowerment of Partners, (5) Diversification, (6) Credit Support, (7) Technology and Innovation including Digital Agriculture, (8) Farm Mechanization and Infrastructure Investments, (9) Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation Measures, 10) Food Safety and Regulations, (11) Agri Industrial Business Corridors, (12) Global Trade, Export Development and Promotion, (13) Post-harvest, Processing, Logistics and Marketing Support, (15) Agriculture Career System, (16) Education and Training: Agribusiness Management, (17) Youth and Women Engagement, and (18) Ease of Doing Business and Transparent Procurement. The Agri-industrial Business Corridors (ABCs) will be developed in the Fisheries Management Areas (FMAs) as part of the 18 strategies. 2 1% 5% Increase in annual growth annual growth in QUANTITY & in MUNICIPAL COMMERCIAL VALUE of traded fisheries fisheries fish & fishery products for DOMESTIC & EXPORT OVERALL SECTORAL TARGETS 4% annual increase in MILKFISH production 10% 25% reduction in increase in post-harvest SEAWEED in 5 years production 6% inSyears 100% 10% annual increase compliance inTILAPIA annual increase production to hygiene& in SHRIMP sanitation standards production 10°/o increase in SHELLFISH 5.4% production in 5 years increase in MUDCRAB production inSyears Figure 1.1. Overall Sectoral Targets for the CNFIDP 2016-2022 (BFAR 2016) An update of the CNFIDP and CPHMAIP is called for given the time elapsed since their crafting, and the necessity to ensure responsiveness of both plans to current developments and needs of the industry, and alignment with the new approaches in agri-fisheries management. . The “new approach” contains specific interventions that reflect the eight paradigms to elevate the country’s agricultural sector: (1) Modernization; (2) Industrialization; (3) Promotion of exports; (4) Consolidation of small and medium-sized farms; (5) Infrastructure development; (6) Higher budget and investment; (7) Legislative support; and (8) Roadmap development. 3 4 le~ \' - CONSOLIDATION 1. 2. Bayanihan Agri Clusters Collective Action/Cooperatives Development •.. ········ 3. Province-led Agriculture & Fisheries Extension Systems .. 4. Mobilization & Empowerment of Partners .. 5. Diversification ... 6. Credit Support .: . 7. Technology & Innovation including Digital Agriculture ... l •••••••• ~ 8. Farm Mechanization & Infrastructure Investments

9. Climate Change Adaptation & Mitigation Measures .. 10. Food Safety & Regulations .. ..: INDUSTRIALIZATION . 11. Agri Industrial Business Corridors •.: ········ 12. Global Trade, Export Development & Promotion ..: 13. Postharvest, Processing, Logistics & Marketing Support ,rs and fisherfolk'' ... PROFESSIONALIZATION ., - ) - ½ .,, • .. . ~ . -- ~ ~~" 14. Agriculture Career System • ········ 15. Education & Training: Agribusiness Management

16. Youth & Women Engagement

17. Ease of Doing Business & Transparent Procurement 2021 Target Growth: 2.5% Figure 1.2. OneDA Reform Agenda: Key Strategies B. Technical Framework: Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management (EAFM) The Fisheries Code (RA No. 8550 in 1998, as amended by RA No. 10654 in 2015) recognizes EAFM as the foundation for managing fisheries resources. BFAR Fisheries Office Order No. 164 (s. 2016) provides guidelines to operationalize the concept of EAFM in the development and implementation of programs and activities of BFAR and adopted Mainstreaming-EAFM as guiding framework. EAFM is considered by several organizations, including the ASEAN-Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Center (SEAFDEC) Member Countries (including the Philippines) and the Coral Triangle Initiative on Coral Reefs Fisheries and Food Security (CTI-CFF), as the best practice for ensuring the long-term sustainability of fisheries and the ecosystem services provided to society (e.g., food security, livelihoods, economic security, coastal protection, human health, and well-being). The EAFM approach was advocated by fisheries experts to improve fisheries management and balance diverse societal objectives. EAFM considers the ecological and human components of ecosystems and their interactions under an integrated approach to fisheries which is applied within ecologically meaningful boundaries. As such, it strives to balance diverse societal objectives in consideration of the knowledge and uncertainties of biotic, abiotic, and human components of ecosystems and their interactions (FAO, 2003). As a systems approach, it binds integrated coastal management and ecosystem-level perspectives grounded on the principles of collaborative and adaptive approaches. EAFM can be implemented across different spatial and governance scales and can be customized to accommodate multiple priority issues and objectives. At the heart of EAFM is an integrated Sustainable Fisheries Management Plan (SFMP), which is developed, implemented, monitored, and reviewed in a multi-year cyclical process. Through the SFMP, implementing partners developed a plan that is adaptive, precautionary, tuned to resilience concepts, and centered on goals that are relevant to the scale and scope of EAFM. The EAFM Methodologically, EAFM characterizes Planning Process a fishery’s condition in an integrated manner through identifying associated threats and issues, prioritizing fisheries management objectives, and presenting a plan to address these threats. The planning process consists of five steps as shown in Figure 1.3. Incorporating climate change considerations into the EAFM plans can also be done using existing guidelines for the Coral Triangle and Southeast Asia including the Philippines. Figure 1.3. The Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management (EAFM) Planning Process 5 C. The Approach and Process The overall process for the CNFIDP 2021-2025 follows the same process adopted crafting the CNFIDP 2016-2020. Such is guided by sound technical analysis, social embeddedness and credible commitment. In this light, the process of updating will be done in consultative, inclusive, and participatory manner that will involve all the sectoral stakeholders in its design, formulation, and verification. The general planning process used in sectoral planning exercises was adopted (Figure 1.4) with certain adjustments at specific steps. Plan Formulation Plan Endorsement and Adoption Sector Analysis ' Action/ Operational Planning Implementation, Monitoring & Evaluation Figure 1.4. General Planning Process Specifically, for the various phases, the following were conducted aligned with the partici- patory and inclusive process adopted for CNFIDP 2016-2025.

1. Coverage. The updating of the CNFIDP considered the following 5 programs/sub-sectors: (a) Municipal Fisheries Development Program, (b) Commercial Fisheries Development Program, (c) Aquaculture Development Program, (d) Post-Harvest, and (e) Trade and Marketing Development Program. Furthermore, Fisheries Governance, Legal, Policy and Institutional, is also included.

2. Co-Ownership, Co-Leadership, Co-Development. Consistent with the consultants’ role of facilitation, technical guidance, and documentation, discussion of these programs were conducted with the inter-agency committee assembled by the BFAR. The logic is that the expert provides technical directions, facilitation and documentation/write-up, while the BFAR representatives provide consistency with agency priorities, realities, and leadership amongst sub-sector stakeholders. Moreover, the BFAR ensures agency and stakeholders’ “ownership” of the final outputs and directions. This co-leadership aims to build capacity through learning by doing within BFAR and among the personnel engaged as part of this assignment’s objectives. 6

3. Consultation and Engagement. Restrictions related to the COVID-19 pandemic prevented the conduct of the consultations in the usual way, i.e., face-to-face. Thus, the sub-sectoral consultations were done through virtual sessions grouped into five (5) clusters of Fisheries Management Areas (FMAs), namely: Cluster Covered Regional Coverage Cluster 1: FMA 1, 2 & 3 CAR, 2, 3 4A, 5, 8, ,9, 11, 12, 13, BARMM Cluster 2: FMA 4, 5 & 9 MIMAROPA, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, BARMM Cluster 3: FMA 5 & 6 1, 3, 4A, MIMAROPA, 6, NCR, CAR Cluster 4: FMA 7 & 8 4A, 5, 8, 13 Cluster 5: FMA 10, 11 & 12 4A, MIMAROPA, 5, 6, 7, 8 The consultations covered the (i) Background on the review and updating of the Comprehensive National Fisheries Industry Development Plan (CNFIDP) 2021-2025; (ii) Presentation of the CNFIDP survey results; (iii) Validation and additional comments from the stakeholders, (iv) Identification of issues, concerns and challenges; and (v) Generation of suggestions and recommendations for improvement and direction for updating of the CNFIDP 2021-2025. Sub-sectoral consultations were also conducted, to discuss issues and challenges for the (i) municipal fisheries, (ii) commercial fisheries, (iii) aquaculture, (iv) post-harvest, and (v) trade and marketing sub-sectors. Apart from these, recommendations and suggestions were taken from the sub-sectoral representatives and incorporated in the draft report drawn and presented to the BFAR Management and technical working group.Capacity Building. The updating process included a capacity building aspect for counterparts and staff of BFAR, through a two-pronged approach: formal training on strategic planning and project management, and “learning by doing” as the personnel participate in the process, either as co-leaders with the technical experts, or as participants in the various working groups.

4. Capacity Building. The updating process included a capacity building aspect for counterparts and staff of BFAR, through a two-pronged approach: formal training on strategic planning and project management, and “learning by doing” as the personnel participate in the process, either as co-leaders with the technical experts, or as participants in the various working groups. 7 D. Strategy Framework FMA EAFM The identification of the strategies and priority activities took into consideration the overarching guidance of four important concepts: (1) the Fisheries Management Area (FMA), (2) the Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management (EAFM), (3) the Garcia-Mandanas Ruling, and (4) the OneDA Approach (Figure 1.5). Several concepts are common to all these foundation policies. Primary and fundamental among these are: (1) multi- Mandanas Ruling OneDA Approach stakeholder participation, engagement and empowerment, and (2) self-determined / development. These foundations, and the strategies and priority actions identified and emphasized by stakeholders signal the consensus and desire for the establishment ,/ONED~ of a Department of Fisheries, specifically to drive the much-needed and much-desired advancement of the fisheries sector. •• MANDANAl·GA~IA CA,( UIIIWI (OU II IUlrnt The Fisheries Management Areas, formally instituted by virtue of the Fisheries Figure 1.5. Concepts underlying the identification/ selection of strategies and priority actions The Philippines formally established the Fisheries Management Areas (FMAs) through the Fisheries Administrative Order No. 263 issued by the Department of Agriculture – Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (DA- BFAR). It established 12 FMAs covering all Philippine waters based on stocks boundary, range, administrative subdivisions, and distribution of fisheries. The policy directs all coastal local government units, municipal fisherfolk, civil society organizations, academe, and key stakeholders to work harmoniously for the conservation and sustainable management of fishery resources. The policy recognizes that the contributions of each stakeholder should be consistent with their respective mandates, and further highlights the valuable collaboration between the DA-BFAR, DILG, and the LGUs in the governance mechanism related to the FMAs. It further emphasizes the engagement of the community and fisherfolks through the Fisheries and Aquatic Resource Management Councils (FARMCs). FAO 263 specifically aims to (1) effectively conserve and manage fish population and habitats, (2) uphold Ecosystems Approach to Fisheries Management, (3) ensure cooperation between local governments and national agencies, and (4) provide science-based, participatory, and transparent governance framework. To ensure “science-based fisheries management”, the Scientific Advisory Group (SAG) is constituted from among BFAR-NSAP, LGUs, municipal fishing sector, aquaculture sector, commercial fishing sector, NGOs, and academe. This reflects the consensus among fisheries stakeholders for multi-stakeholder engagement in governance. 8 FAO 263 connects with the second overarching concept of the Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management (EAFM). Going beyond protecting only targeted species, EAFM promotes the Ridge-to-Reef approach which recognizes that aside from ecological considerations, sustainable fisheries must also prioritize the well-being of fisherfolks, industry traders, and communities. Moreover, EAFM principles (Figure 2) connect back to the concept of the FMAs. The public fiscal policy of the National Government will be affected greatly by the implementation of the Mandanas-Garcia Ruling, which is set to take effect in 2022. The Mandanas-Garcia Ruling pertains to the Supreme Court decision in Mandanas et.al. vs. Ochoa which clarifies how the “just share” in the national taxes of Local Government Units (LGUs) should be computed. Currently, the LGUs’ Figure 1.6. EAFM Principles share in national collections is limited to internal revenue. The Supreme Court rules that the computation should be based on all collections of national taxes including, among others, those that are collected by the Bureau of Customs. In its final ruling in 2019, the Supreme Court declared that the basis of computation of LGUs’ just share must be from “all collections of the National Taxes except those that are accruing to special purpose funds and special allotments for the utilization and development of the national wealth.” This means an increase of 27.61% to the budget has to be given as share to LGUs, equivalent to a P234.39 billion increase to the funds that will be redistributed to all LGUs in the country. These funds are intended specifically for the implementation of devolved functions – one of which is the implementation of programs, activities and projects (PAPs) in agriculture and fisheries. As the fisheries sector has been traditionally underfunded, this significant increase in funds augurs well for the fisheries sector and thus, the ruling provides a valuable foundation for the implementation of strategies in the CNFIDP 2021-2025. “Masaganang Ani at Mataas na Kita” is the current battle cry of the Department of Agriculture in relation to the OneDA Approach. Secretary William D. Dar describes the approach as a “holistic approach to agriculture and fisheries transformation.” Therefore, the OneDA approach takes on a centrality in guiding the identification of strategies and priority actions for the revised CNFIDP. Specifically, the revised CNFIDP is aligned with the mission of the OneDA Approach “to empower farmers and fisherfolk through collective action and attract private sector investments with inclusive agribusiness towards agricultural efficiencies, productivity, sustainability and resilience.” With the approach furthering the 12 key strategies to “grow” agriculture beyond 2021, the revised CNFIDP aligns then to these strategies. The stakeholders participating in the various consultations regarding the revised plan particularly mentioned several foci of initiatives, especially around the OneDA strategies of (1) farm clustering, (2) Co-planning, co-investment, co-implementation and co-monitoring of priority projects in the province, (3) Infrastructure investments, (4) postharvest, processing, logistics and marketing support, (5) food safety and regulations, (6) mobilization and empowerment of partners, and (7) strategic communication support. This does not preclude the individual LGU’s initiatives relating to OneDA strategies, especially as they see fit to their respective contexts. 9 E. Methodology Various methodologies were adopted in updating the CNFIDP including comprehensive review of national policies, programs and related documents on CNFIDP, stakeholders participation, sub-sectoral grouping, multi-disciplinary approach, and virtual activities with limited face to face as necessary. a. Comprehensive review of national policies, programs and related documents. The consulting team will prepare the Fisheries and Aquaculture Situationer and Assessment by reviewing and analyzing policies and programs including but not limited to the following: • National laws, policies, regulations, guidelines, and standards related to the agriculture and fishery sector • DA policies and programs under the New Thinking • One DA Approach to Agriculture and Fisheries Transformation: 12 Key Strate- gies • Coral Triangle Initiative on Coral Reefs Fisheries and Food Security (CTI-CFF) • BFAR previous and on-going programs and projects • National Commodity Management Plans/Road Maps (e.g. sardines, tuna, octo- pus, blue swimming crab, etc. • 12 Fisheries Management Areas Plan • BFAR Food Safety Strategic Plan • Fisheries Infrastructure and facilities (e.g. fish ports, ice plant, cold storage, wet markets • Value Chain Analysis in the Fishery Sector • Livelihood and enterprises in the fishery sector and sub-sector • Global and Regional Trends • Related studies on Fisheries and Aquaculture • PSA Data on Agriculture and Fisheries • BFAR and CNFIDP Annual Reports • Survey results on CNFIDP • Mandanas Ruling’s possible impact on the implementation of CNFIDP • Adaptation to COVID-19 Health Protocols in the agri-fishery sub-sector • Other documents Current available data shall likewise be validated and serve as baseline data for the updating of CNFIDP. The fishery sector and sub-sectoral targets were determined based on the validated information, analysis and performance assessment taking into consideration the supply and value chain. b. Stakeholders Participation. The updating process ensured participation of key stakeholders in the review and assessment of current CNFIDP as well as the fisheries and aquaculture sector as a whole and in the updating and formulation of CNFIDP 2021 – 2025. The stakeholders’ consultations covered community – based organizations (CBOs), FARMCs, Local Government Units (LGUs), concerned National Government Agencies (NGAs), private sector/industry stakeholders, non-government and people’s organizations, and development partners. 10 c. Sub-sectoral Grouping. To facilitate the participatory process the following groups were consulted: • municipal fisheries • commercial fisheries • aquaculture • post-harvest • trade and marketing Cross-cutting concerns (financing, policies, institutional development, law enforcement, etc.) will be integrated in all the five sub-groups above. d. Multi-Disciplinary Approach. Additional multi-disciplinary experts were also consulted to ensure formulation of a comprehensive medium-term plan and integration of current development paradigm including but not limited to fisheries modernization and industrialization, financing and investment, climate change and disaster risk reduction. e. Virtual and Limited Face to Face Meetings and Consultations. Given the restrictions and limitations due to different levels of community quarantine, virtual and online communication platforms in the conduct of meetings, consultations in both sub- sectoral groupings and inter-agency coordination and decision-making process were maximized. f. Close Coordination with BFAR and its Inter-Agency Working Committee. Consultations among BFAR and the Inter-Agency Working Committee were conducted to ensure that outputs are aligned with the specifications of CNFIDP. 11 Chapter 2 DIRECTIONS FOR CNFIDP 2021-2025 12 A. Overview of the Philippine Fisheries: An Update The total territorial water area (including the EEZ) in the Philippines covers 2.2 million square kilometers spread throughout the country (PSA 2020). This extensive area means that the fisheries sector makes a significant contribution to national economy, food security, nutrition, employment, and livelihood. In 2018, with a total annual production of 4.356 million metric tons (MT) of fisheries and aquaculture products valued over Php265 billion, the country’s fisheries sector accounts for 1.2% of the gross domestic product (GDP) and is ranked 8th globally in terms of volume of production. Production volume in the municipal and aquaculture subsectors rose slightly in 2019 but then dipped in 2020 (Figure 2.1), although to levels higher than the 2018 volume. The prices for the fish from the same subsectors followed the same trend. As for commercial fisheries, production volume increased consistently from 2018 to 2020 although very slightly. This increase was not reflected in value, however, the 2020 prices resulted in lower total value than the 2019 value. The contribution of each subsector to the total value of production in the sector changed slightly. FIGURE 2 Vo lume of Fish Production by Sector, Philippines: 2018 - 2020 2500 2,304.4 2 •356 •3 2,322.9 2000 1500 1,106.1 1,125.2 1,102.3 946,4 931 .5 975.2 1000 500 0 Commerei3I Munieip3I Aqu 3eulture ■ 2 01 8 ■ 2 019 ■ 2 0 20 140000 120000 ~ ~ 100000 C: ,Q 80000 :i 61,044.9 53 ,475.o 61,093.1 -C: 60000 40000 20000 0 Commercial Muni cipal Aq uaculture ■ 2018 ■ 2019 ■ 2020 Figure 2.1. Contribution of the sub-sectors to volume and value of production. 13 Foreign trade performance of the fishery industry in 2018 registered a net surplus of US$911 million, with a total export value of US$1,583 million and an import value of US$673 million. Statista (2021) reports that the export value in 2020 was US$606,000 million. The fisheries sector provides approximately 1.6 million jobs (5% of the total labor force), including the low-income families engaged in subsistence fishing in municipal waters, and contributes to food security through the provision of over 50% of animal protein for human consumption. According to Republic Act 8550 (RA 8550), popularly known as the Fisheries Code, three sectors comprise the fishing industry. These are commercial fishers, municipal fishers and aquaculture. Additionally, municipal fishing is fishing within municipal waters using fishing vessels of three gross tons (3GT) or less, or fishing not requiring the use of fishing vessels. Municipal water is the area covered from the shore up to 15 kilometers to the sea. Commercial fishing refers to the taking of fishery species by passive or active gear for trade, business, or profit beyond subsistence or sports fishing. The sector is further divided into three classes, namely: small-scale (utilizing passive or active gear utilizing fishing vessels of 3.1-20 GT); medium scale (fishing utilizing active gears and vessels of 20.1-150 GT); and, large scale (fishing utilizing active gears and vessels of more than 150 GT). 14 Table 2.1. Area and Location of Major Fishing Grounds NUMBER OF LAKES AREA (Sq. Km.) LOCATION A. SEAS West Sulu Sea 29,992.50 Palawan South Sulu Sea 112,642.00 Zamboanga del Sur/Sulu/Tawi-Tawi East Sulu sea 9,288.00 Zamboanga del Norte/Negros Sibuyan Sea 8,127.00 Aklan/Masbate/Romblon Bohol Sea 7,946.00 Bohol Samar Sea 3,870.00 Samar/Masbate/Leyte Visayan Sea 3,096.00 Panay/Negros/Cebu/Masbate Camotes Sea 2,477.00 Cebu/Leyte/Bohol B. BAYS Lamon Bay 2,838.00 Quezon/Camarines Norte Tayabas Bay 2,213.00 Quezon Illana Bay 2,128.50 Lanao del Sur/Maguindanao Manila Bay 1,935.00 Manila/Bataan/Cavite Sibugay Bay 1,935.00 Zamboanga del Sur Iligan Bay 1,811.00 Misamis Occidental/Lanao del Norte Imuruan Bay 1,087.80 Palawan San Miguel Bay 774.00 Camarines Sur Tawi-Tawi Bay 592.00 Tawi-Tawi Butuan Bay 516.00 Agusan del Norte C. GULFS Moro Gulf 12,900.00 Zamboanga del Sur/Maguindanao/Sultan Kudarat Davao Gulf 4,024.00 Davao del Sur/Davao del Norte/Davao Oriental Ragay Gulf 3,225.00 Camarines Sur/Quezon Leyte Gulf 2,724.00 Leyte Island/Samar Island Panay Gulf 2,311.00 Iloilo/Negros Occidental Lingayen Gulf 2,064.00 Pangasinan Lagonoy Gulf 1,935.00 Albay/Camarines Sur/Catanduanes Asid Gulf 619.00 Masbate Albay Gulf 413.00 Albay D. CHANNELS Babuyan Channel 3,612.00 Cagayan/Babuyan Island Jintotolo Channel 280.00 Capiz/Masbate Maqueda Channel 129.00 Camarines Sur/Catanduanes E. STRAITS Tablas Strait 3,870.00 Tablas Island/Mindoro Oriental Mindoro Strait 3,426.00 Palawan/Mindoro Occidental Tañon Strait 2,786.00 Cebu/Negros Cebu Strait 1,819.00 Cebu/Bohol Iloilo Strait 1,006.00 Iloilo/Guimaras F. PASSAGES Burias Pass 1,393.20 Burias Island/Camarines Sur Ticao Pass 805.00 Ticao Island/Sorsogon 15 Santos et al. (2017) confirmed the multiple gear character of Philippine fisheries. For the commercial subsector, the most popular gear is the ring net, followed by the bag net and then the Danish seine. For municipal fishers, the most commonly used gear is the gillnet, followed by the handline. In general, however, fishers in each region of the country prefer a different gear. About 40% of the Philippine’s regions are self-sufficient in fish – all of these surpassing 100% self-sufficiency, while about 24% of the regions have a fish self-sufficiency from 70 to 95% (Table 2.1). The remaining have a very low self-sufficiency of 7% (CAR) to 51% (Region 4a). As can be seen from the estimates in the table, there are significant gaps between fish supply and requirement per year in more than half of the regions in the country. This means therefore that there is a very wide room for interventions and/or strategies to ensure sustainability of food fish supply in the country. Table 2.2. Regional Total Food Fish Supply and Demand Analysis, 2020 FISH EATING POPULATION TOTAL FOOD FISH REQUIREMENT GAP Sufficiency Level Region (Total Population SUPPLY2020 PER YEAR (in MT) (%) less 9 Years Old (in MT) (in MT) and Below) NCR 10,699,288 104,632.41 393,733.80 -289,101.39 27% CAR 1,426,359 3,701.62 52,490.01 -48,788.39 7% Region 1 4,206,205 179,677.86 154,788.35 24,889.51 116% Region 2 2,924,465 43,882.80 107,620.31 -63,737.51 41% Region 3 9,856,411 345,843.96 362,715.91 -16,871.95 95% Region 4a 12,850,006 242,960.39 472,880.22 -229,919.83 51% Region 4b 2,561,709 156,114.33 94,270.90 61,843.43 166% Region 5 4,825,913 199,917.99 177,593.58 22,324.41 113% Region 6 6,311,699 294,224.42 232,270.54 61,953.88 127% Region 7 6,412,678 108,224.78 235,986.56 -127,761.78 46% Region 8 3,607,950 105,658.11 132,772.57 -27,114.46 80% Region 9 3,075,088 382,520.21 113,163.23 269,356.98 338% Region 10 3,985,331 108,980.30 146,660.17 -37,679.87 74% Region 11 4,160,500 42,413.97 153,106.39 -110,692.42 28% Region 12 3,889,099 312,562.90 143,118.85 169,444.05 218% Region 13 2,225,468 57,484.85 81,897.21 -24,412.36 70% BARMM 3,494,596 242,918.82 128,601.13 114,317.69 189% PHILIPPINES 86,514,428.84 2,931,719.75 3,183,730.98 -252,011.23 92% Courtney et al. (2016) reported that in the Philippines, critical issues affecting fisheries include: open access; overfishing and excessive fishing pressure; lack of management; inappropriate exploitation patterns; post-harvest losses; small- and large-scale fisheries conflicts; habitat degradation; lack of research and information; and, inadequacy of technical and human resource capabilities, particularly among managers and the agencies concerned in analyzing fisheries. 16 Based on the input from participants in the capacity building activities, there are four major stakeholder groups in the fisheries sector (Table 2.2). These are the fisherfolk and/or POs, civil society, industry/private sector, and government. Each group can be further broken down as seen in the table. For instance, municipal and commercial fisherfolk represent stakeholders in capture fisheries. Municipal fishers are equivalent to the small-scale or sustenance fishers of other countries, whose primary motivation in fishing is subsistence. The commercial fishers, on the other hand, operate larger fishing boats mostly for profit. Fishers may be temporarily employed in the commercial sector while they are usually owners and operators in the municipal sector. Stakeholders’ participation in the management of the sector is highlighted further in relation to the critical issues identified earlier. Decisions regarding the actions to be taken must be made by 17 18 Table 2.2. Identification and characterization of stakeholder groups in the fisheries sector in the Philippines (Source Stakeholders Analysis Building) Table 2.3. Identification and characterization of stakeholder groups in the fisheries sector in the Philippines (Source Stakeholders Analysis Stakeholders Stakeholders Interest Perceived Problems Resources Mandates conducted conducted during during Capacity CapacityBuilding) Group Civil Society ● Research and scholarship support ● Need further collaboration for ● Linkages and alliances ● Research and Innovation (NGOs, ● Training and extension partnership new technologies developed ● Financial Capacity for priority in Fisheries Industries; Academe, ● Environmental Integrity ● Limited available slots for advocacies ● Monitoring of government Church) ● Networking and Partnership academic improvement ● Expertise in Community implementation of ● Advocacy ● Covid-19 pandemic Organizing programs and services ● Policy development ● Environmental degradation ● Network ● Partnership with ● Fisheries Resource Protection ● Presence of invasive species in ● Technology and Financial government in the ● Strengthening of the fisherfolks CBWs assistance improvement of the lives spiritual, mental and emotional ● Lack of study on Carrying ● Innovations of fisherfolks/POs. well-being. Capacity of Mariculture Areas ● Research Data and Technical ● Convey knowledge ● Rights of the fisherfolk for ● Weak implementation of policies Assistance ● Research and sustainable fisheries ● Degradation of fishing grounds ● Donations and Funding Development ● Conservation of marine ● Political intervention ● Budget for consultation ● Monitor government biodiversity ● Degrading fishing grounds workshop policies and actions ● Develop technology/learning ● Overfishing ● Strong partnerships and ● Supplement and process ● Illegal, Unreported, Unregulated, Fishing network, manpower, complement the role of ● Development and assessment of ● Lack of trained/ capable expertise, investment Government in top (new) technologies manpower technology conservation and ● Humanitarian ● Problem on logistics/ distribution management of fishery functions/development (NGOs) of fish and fishery products products ● Establishment of common shared ● Unharmonized programs and ● Capacitate stakeholders service facilities through Public- activities due to lack of Private Partnership (PPP) prioritization and coordination ● Strong partnership with NGA among parties ● limited support on specific concerns for basic sectors Government ● Availability and sufficiency supply ● Lack of Monitoring and ● National Budget ● Food security (NGA, LGUs, of fish Evaluation ● Support services ● Livelihood, capacitate GOCCs) ● Responsible seafood sourcing ● Political interventions ● Technical Expertise fishery stakeholders, ● Partnership with NGOs relevant to ● Limited support of LGUs ● Technology and Financial ● policy-making sustainability and capacity building ● No continuity of projects Resources ● conserve and manage ● on marketing ● Lack of trained/ capable ● Manpower services fishery resources ● Presence of infrastructures and manpower ● Partnership with stakeholders ● promoted fish and fishery cold storage facilities to improve ● Limited marketing network to ● Facility products both domestic quality of fish and fishery products enable distribution of product ● Technical Assistance and international ● Improve fish trading facilities (e.g., from highly productive areas to ● Fishery Inputs markets, regulatory municipal and regional fish ports foodfish deficient area. ● Funding for livelihood projects mandates and local wet markets) Policy and regulations functions Stakeholders Stakeholders Interest Perceived Problems Resources Mandates Group ● Efficient delivery of services to ● Inadequate transport service ● Development, stakeholders providers resulting to high cost improvement, ● ensure food safety practices in wet of fish and fishery products. management, and markets ● Decline of fish stock and habitat conservation of the ● Establishment of product corridors degradation country's fishery and ● Regulation of traders and ● Buyers requirements in aquatic resources. middlemen international markets ● Development, ● Provide support to the fisheries ● Less capacitated marketing improvement, sector personnel and stakeholders management, and ● Policy formulation and ● Need improvement of infra and conservation of the implementation facilities for post harvest country's fishery and ● Alleviate Poverty handling and storage prior to aquatic resources. ● Sustainable Fisheries trading Management ● Lack budget allocation to ● Improve fishery and aquatic improve and manage fish resources trading facilities in fish ports and ● Render support services and wet markets provision of projects and programs ● Limited manpower of concerned to our constituents agencies due to limited budget ● Modern, climate smart and allocation to increase human sustainable aquaculture resource ● Sustainable livelihood and ● Limited technical know-how on income for the fisherfolk and proper fish handling practices aquaculture industry ● Mismatch of supply and ● Implementation of existing demands of fish products policies, laws and regulation to ● High cost of mark-up from fisheries sector. farmgate prices to ● Sustainability of fisheries wholesale/retail prices resources ● Low penalties of violators ● Inter-agency partnership ● Lack of adequate tools, regulatory services ● Fragmented/conflicting policies and jurisdictions among NGAs & LGUs ● Weak participation of farmers and farming communities in governance for aquaculture ● Limited aquaculture experts ● Weak RDE Linkage (translation of RD Results into programs) ● Lack of Extension Workers 19 20 Stakeholders Stakeholders Interest Perceived Problems Resources Mandates Group ● Stakeholders' compliance to GAqP ● Limited financial resources ● Adverse Impact on the full implementation of Mandanas- Garcia ruling ● Limited services to remote areas ● Poorly targeted Fishing Methods ● Light penalty for violators ● Limited plantilla position in government Rigorous consultation process and overlapping functions Peoples ● Increase income and livelihood ● High poverty incidence ● Logistics support ● Strengthening fishers Organizations ● Government support ● Technology and extension ● Raw materials & marketing organizations (Fisherfolk, ● Availability of financial support and capacity limitation channels/ fish and fishery ● Conservation and vendor access to subsidized capital ● Limited credit access products protection of fishery organizations) ● Access to capacity building ● Limited budget for development ● Inland, coastal and marine resources ● Intensified IEC campaign relevant programs resources ● Conservation and co- to market competitiveness ● Price control of middlemen and ● Technical and manpower management of the ● Compliance to regulatory traders ● Municipal waters country's fishery and requirements ● limited access to information ● Capability aquatic resources. ● Transparent pricing and tedious accreditation ● Credit and Financing from ● Promote the public interest system/regulation of traders and processes (e.g., FDA, HACCP) government institutions and with identifiable middlemen ● Inconsistent business ● Technologies and equipment leadership and ● Increase in come and livelihood requirements of LGU ● Land membership to peoples ● Health and well-being ● High cost of mark-up from ● Labor organization ● Conservation of fishing grounds farmgate price to ● Inputs ● Resource management ● Increase production & wholesale/retail prices ● Traditional Knowledge ● Cooperate with national productivity ● Limited access to medical care ● Data and local governments ● Secure adequate investment and health insurance ● Expertise ● Many fisherfolks are not yet ● Financial Resources organized or not yet registered. ● Commercial fishing inside municipal waters ● Limited knowledge on new and climate smart aquaculture technology Stakeholders Stakeholders Interest Perceived Problems Resources Mandates Group ● Limited assistance on aquaculture inputs (feeds, fingerlings, propagules, etc) ● High cost of aquaculture inputs (feeds and fertilizer) ● Difficulty in compliance to GAqP ● Limited access to market ● Calamities ● Decline in Fish Catch; ● Shift of Catch from Predators to Small Species due to Overfishing ● Lack of alternative sources of income during inclement weather conditions; ● Limited access to recent and verified technologies ● Limited access to post harvest facilities e.g CFLC and Common Service Facilities ● Lack of Monitoring and Evaluation Lack of trained/ capable manpower Private Sector ● Empower and uplift the marginal ● Lack of budget and manpower ● Technical expertise and ● Development, (Traders, fisherfolks and increase food ● Lack of trained/ capable Technology improvement, Investors, production manpower ● Availability of financing management, and Exporters, ● Support financing of development ● Limited market information/ mechanism conservation of the Business, projects fragmented data on fisheries ● Wide networks/market, country's fishery and Wholesaler, ● Expand market reach and access ● Lack of alternative market of facilities/technology, aquatic resources. to fisheries data and relevant excess supply production capacity, ● Food security Retailers) market information ● Stringent and tedious import and established markets, ● Provide livelihood ● Increase in quantity, quality and export regulatory procedures and manpower & accreditation ● Produce good quality value of fish and fishery products requirements resources, export quality fishery products for export ● Limited market infrastructure products ● Enhance productivity, ● Sustainable sourcing of raw support/logistics/production/ post ● Land efficiency, and resilience materials harvest facilities ● Financial Resources ● Spur growth and ● Competitiveness of product in ● Export rejection of importing development in fishery terms of brand quality countries due to food quality, food industry ● Public-Private Partnership safety issue and non compliance ● Business network ● Goverment subsidies 21 to regulatory requirements 22 Stakeholders Stakeholders Interest Perceived Problems Resources Mandates Group ● Increase production, productivity ● high accreditation cost in Technical assistance ● Product development and Income complying to requirements for compliant with ● Provide Job for the fisherfolk sustainability (e.g., MSC international standards ● Introduce new technology certification) Trade and marketing of locally ● Increased income through value ● Limited acessisbility to accredited produced fisheries products addiiton sustainable fishing grounds ● Deliver goods and services ● Limited export market due to off- ● Technical assistance (Capability brand products building) ● Limited assistance on investment ● Strengthening the export market, opportunities (hatcheries, trade, marketing and export mariculture park, etc) Increase areas of cooperation ● Limited access to credit and insurance ● Restrictive Govt Policies (among NGAs) ● High cost of aquaculture inputs (feeds and fertilizer) ● -ifficulty in compliance to GAqP ● Increase prices of fisheries commodity ● Limited funding support from the government ● Increased prices of Fishery commodities ● Compliance to new international regulations (i.e. lab analysis) ● Insufficient fingerlings supply; ● Low global market demand and low international market price Development ● Networking and Partnerships ● Timely compliance of NGAs to ● Expertise and Financial ● Attain food security and Partners ● Sustainable Development Goals surveys and data needs Resources ensure economic growth (International ● Food Security ● Limited funding support by providing development organizations, ● Provide funding assistance and ● Detrimental fishing practices, services in fisheries funding increase job opportunities for ● Political intervention, industry agencies) fisheries industry ● Continuously changing loan ● Uplifting of marginal ● Assist the need of the marginal structure adjustment fisherfolks fisherfolks ● Compliance to documentary ● Provide pathways and ● Alternative livelihood requirements promote growth ● Provide financial assistance Lack of trained/ capable manpower Stakeholders Stakeholders Interest Perceived Problems Resources Mandates Group ● Generate funds for development Ensure economic growth ● Food Security through development projects ● Increase opportunity through joint and interventions projects Financial assistance 23 B. Assessment of the CNFIDP 2016-2020 BFAR has conducted survey on the CNFIDP 2016-2020 and the results were presented during the series of consultation workshops for the updating of CNFIDP 2021-2025. The results of the survey serves as the backgrounder and situationer on the status of CNFIDP implementation. The consultation workshops was conducted in five clusters covering 12 FMAs and participated by various stakeholders, NGAs, LGUs, private sector, cooperatives, NGOs/POs, academe, and development partners. The outputs in the five clusters were summarized and presented to the four subsectoral consultations, namely: (i) municipal, (ii) commercial, (iii) aquaculture, and (iv) post harvest and trade and marketing. The consolidated results from the four sub-sectoral consultations were further presented to the national consultation involving all sub-sectors and 12 FMAs.

1. Survey on CNFIDP2 A. Respondents The CNFIDP 2016-2020 was assessed with respondents from the various subsectors (Figure 2.2). More than half were female, and most were from the 45 to 54 years age range. Many were either high school or college graduates, with the monthly earnings ranging from PhP1,000 to PhP10,000 from either aquaculture or capture fisheries. Number of Respondents Age Bracket ■ Marketing ■ Cross - Cutting ■ Aquaculture ■ Post Harve$l ■ Commercial ■ lllarke:ing ■ Cross • Culling ■ AQ1.aculture ■ Post Harvest ■ Comrrerdal 100 75 50 25 15- 24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65ard atxue Gender Educational Attainment ■ Cross - cuttr,g ■ Matkat,ng ■ Aquaculure ■ Mtndpal 100 75 50 25 Ele<nenlary Elememary ~ H ~ College UG Colego G Vocatlonal Posl • Male • Female UG G UG G G Graduate 2 BFAR Survey on CNFIDP 24 Main Source of Income Fish Processor 0.9% Employed 11.0% Aquaculture Farming 30.9% 13.0% Business 6.1% Fish Vending 7.5% Fish Dealer/Trader Capture 5.0% 25.6% Monthly Income ■ Cross - cutting ■ Marketing ■ Aquaculture ■ Municipal 150 100 50 0 1,000· 10,000 10,001 • 20,001- 30,001- 40,001 • 50,0001 - 60,001 and 20.000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 above Figure 2.2. Socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents for the survey on CNFIDP 2016- 2020 B. Commercial Fisheries. Below is the summary of findings for the commercial fisheries from the CNFIDP Survey co i. Reasons for the decrease in annual average production The top reasons for the decrease in annual average production in the commercial fisheries are the following: Luzon Visayas Mindanao

1. Climate Change 1. Climate Change 1. Climate Change

2. Strict enforcement of 2. Strict enforcement of 2. Strict enforcement of 15km rule 15km rule 15km rule

3. Conflicting/inconsistent 3. Stock Continue to Decline 3. Conflicting/inconsistent policies 4. Government Programs are policies

4. Moratorium of Fishing not responsive 4. Stock Continue to Decline vessels 5. Limited or no new fishing grounds It can be noted that across the three island groups, there are three common reasons resulting to the decline of production, namely: (i) climate change, (ii) strict enforcement of 15km rule, and (iii) conflicting/inconsistent policies. Other factors cited include moratorium of fishing vessels government programs are not responsive, stock continue to decline, and limited or no new fishing grounds. 25 ii. Gaps and Recommendations Below is the summary of the perceived gaps and recommendations from the survey on commercial fisheries. Strategies Gaps Recommendations Determining New Economic Exclusive Zone • Strengthen law enforcement and expanding • Encroachment by additional BFAR/Naval access to fishing • Fisherfolks awareness on Assets grounds EEZ Limits • Orientation to fisherfolks must be conducted High Seas • Provide IEC regarding Rules • Lack of Information & Regulations in the HS. dissemination regarding • Expand HS access to prevent High Seas congestion in EEZ • Exceeding Requirements • Outdated Fishing Boats • Modernize Fleets Strengthening Proper boarding and Program on Distant HS Boarding and Inspection inspection must be done water/offshore properly fisheries • Vessel • Fast - track the Monitoring/Integrated implementation of this project Marine Environment for FREE Monitoring System • Implement to all commercial • Costly Propagation of VMS Incomplete fishing boats Implementation • Strengthen enforcement • Inacurate declaration of process and strategies actual coordinates during • Calibration of GPS apprehension • Inacurate GPS • Lack of Information Delineating and Closed Fishing Season • Strictly implement the policy Zoning of Coastal • Not properly implemented • Provide alternative livelihood land and Water uses No alternative livelihood during the duration of closed for affected sectors fishing season Delineation of 15KM • Adjust GT to allow fishing in municipal waters (w and w/o MW Offshore Islands • LGUs must allow small- • Small-scale commercial FB scale commercial to operate is not appropriate beyond at least 10.1 – 15km 15km at some areas • Fast-track the delineation to • Municipal boundaries avoid conflict of municipal conflict with LGUs boundaries MPAs/Fish Refugia/Fish • Provide information drive / Sanctuaries IEC materials • Lack of information on the • Strengthen Bantay dagat importance of MPAs • Establishment of more • No proper implementation MPAs for the of MPAs. Illegal activity conservation/protection of exist. Aquatic Resources Determine Stock Status • Assessment is necessary 26 Strategies Gaps Recommendations Establish science - • Lack of based coordination/cooperation conservation and with fisherfolk management Establish RP & HCR • Strict implementation of the measures • Fisherfolk must be aware RPs and HCR with the activity FMAs • Lack of information/ orientations regarding FMA Use of Appropriate Determine Stock Status • Assessment is necessary technologies and • Lack of provision of coordination/cooperation Livelihood with fisherfolk opportunities Implementation of • Establish more payao to TCMZ/National Payao increase livelihood and fish Program production • Some of the fisherfolk destroy payao • Destroy nets (Gillnet) Strengthen the drive Manpower Capacity • Need hiring and well-trained against IUUF (Law Lack of manpower/well-trained enforcement personnel Enforcement) personnel Patrol Vessels & other • Additional Floating assets Floating Assets • Donate patrol boats to LGUs • Lack of Patrol Vessels • Strictly delegate the • Selective apprehension of apprehension to combat IUUF Fishing boats iii. On Reporting Compliance and Database iii. On Reporting Compliance and Database Most of the respondents rated the reporting compliance and database as moderately effective and Mostrelevant. Figure below of the respondents illustrated rated the satisfaction the reporting compliance level andofdatabase respondents on reporting and as moderately compliance. effective and relevant. Figure below illustrated the satisfaction level of respondents on reporting and compliance. 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Not at all I Efective/Releva_n_t ___ Figure 2. 3: Satisfaction of respondents on the reporting compliance and database 27 26 C. Municipal Fisheries i. Boat registration. Most of the fisherfolks are registered in the FishR and most of the boat owners are also registered in the BoatR. Figure 2.4 illustrates the registration of fisherfolks and boat owners. Registered in FishR Fish Worker ■ No ■ No ■ Yes ■ Yes Boat Owner Registered in BoatR ■ No ■ No ■ Yes ■ Yes Figure 2.4. Registration of Fish Workers and Boat Owners. Listed are factors on why some of the fisherfolks and boat owners are not registered in the FishR and BoatR FishR BoatR • Unable to enter the information in the • The amount of required documents BFAR FishR system and payment for O.R • Lack of knowledge in FishR • Specific Qualifications •Not a boat owner •Boat is not for river 28 ii. Type of Boats and Fishing Gears. Most of the respondents operate municipal motorized fishing boats using gill nets and hook and line. Figure 2.5 shows the other types of boats and fishing gears used by the respondents. Type of Boat Commonly Used Fishing Gears Municipal non- motorized fishing boat ---- - - - Municipal motorized fishing boat Gill Ne t Hook Pots and Seine Falling Spear Scoop Lift Ne t Cast net and Line T raps Net Ge ars gun Nets Figure 2.5. Types of Boat and Fishing Gears iii. Fish Catch and Household Consumption. Most of the respondents catch per trip is less than 10 kilos and some with 10-50 kilos while only few catch more than 50 kilos. Likewise, most of the respondents consumed 1-2 kg of fish daily. Figure 2.6 illustrates the average volume of catch per trip and daily household consumption of fish. Av erage Volume of catch per trip (kg) Volume consumed by household (kg) ► 100 <1 >3 1 to 2 2.1 to 3 < 10 10 to 50 51 to 100 Figure 2.6. Fish Catch and Household Consumption iv. Change in the Volume of Fish Catch. From the last five years, most of the respondents indicated that the fish catch remains the same while many said the catch decreased substantially and only few indicated that their catch had increased over the years. Figure 2.6 illustrates the changes in fish catch over the five year period. CHANGE IN VOLUME Of CATCH FROM 5 YEARS AGO Decreased so Decreased Remains t he fnc reased fnc reased so m uch sa m e m uch Figure 2.7. Change in the volume of Fish Catch for the last five years 29 v. Channels and Locations of Fish Markets. The respondents indicated that they sold their catch through house to house selling (48%), middleman/buyer (30%), and wet market vendor (22%). Concurrently their harvest is being sold either within the barangay (52%), the municipality (37%), and exported to other urban areas (11%). Figure 2.8 presents the buyers and location of sales of respondents catch. Where do you sell your harvest? Who buys your harvest? Wet Exported to _ __ other urban market/Market_____ vendor Households areas 22% within 11% House to house municipality selling 37% 48% Mi ddlema Households / Buyer within 30% barangay 52% Figure 2.8. Channels and Locations of Fish Markets vi. Perception on Fishery Habitat. Most of the respondents indicated that the marine environment had declined, but became more knowledgeable on marine protected areas, and that there was lesser incidence of illegal fishing in the MPA areas. Figure 2.9 illustrates the perception of the respondents on fishery habitat. Change in Marine Environment ■ Coral reef abundancy ■ Mangro,e abundancy ■ Seagrass abundancy ■ Status of coral reef habitat ■ Status of inland bodies of water ■ Status of mani:rwe habitat ■ Status of seagrass habitat ■ Status of wetlands Don' t knoW Declined Remained the lmpra,ed Don't have that same habitat in our area Changes i n i ncidence of illegal fishing Knowledge on any Marine activities since MPA was established Protected Area (MPA) ■ No • No ■ Yes • Yes Figure 2.9. Perception on Fishery Habitat 30 vii. Perception on Science-based measures Most of the respondents ranked the effectiveness of fisheries management actions as mostly effective and the impact of fisheries management as positive. Figures 2.10 and 2.11 illustrate the perception rating on science-based measures. Effectivity of Fisheries Management Actions ■ Capacity development on fisheries management skills Mostly effective ■ Ecosystem manipulation ■ Income diversification Of ten effective ■ Input controls Somewhat effective ■ Integrated Coastal Management, Rarely effective Marine Spatial Planning, etc. ■ Output controls Not ,effective ■ Spatial controls Don' t know ■ Temporal controls Figure 2.10. Effectivity of Fisheries Management Actions ■ ReclJced cortlicts and stields t he fishingsedorfran pctertial impacts ■ PoliticaVstal<eholder/donor buy-in and p;rtlcipatlon in increased resources ■ Link in fisheries management across jurisciction and LGUS ■ Laree-scale, la,g-term issues into oonsioeration (dimate change) ■ • Increased support for better pernanre • Better oom pliance and ertorcement •-- ■ Better a::m muricatia, aid trust ama,g stakeholders ■ Altc,;,ed trad~afs when balancing tuman and eoologlcal needs Don't Very HeE,.th,e HO lrJ'lli-Cl Positiw Very know H. .tM Posidw ■ Adaptation to chal'€ing situation Impact of fisheries Management Figure 2.11. Impact of Fisheries Management 31 viii. Understanding and Perception on BFAR Programs and Projects. Most of the respondents rated BFAR programs and projects as very effective and have a positive impact on their quality of life. Most of them will continue to be a fisherfolk and 52% will still encourage their children to be the same. Figure 2.12 shows the perception of respondents on BFAR programs and projects. Effectiveness of BFAR projects on Continue being a fisherfolk Municipal Fisheries ■ No • Yes -- Don't know Not effective Rarely effective Somewhat effective Often effective Very effective Impact in Quality of Life Don't know Very Negative No Impact Positive Very Negative Positive Encourage children to be a fisherfolk Figure 2.12 Understanding and Perception of BFAR Programs and Projects 32 D. Aquaculture i. Types of Aquafarm, Culture Technique and Culture System. Most respondents (43.8%) are in the freshwater aquafarm, 63.4% into grow-out pond culture technique, and 49.5% are into semi-intensive culture system. Figure 2.13 shows the distribution of respondents types of aqua-farm, culture technique and culture system. Type of Aqua farm Marine 23.1% Brackishwater 28.5% Freshwater 48.3% Culture System Intensive 19.3% Extensive 31.2% Semi - Intensive 49.5% Culture Technique Others 7.5% Pen 4.8% Cage 24.2% Grow - out Pond 63.4% Figure 2.13. Distribution of respondents on the type of aqua-farm, culture technique and culture system 33 ii. Volume and Value of Production. Most of the milkfish and shrimp commodities are produced in Mindanao, Luzon mainly produces Tilapia and milkfish, and Visayas is abundant in seaweeds. Additionally shrimps are largely produced in Mindanao and Luzon. The value of production follows the same trend. Figure 2.14 and 2.15 illustrate the respondents volume and value of aquaculture production in Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao. Value 2020 ('000) ■ Luzon ■ Visayas ■ Mindanao Tilapia Milkfish Seaweed Carp 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 Figure 2.14. Volume of Production of Respondents Value 2020 ('000) ■ Luzon ■ Visayas ■ Mindanao - I Tilapia Milkfish Shrimp ■ Seaweed Carp - • • 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 Figure 2.15. Value of Production of Respondents 34 iii. Volume and Value of Production. Awareness on the Government Programs. The respondents indicated their awareness on the government programs, registered the perceived problems and actions taken to address the problems. Below are the programs, perceived problems and actions taken: Government Interventions • Banca Ko Gawa Ko • Inputs Distribution • Ornamental Fish Culture • Aquasilviculture Project • Pond Culture Techno Demo • Technical and Financial Assistance • SAAD Program and CFLC Problems on the Interventions • Information Dissemination • Delay and Anomalies with the Logistics and Provision of Inputs • Mishandling of the Inputs Provided Action Taken to Address the Problems • Increase Awareness of the Interventions Available • Gain further knowledge in handling the distributed inputs Most of the information on the programs come from the LGUs, FLDTs and FARMCs as perceived by the respondents. Figure 2.16 presents the platform of dissemination and sources of information. Platform of Dissemination 150 100 50 0 FLOT FARMC LGU BFAR Others Figure 2.16. Platform of dissemination and sources of information. 35 iv. Quality, Quantity and Timeliness of Government Programs. Most of the respondents rated the quality, quantity and timeliness of the government interventions as good, very good, and excellent. Only a few rated fair and poor. Figure 2.17 shows the perception of the respondents. Quality 100 75 50 25 0 Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor Quantity 100 75 50 25 0 Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor Timeliness 100 75 50 25 0 Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor Figure 2.17. Quantity, Quality and Timeliness of Government Programs 36 v. Efficiency and Effectiveness. Most of the respondents indicated that the efficiency and effectiveness of the government programs for aquaculture are very good. Figure 2.18 presents the perception of respondents on efficiency and effectiveness Efficiency 100 75 50 25 0 Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor Effectiveness 100 75 50 25 0 Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor Figure 2.18. Efficiency and Effectiveness of Programs and Projects in Aquaculture 37 vi. Vision for the Aquaculture Industry. The respondents indicated their views on the vision for the aquaculture industry. Below is the summary of the respondents’ view on the vision for the industry. SURVIVE • Prioritized production assistance to fisherfolk • Culture camaraderie among concerned agencies, partners and other fisherfolk • Application of Proper Fishery Management Techniques REBOOT • Ask for further technical and financial assistance from different concerned agencies • Commitment to the good aquaculture practices for better management techniques ACHIEVE • High fish production and quality of produce • Food security and sufficiency • Fishery commodity competitiveness Year Vision • Development of Aquaculture Technologies for Sustainable Production, Processing, and Post - harvest • Empowered Fisherfolk and be able to establish sustainable aquaculture livelihoods and be competitive on a commercial scale Ways to Achieve the Vision • Invest in developing and researching new yechnologies to be used by our fisherfolks for sustainable production, processing, and post-harvest • Capacitate the fisherfolks regarding technical and financial knowledge 38 fisherfolk for sustainable production, processing, and post-harvest ● Capacitate the fisherfolk regarding technical and financial knowledge vii. Strategies. The respondents registered their views on issues, concerns, and vii. Strategies. gaps as well asThe respondents suggested registered interventions their the to achieve views on issues, strategies. Theconcerns, summary and ofgaps proposed interventions as well as areinterventions suggested summarized tobelow. achieve the strategies. The summary of proposed interventions are summarized below. Strategies Issues/Concerns/Gaps Suggested Interventions Establishment/ ● Lack of inputs, hatcheries, ● Provide support for the Upgrading of grow - out facilities and such establishment of necessary Aquaculture in the provinces facilities for production, Facilities ● Effect of natural processing and post - occurrences harvest ● Overused facilities Adoption of ● Lack of awareness and ● Conduct of capacity Good further technical Chapter skills 2: Directions building foractivities for the CNFIDP 2021-2025 Aquaculture regarding Good Aquaculture improvement of awareness Practices Practices and technical knowledge of ● Low production volume fisherfolks Strategies Issues/Concerns/Gaps Suggested Interventions ● Support technological improvements to increase the volume of production PAGE Registration and ● Mismanagement and ● Capacitate fisherfolk and \* Accreditation of malpractices in the concern agencies Aquaculture Aquaculture Fishery regarding the process and Facilities Systems necessary documentation ● Lack of knowledge for the registration and regarding the process and accreditation guidelines in application for registration/accreditation. Investing on ● Lack of support of the ● Work hand in hand with Species with public sector in boosting the different sectors focusing High commodities with on scaling up species with Commercial commercial potential high commercial potential Potential ● Lacks the technical and financial capabilities to culture and maintain such species. Mariculture ● Low survivability and ● Capacitation regarding the Parks suitability proper management ● Insufficient financial techniques, process and capabilities to sustain and maintenance. maintain the facilities ● Further invest in facility present construction and maintenance Early Warning ● Concerned agencies lack in ● Conduct seminar/trainings Systems providing trainings/seminars ● Provide access to advance Technologies regarding climate resilient technologies to be able to for Aquaculture aquaculture sustain different types of ● Unpredictable natural occurrences occurrences 39 Chapter 2: Directions for CNFIDP 2021-2025 Chapter 2: Directions for CNFIDP 2021-2025 E. Post-Harvest The survey on post-harvest covered the perception on the reduction of post-harvest losses The survey on post-harvest covered the perception on the reduction of post-harvest losses andThe on fish processors. survey on Below is the post-harvest summary covered the of perceptions perception onof thereduction respondents of on post- and on fish processors. Below is the summary of perceptions ofthe the respondents post-harvest on post- harvest. losses and on fish processors. Below is the summary of perceptions of the respondents harvest. i. on post harvest. of Post Harvest Losses Reduction i. Reduction of Post Harvest Losses i. Reduction of Post Harvest Losses Activities Conducted Facilities Established Activities Conducted Facilities Established ● Capacity building activities by ● Drying facilities ● Capacity building activities by ● Drying facilities different agencies and sectors ● Seaweed processing facilities and different agencies and sectors ● Seaweed processing facilities and (seminars, on and off site trainings, warehouses (seminars, on and off site trainings, warehouses etc.) ● Chemical analysis and testing etc.) ● Chemical analysis and testing facilities facilities ● Fish deboning facility ● Fish deboning facility Additional Interventions Needed Strategies Additional Interventions Needed Strategies ● Access on IPCS facilities ● Invest in technological advancement ● ● Access on IPCS facilities Access to logistics facilities ● Invest in technological advancement ● Improve Food and Safety ● Access to logistics facilities ● Improve Food and Safety ● Access on post-harvest technologies Guidelines/Standards ● Access on post-harvest technologies Guidelines/Standards ● Packaging and labelling support ● Facility establishment ● Packaging and labelling support ● Facility establishment ● IEC on proper fish handling and ● IEC on proper fish handling and seafood safety guidelines seafood safety guidelines ii.ii. FishProcessors Fish Processors ii. Fish Processors Status of establishment in Facilities Established Status of establishment in Facilities Established compliance with Health and ● Drying Facilities compliance with Health and ● Drying Facilities ● Seaweed Processing Facilities and Hygiene ● Seaweed Processing Facilities and Hygiene Warehouses ● Compliant to basic hygiene and Warehouses ● Compliant to basic hygiene and ● Chemical Analysis and Testing sanitation requirement from LGU ● Chemical Analysis and Testing sanitation requirement from LGU Facilities ● Good Manufacturing Practices Facilities ● Good Manufacturing Practices ● Fish Deboning Facility (GMP) aligned ● Fish Deboning Facility (GMP) aligned ● GMP certified ● GMP certified ● HACCP certified ● HACCP certified Additional Interventions needed R&D Focus for Productivity Additional Interventions needed R&D Focus for Productivity • Access on IPCS facilities • Technological Advancement • Access on IPCS facilities • Technological Advancement • Capability building • Improvements with the current • Capability building • Improvements with the current trainings/seminars practices and techniques in trainings/seminars practices and techniques in • Project inputs processing • Project inputs processing • Access to common service facilities • Access to common service facilities • Technical assistance • Technical assistance f. Trade and marketing f. Trade and marketing i. Marketing Assistance. The respondents identified the marketing assistance i. Marketing Assistance. The respondents identified the marketing assistance they are receiving which include; (ii) Market matching/linkage, (ii) IEC materials, they are receiving which include; (ii) Market matching/linkage, (ii) IEC materials, (iv) Livelihood, (v) Trade Fair & Exhibit, (vi) Technical Assistance, (vii) Materials (iv) Livelihood, (v) Trade Fair & Exhibit, (vi) Technical Assistance, (vii) Materials like banyera, weighing scale, etc., (viii) KADIWA on Wheels and (ix) Provision of like banyera, weighing scale, etc., (viii) KADIWA on Wheels and (ix) Provision of PAGE PAGE \* 40 \* F. Trade and marketing i. Marketing Assistance. The respondents identified the marketing assistance they are receiving which include; (ii) Market matching/linkage, (ii) IEC materials, (iv) Livelihood, (v) Trade Fair & Exhibit, (vi) Technical Assistance, (vii) Materials like banyera, weighing scale, etc., (viii) KADIWA on Wheels and (ix) Provision of Fish Stalls. Most of the respondents accessed the above services and the platform and sources of information are through word of mouth, training, IEC materials and social media. Figure 2.19 shows the platform of information dissemination and the numbers of respondents who accessed the marketing assistance. Platforms of Information Dissemination 80 60 - - 40 - 20 - - I - - - 0 I l Credit Forum Training IEC Materials Social Media Word of Mouth Others Accessed the Marketing Assistance e YES e NO Figure 2.19. Platform of Dissemination and Number of Respondents who Accessed Marketing Assistance 41 The Fisheries Trading’s Gaps/Challenges are also identifies as follows: • Limited access to logistics facility • Limited market access and information • Limited access to loans/credit • Unstable pricing • Stiff market competition • Unstable production • Lack of skills and knowledge on marketing/trading The impact and benefits gained from the market assistance of BFAR may improve business opportunities for the fisherfolk and stakeholder in terms of easy access to consumers, sellers, transportation and quality fishery commodities and other marketing services. There is a strong suggestion to support the marginalized fisherfolk. Thirty-seven percent (37%) of the respondents suggested strengthening the enforcement of the Suggested Retail Price (SRP) of fishery commodities. The government should also promote economic fairness and properly implement the fish landing centers as the trading venue for fisherfolk. Market linkage and conduct of trade fairs may also help them expand their market directly to the consumers. ii. Credit Facilitation. The respondents identified the credit programs such as PLEA, ACEF, and ACPC. Majority has access to these credit programs and they obtained the information from word of mouth, trainings, credit forum, IEC materials, and social media. Figure 2.20 shows the platform of information and percentage of respondents who availed credit services. Platforms of Information Dissemination 50 Credit Forum Trainings IEC Materials Social Media Word of Mouth Others Accessed the Credit Assistance YES • NO Figure 2.20. Platform of Information and percentage of respondents who benefitted from credit 42 facilitation The respondents also indicated the reasons for inaccessibility of credit programs. Based on the responses, the government’s credit programs are inaccessible because of the stringent requirements, wherein, the majority of fisherfolk borrowers have difficulty to comply. It is suggested that several platforms must be considered to make the government’s program accessible to the fisherfolk borrowers such as but not limited to the following: • Simplify loan requirements • Improve IEC campaign to reach remote areas • Conduct trainings and capacity building iii. Overarching Concerns in Trade and Marketing. Below are the overarching concerns raised by the respondents on trade and marketing in the fisheries and aquaculture Overarching goal of the fisheries trade and marketing sub-sector: • Sustainable market (local and international), production and post-harvest Capabilities • Direction/focus for fisheries trade & marketing in the new industry plan • Improve market, production and post-harvest capabilities of involve personnel • Food security and sustainability Top Emerging Commodities for Export: • Crab, shrimp, and lobster • Tuna, bangus, and tilapia • Seaweed Interventions needed by the Industry • Improvement in market competitiveness • Fish processing training and activities • Technical and financial support in production Identified Challenges: • Fluctuations in the local and international market • Lack in post-harvest equipments • Effect of climate occurrences BFAR Extension Services that needs improvements: • Marketing Assistance • Capacity Building • IEC Distribution Technical Assistance • Stakeholders’ commitments on the development of the fisheries trade and marketing sub- sector: • Continuous support and interventions for marketing, financing, production and post-arvest 43 G. Cross-cutting i. Most of the surveyed academic institutions are offering fisheries related programs and facilities that supports fisheries and aquaculture as indicated below: Fisheries Related Programs • Bachelor of Science in Fisheries (General) • Trainings and seminars • Vocational course • Diploma in Fisheries • Fisheries Insurance Program • Scholarship Program for Fisherfolk Type of Facilities • Post-harvest facilities • Grow-out facilities • Testing facilities • Aquaculture facilities ii. The National Government Agencies such as BFAR, DOST and SUCs are providing training. iii. The Civil Society Organizations provide awareness programs on fisheries management and conservation. The types of advocacy of CSOs include the following: • Information dissemination on the conservation of fisheries resources (i.e. rivers,lakes, and endangered species) • Coastal clean-up iv. Gender and Development. It is worthy to note that 53% of the members of the organizations are women. Most of the organizations have gender experts and sex-based aggregated data. Likewise, 55% with scholarship are women. Figure 2.21 presents the quick statistics on gender and development of the organizations surveyed. 44 Gender experts in the Percentage of Women in the organization Organization • No • less than 50% ■ '(P,S • more than 50% Women with Scholarship Sex-based aggregated data • No ■ le ss th an 50% ■ more than 50% 55% / Figure 2.21: Gender and Development v. Figure 2.21. Gender Disaster Risk Management. Theand Developmentidentified the adverse respondents v.impactDisaster of disaster in the fisheries Risk Management. Theand aquaculture respondents sectorthe identified summarized adverse impact of belowdisaster in the fisheries and aquaculture sector summarized below Livelihood: Income: • less demand from the market • Business failure (pandemic) • Disruption of livelihood of • Low income due to less market affected fisherfolk Employment: Properties/Resources: • Unemployment • Loss of properties (damage or • Disruption of employment lost) Family/health: Others (specify): • Spread of Diseases (water- • Reduced availability of food borne diseases) supply • People spend more for • High market prices hospitalization. • High risk of being sick 47 45 The respondents The respondents also ratedalsr therated the government government performance performance in times in times of disaster of disaster ranging ranging from from average average to good. to is Below good. the Below summaryisofthe summary rating of the of rating of the respondents: respondents Government Performance in limes of a Disaster Preparedness Good Interv ention/Mitigating measures Average Response time Average lnter-aaencv coordina tion Good Budgetary support Av erage M anpower resources Good Competency Average H. Level of Awareness on the CNFIDP Most ofh.theLevel of Awareness respondents, 59% on andthe CFNIDP 60.7% respectively, were unaware of the CNFIDP and the CPHMAIP (Figure 2.22). Those who were aware consisted the majority of the remainder, with the least Most proportion coming 59% of the respondents, fromand those whorespectively, 60.7% are ‘stronglywere aware’. In relation, unaware of themore thanand CNFIDP halfthe of the respondents CPHMAIPwere aware (Figure of .CNFIDP 2.22) strategies. Those who were aware consisted the majority of the remainder, with the least proportion coming from those who are ‘strongly aware’. In relation, more than Withhalf of regardstheto participation respondents werein aware workshops related to of CNFIDP the CNFIDP, 58.1% reported that they had strategies. no participation. Of those who participated, 71.6% were invited individuals, 23.4% represented relevant organizations while 5.0% came to participate as a result of publicity. More than 85% of respondents said to With regards however that in participation they are willing to workshops participate. related to See Figure the CFNIDP, 2.23. 58.1% reported that they had no participation. Of those who participated, 71.6% were invited individuals, 23.4% CNFIDP represented relevant organizations while 5.0% came to participate as a result of publicity. SP(II\Olr Aw- ,?,$>; More than 85% of respondents said however that they are willing to participate. See Figure tl. f.!$2.23. 1.100•1:1,1:,.'{'/ A.WollC A...,,,. CNFIOP Slr3tegie-s CPHMAIP .. SP~~ 1'!1,•N-1: :., t.!Onl't,'j~ A1t:1,c • • ••• • • ffU'¾ Figure 2.22. Level of Awareness 48 46 Participation in previous workshops Participated 41.9% Willingness to Participate No Participation 58.1% Platforms Publicity 5.0% Organizations 23.4% • Willing • Not Willing From Invitations 71.6% Figure 2.23. Participation in CNFIDP C. Updating of CNFIDP 2021-2025 Based on the series of consultation workshops with the stakeholders, the current strategies remain valid and shall be carried over in the CNFIDP 2021-2025. However, there are proposed adjustments on targets based on performance and current situation of fisheries and aquaculture resources. The details of the directions, strategies and proposed action plans are embedded in the sub-sectoral components discussed in the succeeding chapters. 47 Chapter 3 CAPTURE FISHERIES (MUNICIPAL AND COMMERCIAL) 48 Chapter 3: CAPTURE FISHERIES CAPTURE CAPTURE FISHERIES FISHERIES (MUNICIPAL AND COMMERCIAL) (MUNICIPAL AND COMMERCIAL) A. State of Capture Fisheries in the Philippines2 A. State of Capture Fisheries in the Philippines2 This paper presents a synthesis of current available information on the status of capture This paper fisheries presents in the a synthesis country. of current These include available temporal trends information on the status and geographical of capture (regional) distribution fisheries in the country. These include temporal trends and geographical (regional) distribution of landings of major fisheries resources, such as tuna and tuna-like fishes, sardines and other small of landings pelagics, andof major fisheries soft-bottom resources, fish and such as tuna invertebrates likeand tuna-like squid and fishes, swimming sardines blue and crabs.other Available small pelagics, and soft-bottom fish and invertebrates like squid and swimming information relating catch and fishing effort are summarized to present trends in exploitation blue crabs. Available status and ininformation relating simple catch ratescatch and fishing for various effort fishing are summarized grounds around the to present trends in country. exploitation status and in simple catch rates for various fishing grounds around the country. 1. Historical trends in marine capture fisheries production

1. Historical trends in marine capture fisheries production 2.5 Marine captureMarine fisheries capture production fisheries from production 1950from 1950 to 2014 is to 2014 by presented is sector presented by sector in Figure Fisheries Production in Millions of mt in Figure 3.1. On a nationwide 3.1. On a nationwide scale, the development scale, the 2.0 development of fisheries showed of fisheries showed rapid growth rapid from thegrowth from the 1960’s to the mid-1970s. 1960’s to the mid-1970s. This was followed This was 1.5 by followed about a by aboutofa decade decade of near stagnation near stagnation in production in both sectors until the mid-1980s mid- in production in both sectors until the 1.0 1980s et (Silvestre (Silvestre al., 1989). et al.,This 1989). This has slowdown slowdown beenhasinterpreted been interpreted as the as the period period when the when the major fishing grounds of the country reachedreached major fishing grounds of the country Total 0.5 Mun Prod Comm Prod theirtheir respective respective maximum maximum sustainable sustainable yields yields 0.0 (Dalzell (Dalzell andand Ganaden, Ganaden, 1987; 1987; Armada, Armada, 2004). The 2004). 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 further increase from the The further increase from the late 1980s to late 1980s to 2010, particularly 2010, particularly forforthethecommercial commercialsector, sectormay be Figure 3.1. Marine Figure 3.1. Marinecapture capture fisheries fisheries production production (in may be due to expansion to fishing groundsfurther due to the expansion to fishing grounds MT) by sector from 1950-2014. (in MT) by sector from 1950-2014 further offshore as well as to technological advances in navigation, locating fish 1515 aggregations, and efficiency in offshore as well as to technological comm Annual change in Landings (%) fishing operations. The increasing ~ mun advances in navigation, locating trend is less consistent for the 'o "' 1010 DI) (: fish aggregations, and efficiency in municipal sector. Figure 3.2 shows (: fishing operations. The increasing "' 5 _J the average percent (%) change in -~ 5 trend is less consistent for the Q) annual landings by 10 year periods DI) (: municipal sector. Figure 3.2 £"' 0 for each sector. The reduction in niu 0 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2014 shows the average percent (%) annual growth in municipal fisheries :::, (: change in annual landings by 10 -5 (: production was consistent for at least <( -5 year periods for each sector. The 30 years, from the 1970s to 2000, while Figure 3.2. Decadal average percent (%) change in annual reduction in annual growth in Figure 3.2.for landings Decadal commercialaverage percent and municipal (%) change in annual sectors. commercial landings remained low but municipal fisheries production landings for commercial and municipal sectors was consistent for at least changed little during the same period. Annual production has been decreasing in both sectors since 2010 (Fig. 1). In 2013, total marine 2 Wilfredo L. Campos1, Donna M. Guarte1 and Rafael V. Ramiscal2 1OceanBio Lab, College of Arts & Sciences, UP Visayas, Miag-ao, Iloilo 2Capture Fisheries Division, DA-BFAR Central Office capture fisheries production amounted to 2.13M MT. 53 2 Wilfredo L. Campos1, Donna M. Guarte1 and Rafael V. Ramiscal2 1OceanBio Lab, College of Arts & Sciences, UP Visayas, Miag-ao, Iloilo 2Capture Fisheries Division, DA-BFAR Central Office 49 While trends in production may provide some information, the truly useful information on the performance of the industry should be of the rate of fisheries production, in terms of fishing effort, or some parameter that is indicative of it. This will be examined in a later section.

2. Geographical distribution of fisheries production Figure 3 shows the distribution of mean annual landings (in 103 MT) by region. Most of the catches from the commercial fisheries are landed in ports along the western part of the country, particularly in East Sulu Sea, Moro Gulf, Manila Bay and in Southern Luzon (Figure 3.3). Much of the municipal production, however, landed in central parts of the country, namely the Visayan Sea, Bicol, North, and Southeast Sulu Sea (Figure 3b). While municipal catches are ~ typically landed within the same locality or fishing ground, the same cannot be assumed 250 )( for commercial catches. Hence, Figure 3.3 does not necessarily reflect the main fishing grounds of the commercial sector. •••O · Total Prod uction MT (2002-12) The typical composition of catches Figure 3.3 The distribution of mean annual landings from both sectors, based on annual mean by sector in each region from 2002-2012 landings from 2002 to 2014, are sum- marized in Figure 3.4 and b. Commercial fisheries landings are made up primarily of pelagic fishes, with small pelagics (scads), sardines and small mackerels making up about 48%, and tuna and other large pelagics making up anoth- er 30% or so. In contrast, over 50% of municipal catches consist of other species of pelagic and soft/hard bottom demersals, including many invertebrates. N~ r i d u" mue a•b ..... S-:),,l~~d _ _ __,~~~ '·"" Commercial Municipal Figure 3.4.a and 3.4b Catch composition of catches from commercial and municipal mean landings from 2002-2012. 50 The geographical distribution of landings of major resource groups caught by each sector are shown below in Figures 3.5-3.7. The trend in annual production for the 13-year period 2002- 2014 is also presented alongside for each resource group. For the major tuna species (skipjack and yellowfin), as well as for the other tuna (Bullet/ Frigate, Eastern little & Bigeye), the commercial landings are located mostly in the East/South Sulu Sea - Moro Gulf – Celebes Sea areas, while the main municipal landing area is in Southern Luzon (Figures 3.5 a-c). These also correspond somewhat to the major fishing grounds for the respective sectors. For sardines (Figure 3.6a), highest commercial landings are concentrated off Zamboanga, while municipal catches are landed mostly in ports along the western part of the country, including Lingayen Gulf, Visayan Sea and Moro Gulf. a C b , ~ "~ L:~ L Skipj~ 'i'ITTi'a11-lfrod'J ction (MT) <-•••<M••- ~ Yellowf1n Tuna P-roduct1on (MT) \.UWf-- Tuna-like Production (MT) (2002-20121 (2002-20121 (2002-20121 uo 1.:0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 111.0 & . i 60 - ~ commer dlll Munic:iplll ·!'ii --------------- lO ~ Muni~I l •+-----~-~----" 2002 2004 lOOr,1, 100!1 lO:O 2011 lO!L 1001 2004 2006 ;mos 1010 1ou 2014 2002 2004 1006 20011 20:0 2(112 20:4 Figure 3.5. The geographical distribution of landings of major resource groups caught by each sector from 2002-2012 and the trend in annual production from 2002-2012. a) Yellowfin tuna b) Skipjack tuna and c) Tuna-like. For other small pelagics, particularly the Round and Bigeye scads, the main landing areas are very similar for both sectors (Figure 3.6b), except for Manila Bay and southern Luzon which are major landing areas for commercial vessels. This similarity suggests that the main fishing grounds for scads are also located within the vicinity of these landing areas. Overall production of small mackerels (Indian and Indo-Pacific mackerel) is about 1/10 the production of scads (Fig. 3.6c), but the catches of the different sectors are landed in different areas. This suggests differences in the species composition of their catches for this resource group. 51 a b C , l \a L ~ : :IJ l . tl "I] "" :: ,.. _ w:JL:i~ L ' 1o ""-'-" -"~' L Sardine l roduction (MT) • ( ....,-1,1 M.t.., .. .. Small Pelagic. Production (MT) __ Sm all Mac-k erel Production (MT) (2002-20121 (2002-20121 (2002-20121 i "'l.S ,00 '2. '"' ~ l JSO 1' ..-l ...? , ~ !_,. ! l 100 ~ ~4 ~! 300 lO ,so l =, ~ 1,! !~ ~6 150 ~ i10 200! i= 100 ~ l.S - M.u1li~I t 1 10~ - comme,dll :co j, ~. .g 10 .,......r-•·-- 100 ! ~ so - Commcr dltl ,} £ .-•I• • - Muni cip:,,I ! •' ,.., • t~ £ • ~ ~ 0 a 200& 20011 10:0 201? 10~4 ,3 lt0o1 2006 2008 lO:O 1011 2014 ""' '""' 2002 2004 lOOr,1, 20011 1010 2011 20i 4 Figure 3.6. The geographical distribution of landings of major resource groups caught by each sector from 2002-2012 and the trend in annual production from 2002-2012. a) Sardine b) Small pelagics and c) Small mackerels. On the whole, pelagic fish make up 2/3 of the country’s mean annual marine capture fisheries production. These include transboundary stocks (e.g., tunas) and those that are more limited to within the country’s archipelagic waters, but likely move across various fishing grounds. These are also typically schooling which are likely to be more vulnerable to fishing gear that are able to encompass large areas, and to those that use attracting accessories such as lights and aggregating devices. For all pelagic categories examined above, annual catches by the commercial sector were much higher than those from the municipal. In contrast, municipal catches exceed from 2 to over 10 times the commercial catches for demersal resources, which are limited to relatively shallow shelf areas, most of which are within 10-15km, or nearer, from the shore. The major landing areas for demersal resources are within Central Philippines, between south Luzon and north Mindanao (Figure 3.7). The bulk of commercial demersal catches are likely to be from trawls and modified Danish seines (hulbot- hulbot), which have been banned since late 2013. 52 a C lil 't .~ l,, t 12 ~~ I '"I] , ,~l ::IJ ~~-[_ L .."• I • • [_ L....L ~ (O"llll,tl(!;¥ M,ll.<!N ~... .........1 "''"""" Nemipt erid Production (MT) Blue Crab Production (MT) i'° (2 002-20121 '° .. ,. a 12002-2012I ' • . ~so - commefdal 1., . ~ 32 34 - M uni ~ I ~ !!. i., - M uni ~ ! E«> '' j - 30 i -=lO •. ~ ~,. rj 10 15 ' s .. g20 l 10 l 0 ~ J 10 •• 0 .. . . . . . ......., ~ Municip;,I 26 ii 24 £s "

1.S 2 • ~ 0 > 20 I ~ 1001 2004 2006 1008 2010 lOU 20!.4 l00o1 2006 200!1 2010 lOU 2014 1001 """ 2006 lOOS 20!0 2012 2014 """ Figure 3.7. The geographical distribution of landings of major resource groups caught by each sector from 2002-2012 and the trend in annual production from 2002-2012. a) Nemipterids b) Squids and c) Blue crabs. Cephalopods are a promising resource, particularly squid, because of their fast growth and relatively high value. In overexploited shallow demersal fishing grounds, the decline in the abundance of large predators is believed to be the cause for the high abundance of squid. The reduced predation pressure allows squid to multiply rapidly, and because they continue to remain abundant in many fishing grounds (see Figure 3.7b), they seem to be less vulnerable to heavy fishing pressure than their vertebrate counterparts (i.e., fish). Little is known about cephalopod stocks in the country. In the case of octopus, which is now appearing as the least of major marine fisheries commodities in the country, we have no reliable catch and effort statistics anywhere. For blue swimming crab, the fishery has declined rapidly since the late 2000s. The major fishing ground is presently along the northern and eastern coasts of Panay in the Visayan Sea, although there is substantial production also in Bicol and Leyte (Figure 3.7c). Details on the status of blue swimming crab stocks in the Visayan Sea are provided by Ingles (2004). 53

3. Status of Resources Commercial fisheries 0,8 While annual production trends 5110 •...... MSY--.... ·...... may give the impression of a growing 0.5 • sector, they mask the status of true ~~ •• X ! 400 ! resource abundance, especially when e M1~11m i.. fishing grounds are typically under iu 0.4 • ! - ., JOO ''b C -Ill g,..., .,... ,_ 8 heavy fishing pressure, as most j' OJ . ;! ? 2' have been since the 1970s. Equally l'l. 'iii i 200 2,'aj important as the landings is the amount of fishing effort that was spent !i 02 'II ~ ; i to catch what is landed. ~ C 0.1 ! 100 j !'~', l~isv: Relating production (catch) and 0 0 fishing effort allows us valuable insight 0 100 200 JOO 100 5110 GOO on the status of the stock. Dalzell and Mean annual total adjysled flee! horsepower (hp x 10) Ganaden (1989) and Silvestre and Figure 3.8. Surplus production of small pelagics from Pauly (1986) report their findings on commercial sector (1950’s-1987). Adapted from Dalzell MSY (maximum sustainable yield) of and Ganaden, 1989. small pelagic and soft bottom demersal resources, respectively, in the country as a whole, based on data derived and/ or gathered from the 1940/50s to the 1980s. In both reports, MSY in most fishing grounds at the time was reached in the late 1970s, with fishing effort continuing to increase for another 5-10 years at the time the studies were done. - b 0.4 ~ X For small pelagics, the MSY model estimated that commercial I O.J ___ MEY ran911 ...... . fishing effort levels in 1987 had ~ 200 to be reduced by 50% to allow <ii 0.2 the country’s fishing grounds to i ffl regain their natural productive 100 capacities (Figure 3.8). That was ..g 0.1 C 30 years ago. l,'l :::; 0 0 0 0.2 o., 0.6 0.8 1.0 For soft bottom demersals, Fishing morlality (F = ViB; year') the model showed that the commercial fishing fleet in 1984 Figure 3.9. Surplus production of demersal resources from was catching (producing) only as commercial sector (~1946-1984). Adapted from Silvestre and much as they did in the 1970s, Pauly, 1986. but with 40% more fishing effort (Figure 3.9). Again, this was 30 years ago, and it is hence very likely that the level of excess (wasted) fishing effort for both resources is much more today, 30 years hence. 54 This decline in natural productivity of our fishing 1 00000 3.00 This decline grounds becomes in natural more productivity obvious when we of our compare fishing grounds becomes more obvious when g 80000 - 60000 - + - + .. .• / ,/ . / , ~ 2.50 ~ 2.00 Q. the trend in annual production (MT) of commercial :c we compare the trend in annual production ring net 2004)dots) ratessame catches (blue dots) from 1978 - 87 (Barut, (MT) of commercial ring net catches (blue (catch 1978 -data the same withfrom perconverted data converted 87 (Barut, vessel-HP) 2004) annual towith (red crosses) to annual the catch over the catch rates ···,.~·"• same(catchperiodper(Fig 3.10). (red The crosses) annual production .. V C 0 :;:; , ·... ,. , + + + ~ ~ ~ 1.50 V vessel-HP) over + + increases during the said period, but only because the same period (Figure 3.10). The annual V :, ~ 4 0000 , *, ' + ··~- .. ·-> .t= , of production increases during the said period, (J the parallel increase in fishing effort. The trend in V /;. •". ,·· ~ 1.00 1li catchbut only(=because rates catch per of the parallel effort), increase however, in the shows fishing effort. The trend in catch rates (= catch 20000 - opposite trend. Hence, overall catches increase ~ 0.50 per effort), however, shows the opposite trend. from Hence, year tooverall year, catches just as increase in Fig. 3.11, from but yearthis to may Figure 3.10.0 Annual production of commercial0.00 be due entirely year, to Figure just as in more 3.11, and more people but this may beordue vessels ring net and 1 975converted1980 annual 1985 catch rates 1990 fishing yeartoafter entirely year,more more and andpeople not tor the vesselsunlikely from 1978-1987. Adapted from Barut (2004). increase in year fishing abundance ofand after year, thenot to resource. the An analogy unlikely Figure 3.10. Annual production of commercial ring would increase in abundance of the resource. An net and be equating converted annualthe resource catch rates in from the fishing 1978- ground as a pie of constant size (= similar year- to-year abundance) and as more and more people analogytake would be equating a slice from the thepie, resource in get the slices

1987. Adapted from Barut (2004). smaller. The trend in catch rates is thus more the fishing groundshowing realistic, as a pie ofaconstant decrease size in (= each similar year-to-year abundance) and as more vessel’s/fisher’s share as fishing effort increases. and more people take a slice from the pie, the slices get smaller. The trend in catch rates is thus more realistic, showing a decrease in each vessel’s/fisher’s share as fishing effort increases. , ~i; - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ This This relationship becomes relationship becomeseveneven more more instructive when instructive when catch catch rates rates areare plotted plottedagainst against fishing effort. Figure 3.11 shows fishing effort. Figure 3.11 shows the overall the overall decreasing trend in mean decreasing trend in mean annual catch rates of annual catch rates of commercial ring nets, commercial purse seinesring andnets, purse bagnets as seines fishing and effortbagnets as fishing The increases. effortdata increases. are from Barut The data(2004) are from Barutcover and (2004) theandperiodcover 1978the to period 1987.1978 Thisto 1987. This is a is a clear clear indicationindication that rates that catch catch ofrates of various gear various gear types types decrease decreaseasasmore moreand and more more vessels are fishing. This is truly what l )C vessels are fishing. This is truly what eventually eventually happens in any fishery in the happens in any fishery in the world, and the task world, and the task at hand is to manage at handeffort fishing is to at manage the rightfishing time andeffortinatthe the right 0 time and inmanner appropriate the appropriate so that catchmanner rates canso that '" catch rates can be maintained at be maintained reasonable levels.at This reasonable levels.becomes task This task lessbecomes achievable less achievable the the longer Figure 3.11. Catch rates (MT/HP) plotted against overfishing has been taking place. Figure fishing 3.11. Catch rates (MT/HP) plotted against longer overfishing has been taking place. effort. fishing effort. Unfortunately, there is little information on fishing effort that corresponds with our much Unfortunately, longer time-series there is little information of production (landings) on fishing data. Whileeffort that corresponds MSY models provide more with our much insights to pol-longer time-series icy formulation, of production simpler trends (landings) data. in catch per While effort (= catchMSY models rates) couldprovide have been more moreinsights convincing to policy formulation, of simplerearly resource depletion trends on in catch they because per effort (= catch truly reflect rates) abundance resource could haveand beenaremore usefulconvincing indi- of resource ces of productive depletion early capacity of on because fishing they truly grounds. An reflecton over-reliance resource trends inabundance production and are useful (landings) has contributed to the continued decline in our fisheries resources. indices of productive capacity of fishing grounds. An over-reliance on trends in production A fundamental difference between (landings) natural resources into has contributed land theand water isdecline continued that in the former in our we can fisheries see and weAcan resources. then fundamental appraise. difference between natural resources in land and water is that in the former we can we In the latter, we do not see (under the sea surface), so we can only “guess” at best if see and are not willing to investigate (i.e. systematically assess). 55 Biomass of Demersal Resources Fisheries-independent trawl surveys have been conducted in various bays and coastal areas around the country since the late 1940s to systematically determine resource abundance in these fishing grounds. The most extensive effort to date was done in the late 1940s to early 1950s, covering 24 coastal areas around the country (Warfel and Manacop, 1952). For some of these areas, similar trawl surveys were conducted at different times and these provide us with a picture of how demersal resource biomass (abundance) has changed as Chapter fishing3:effort CAPTURE has FISHERIES increased with time. Figure 3.12 shows annual production (harvest) of demersal resources from the country’s trawling grounds from 1946 to 1987 (blue line) and fishery independent estimates35 of demersal biomass (abundance) at various depth strata in various fishing grounds around the country from 400 the late 1940’s to 1993 (Armada, 2004). Mean annual harvest has stagnated since 30the 1970s, while demersal resource biomass in various grounds continued to decline. Demersal biomass levels in the early 2000s were estimated to be only 10% of their levels in the late 1940s (i.e., considered as virgin biomass levels because of cessation of all fishing during WWII).25 Demersal biomass (tons/km ) Figures 13a Annual harvest (in 000 tons) 2 300 and b show changes in demersal biomass in Sorsogon Bay (Hilomen et al., 2002) and Chapter Manila 3: CAPTURE Bay FISHERIES Annual demersal harvest (Armada, 1998 and Green et al., 2003). 0-10 m 20 Figure 3.12. Annual production of 10-20 m 35 demersal resources from the country’s 20-50 m trawling200 grounds from 1946-1987 400 I 50-100 m 15 30 and fishery independent estimates of Demersal biomass demersal biomass at various depth 25 Annual harvest (in 000 tons) Demersal biomass (tons/km ) 2 strata in various fishing grounds in 300 10 100 from the late 1940s-1993. the country Annual demersal harvest 0-10 m 20 Adapted from Armada, 2004. 10-20 m 50 200 20-50 m 5 50-100 m 15 Demersal biomass 0 0 10 1946 1966 100 1977 1993 Year 50 5 Figure 3.12. Annual production of demersal resources from the country’s trawling grounds from 1946-1987 0 and fishery independent estimates of demersal biomass at various depth strata in various fishing grounds in 0 1946 1966 1977 1993 the country from the late 1940s-1993. Adapted from Armada, 2004. Year Figure 3.12. Annual production of demersal resources from the country’s trawling grounds from 1946-1987 9,000 and fishery independent estimates of demersal biomass at various depth strata in various fishing grounds in the country from the late 1940s-1993. Adapted from Armada, 2004. B,000 12 a b Demersal Standing Stock 7,000 9 12 6,000 a b {.,~ Mar ii;:- Etay Demersal Standing Stock ,,:;- 9 'i3-g 5,000 6 .,, :g (mt/km2) c., , !51 6 gi 4 ,000 (mt/km2) .Sil~ 3 m, 3,000 3 2,000 0 • 0 1940 1960 1980 2000 1,000 2020 10'¼ 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 Year Year 0 19491 2001 Figure 3.13. Changes in demersal biomass in Sorsogon Bay (a) and Manila Bay (b). y~ Adapted from Hilomen et al., 2002; Armada, 2004; Green et al., 2003. Figure 3.13. Changes in demersal biomass in Sorsogon Bay (a) and Manila Bay (b). Adapted from Figuret3.13. Hilomen ChangesArmada, al., 2002; in demersal biomass 2004; in Sorsogon Green Bay (a) and Manila Bay (b). Adapted from Hilomen et al., 2003. et al., 2002; Armada, 2004; Green et al., 2003. 56 The only estimate of MSY for a resource that is primarily exploited "'"' by the municipal fisheries is provided for the blue swimming e: 1,000 crab, Portunus pelagicus. In the \_MSY in 1993: 1980s, the main fishing grounds for ":: • "- !le fMSY blue swimming crab included Ragay IOO IMJY • ! ISO Gulf and the Visayan Sea, but catch and effort data were only available 0 for the latter area. Using catch and 0 I tO II lt ll effort data for the 1990s, Ingles t:t,11(,. 10' ~p.,-.I1) (2004) showed that MSY for the western Visayan Sea was reached Figure 3.14. MSY of blue swimming crab in Western Visayan around 1993 (Figure 3.14), and that Sea (Ingles, 2004) a further increase of 40% in fishing effort over the next 6 years did not increase overall landings from the fishery. A plot of mean daily catch rates (catch per trip) from 1992 to 1998 (Figure 3.15) clearly shows a decreasing trend, with catch rates in 1998 being about 50% ofother available information on catch rates for the municipal fisheries are from various fishing grounds and cover different periods. 14 The long term information is from interviews • from different sources. Figures 3.16 a and b --,. - ' 10 12 show indicative catch rates (kg/fisher/day) from various gear types based on interviews > '0 g • ·-. .... .. of fishers representing a wide range of ages in Honda Bay, Palawan (Figure 3.16a) and ...... Q. ·;:: • ... I Olango, Cebu and Tukuran, Zamboanga- -t:. 6 •·· .... Sibugay (Figure 3.16b). Though they cover .... ~ V 4 •• • different periods, they show parallel trends of decreasing catch rates (kg./fisher/day) u 2 • over a few to several decades. For coral reef fisheries, historical catch rate information 0 based on interviews are summarized by Alino 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 et al. (2004) (Fig. 3.17). Based on indicative information, they estimate that catch rates Figure 3.15. Trend in catch rates (catch/trip) of blue from reef fisheries have decreased by at least swimming crab in the 1990s. fivefold since the 1950s. This situation is similar to municipal fishers targeting small pelagics. Derived catch rates (MT/HP/yr) from several fishing grounds combined, over the period 1948-1985, also show a fivefold decrease from the 1950s to the 1980s (Figure 3.18). 50 ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ eo C.ebu & 2amboanga-Sibugay 300 . Honda Say, Palawan 1980-s 2000 4 50 --~-- 250 ~ .i•i • a ii' ., -- 0 ....., b 20() " C ~· ~ !!'. ~ w 1&:l ~ 0 t ~ 100 ¥- w . ~ ~

10 . I:) . 50 <.> ·o • 0 , ., 1950 0 1960 191'1 1990 1990 2000 2010 0 + - - - ~ - - - ~ - - - ~ -==-i YEAR.$ t980 2000 20t0 2020 Figure 3.16. Catch rates of various municipal gear types based on interviews in various sites around the country. A) Honda Bay, Palawan B) Cebu and Zamboanga-Sibugay. 57 Over shorter time intervals, the FSP/FRMP ,..,,,. Resource and Ecological ... IS '? , 10 Assessments (REAs) in r . .... 10 the 1990s and 2000s 0. show changes in catch ,.e .. . ) ~ rates that are consistent " ~ over a wide range of u ~ •5 fishing gear. Figure 19 C .. r l compares catch rates J ~ 0 I I (kg/fisher/day) of seven (7) gear types in Lingayen Gulf for the Figure 3.17. Mean catch rates (kg/day) of fishers in coral reef areas in period 1985-1988 with the Philippines during different time periods (1950s-1990s). Adapted those 12-15 years later from Dalzell, 1996; Uychiangco and Torres, 2002; MSU-Naawan., 2003) (Hilomen et al., 2002). Catch rates decreased in all gear types, with traps showing the smallest change. Associated with this is an increase of about 30% in the population of fishers in the Gulf during the same period. Hilomen et al. (2002) also documented a corresponding increase in the duration of fishing operations during the same period. The latter simply means that in spite of fishing longer (more hours) on average, fishers in the Gulf still caught less than they did in the mid-1980s. This clearly indicates a decrease in the abundance of the resources, and its close correspondence with the increase in number of fishers during the same period strongly suggests a negative relationship between fishing pressure and I 3.5 3.0 , 2,5 ' I a: 2.0 §. 1.5 1.0 0.5 0 --- 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 Voor Figure 3.18. Historical trend in catch rates (MT/HP) of small pelagics in the municipal fisheries of several fishing grounds from 1948 to 1988. catch rates. 58 Chapter 3: CAPTURE FISHERIES Lingayen Catch Rates (kg/fisher/day) 35 a 17000 30 Gulf No. fishers 25 □ trawl 15000 □ baby trawl 20 □ danish seine 15 □ gillnet 10 13000 □ hook & Line 5 ■ Fish Corral ■ fish traps 0 11000 1985-88 2000-01 • no. of fishers 2.5 b 2.0 CPUE (kg/mnhr) 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 BSGN CN DGN DiGN FT HL J MHL Sp Tr BchSn Gl LN Fishing Gear 1993-94 0 2001-02 FigureFigure 3.19.3.19. Comparison Comparison of catchrates of catch rates (kg/fisher/day) (kg/fisher/day) ofgear of various various gear types in (a) types Lingayenin (a)(above) Gulf Lingayen Gulf (above) between between 1985/88 1985/88 and The and 2000/01. 2000/01. increaseThe increase in number of in number fishers in of is the Gulf fishers also in theand hown; (b) is Gulf also shown; Sogod Bay, Southern Leyte between 1993/94 and 2001/02. and (b) Sogod Bay, Southern Leyte between 1993/94 and 2001/02. A similar situation was observed in the other side of the country (Sogod Bay) in the southern partAofsimilar Easternsituation was observed in the other side of the country (Sogod Bay) in the southern Visayas. Figure 3.19b shows an average reduction of 30% in catch rates of 10 out part of Eastern Visayas. Figure 3.19b shows an average reduction of 30% in catch rates of of 13 fishing gear types used in the Bay between 1993/4 (Calumpong et al., 1994) and 2001/2 10 out of 13 fishing gear types used in the Bay between 1993/4 (Calumpong et al., 1994) and (BFAR-FRMP, 2003). Catch monitoring in all FSP/FRMP REAs followed a standard protocol of 2001/2 (BFAR-FRMP, 2003). Catch monitoring in all FSP/FRMP REAs followed a standard regular monitoring at several municipal fish landing sites every other day over a period of 12 protocol of regular monitoring at several municipal fish landing sites every other day over a months. Hence, results from these estimates cannot be dismissed as merely incidental. period of 12 months. Hence, results from these estimates cannot be dismissed as merely incidental. Figure 3.2a shows mean daily catch rates over a period of 1 year for fish corrals in relation to relative fisher density (fishers/km of coastline) in nine (9) different fishing grounds around the country. Figure The 3.20afitted regression shows shows mean daily catchthat ratesdaily overcatch rates period of from 1 yearfish for corrals decrease fish corrals by 0.1kg in relation withtoevery additional relative 1 fisher/km fisher density coastline. (fishers/km of coastline) in nine (9) different fishing grounds around the country. The fitted regression shows that daily catch rates from fish corrals decrease by Similarly, 0.1kg driftadditional with every gillnet catch rates also 1 fisher/km decreased as fisher densities (fishers/km2) increased coastline. (Figure 3.20b) in eight (8) fishing grounds. This decrease translates to about 0.5kg/fisher/trip for every additional 1 fisher/km2 of area fished (MERF, 2006). The overall mean daily catch rates in reef fisheries also decreases as fisher density (fishers/ km2) increases (Figure 3.21). This is based on data compiled from seven (7) reef areas in various 64 parts around the country (Campos et al., 2004). 59 a in reef fisheries also decreases as fisher b density Drift Gill Net Catch Rate The 8 overall mean daily catch rates Fish Corral Catch rate 15 (fishers/km2) increases (Fig. 3.21). This is based on data compiled from seven (7) reef areas 6 in various parts around the country (Campos et al., 10 2004). Drift Gill Net Catch Rate 4 10 205 2 • a b Fish Corral Catch rate 8 150 0 0 5 10 15 20 6 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 10 Fisher density (no./km2) Fisher Density (no./km coast) 4 Figure 2 3.20. Mean daily catch rates of (a) fish corrals in 9 5fishing grounds, and (b) mean catch rates of drift gillnets covered by the FSP/FRMP REAs. 0 • 0 0 5 10 15 20 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Fisher density (no./km2) Fisher Density (no./km coast) Figure 3.22 shows the location of sites or fishing grounds in the country where decreasing Figure 3.20. municipal Mean Figure 3.20. daily catch small-scale or Mean daily rates catch ratesofof(a) catch rates (a) corrals fishhave fish corrals 9in 9 been in fishing documented fishing grounds, grounds, based and (b) and (b) meanon ratescatch mean actual catch rates on-site of drift gillnets covered by the FSP/FRMP REAs. of drift monitoring gillnets covered efforts. It by is the clearFSP/FRMP from the REAs. wide geographical distribution of the points, that fishing grounds with depleted resources are not “isolated” cases, but they represent the typical or Figure usual 3.22 shows conditions around thethelocation country. of sites or fishing grounds in the country where decreasing municipal Figure or 3.22small-scale shows thecatch rates location of have been sites or documented fishing grounds in based the on actual country on-site where monitoring decreasing efforts. It is clear municipal or from the wide small-scale geographical catch distribution of rates have been the points, documented thaton based fishing actualgrounds on-sitewith Geographical depleted resources monitoring distribution efforts.areIt is notclear of isolated fromfishing cases, the effort wide but they geographicalrepresent a typical distribution of the common orpoints, conditions that fishing around the with grounds country. depleted resources are not “isolated” cases, but they represent the typical or usual conditions around the country. Geographical Distribution of Fishing Effort 10 Geographical distribution of fishing effort Reef fisheries Overall catch rate 8 Overall catch rate 6 4 10 Reef fisheries (kg/fisher/day) 2 8 (kg/fisher/day) 0 6 0 20 40 60 80 100 4 Fisher density (no./km2) Figure 3.21.Overall Figure 3.21. 2 Overall relationship relationship betweenbetween mean catchmean FigureFigure 3.22.3.22. Geographical distribution Geographical distribution of fishing catchof rates rates various of various gear types and gear types and fisher density fisher (fishers/km 2 ) grounds where reports of decreasing of fishing grounds where reports of resource in 0 various reef sites density in the in (fishers/km2) country various reef sites in the 0 20 40 60 80 100 abundance have been documented.have decreasing resource abundance been documented. Fisher density (no./km2) In the 1980s, at the time that small pelagic Figureand demersal 3.21. Overall fisheries relationship around between meanthecatch country Figure reached 3.22.MSY their Geographical distribution levels, the rates of distribution of fishing various effort in gear termstypes ofand fisher of number density (fishers/km fishers per )km65 2 of fishing grounds where reports of in various of coastline, already showed high concentrations decreasing resource abundance have (> 70reef sites in the country fishers/km) in several areas including Lingayen Gulf, Verde Island Pass (VIP), NE Panay, Tanon Strait, Danajon Bank, Samar Sea, Iligan been documented. Bay, Iliana Bay and parts of Davao Gulf (Tandog-Edralin, 1987). 65 60 26-50 Figure 3.23. Distribution of fishing effort based Figure 3.24. Distribution of fishing effort based on on data from the 1980s (Tandog-Edralin et al., data from the FishR (2014/15). 1987). Most coastal waters were already assessed as heavily-exploited at the time, with only a few areas considered as lightly exploited, where fisheries could still sustain further growth. The latter included waters around Palawan (except the Calamianes island group), the Cuyo Island Group and atolls within Sulu Sea, and waters off Aurora, Isabela and Batanes along the country’s Eastern Seaboard (Figure 3.23) An update of this map is provided in Figure 3.24, using fisher population estimates per municipality from the fisherfolk registration (FishR) program spearheaded by the BFAR in coordination with LGUs nationwide, which was initiated in 2014. Lengths of the coastlines of each municipality were estimated using Google Earth and barangay boundaries from the PhilCore Project. Just to facilitate comparison, only inter island waters between the south Luzon and northern Mindanao are shown in Figure 3.24. It appears that the available estimates from FishR are not yet complete, since the process is still on-going. The fishers densities derived nevertheless provide us with a snapshot of fishing effort distribution about 30 years after Tandog-Edralin’s work. The areas with highest fishing pressure as of 2014/15 include the VIP, Ticao Pass between Sorsogon and Masbate, Northern Panay & Northern Negros, Guimaras Strait, Danajon Bank, Iligan Bay and Sindangan Bay in Northern Zamboanga. These waters have fisher densities > 100 and up to 500 fishers/km coastline, which represents a possible 2-5 fold increase in fisher density during the 30 year interval. 61 Figure 3.24 will be more representative of municipal fishing effort, since commercial vessel operations are not restricted to local waters. Sardine Fishery and Closed Seasons 0 !!!. £ ....g. ~ tl) ........ 3 0.... -...~ VI c. :::, -tl) < ::i Q) VI ....V, 8 "' .... 8 0 V, 8 "'0 8 ..... V, 8 ..... 0 8 V, 8 0 Sep-08 Dec-08 M ar-09 Jun-09 Sep-09 Dec-0 9 M ar-10 Jun-10 Sep-10 Dec-10 M ar-11 Jun-11 Sep-11 Dec-11 M ar-12 Jun-12 Sep-12 Dec-12 M ar-13 Jun-13 Sep-13 Dec-13 M ar-14 Jun-14 Sep-14 Dec-14 Figure 3.25. Trend in mean daily catch rates (catch per vessel per trip) of ringnet operations in Northern Zamboanga presented by month based on logbooks of a single buyer (Campos et al., 2014). Mean daily catch rates (catch per vessel per trip) by month of ringnet operations in northern Zamboanga from late 2008 to Dec 2014, were computed from records of a single buyer of catches bought from several vessels each day. Daily records ranged from 1 to 5, with at least 20 days of records each month. Again, these data cannot be dismissed as incidental, or isolated, or non-representative. Daily catch rates declined from 2009 to 2011. After imposing a 3-month closed season (Dec to March) starting in 2011, catch rates increased in 2012 and 2013, most likely resulting from the closed season. The drop in catch rates in 2014, however, may be due to some other factors. Field observations showed generally smaller fish that year, and this may have contributed to the decline in catch rates for that year. Clearly, while the closed season appears to have had a positive effect, other factors may mask this apparent effect. We need to continue monitoring such fisheries to know what these factors are.

4. Overall Summary There is sufficient information showing that most, if not all, interisland fishing grounds in the country are already overfished. Many have been so since the 1980s, or for over 30 years. As such, the nature of the resources in these fishing grounds has already changed in terms of species composition and in terms of productive capacity (Armada, 1998). Using MSY as a reference point is no longer practical because of the critical lack of catch and effort data covering the early part of the fisheries. Instead, there are other measures that can be used to regulate exploitation. While the primary need to reduce the number of fishers (i.e., fishing pressure) is not a realizable possibility in the near future, there is a need for a combination of measures to reduce the worsening conditions of our fisheries resources. A five or even ten year plan will not solve this problem, but may buy time some ample to formulate long-term solutions to the existing dilemma. Clearly, the task of providing other livelihoods for future generations will require investments 62 from sectors outside of fishing itself. What the fisheries sector can do is to regulate use of the resource, maintain habitat health and ensure resources are able to reproduce and complete their life cycle.

5. Recommendations The following are recommendations based on various reviews from earlier years, including Silvestre and Pauly (1986), Silvestre (1989), Green et al. (2003), Armada (2004) and MERF (2006), and on more recent fora including the Round Table Discussion on Science Needs and Gaps to Operationalize the Implementation of the Amended Philippine Fisheries Law facilitated by Greenpeace and the World Wildlife Fund, as well as the series of workshops to formulate the Comprehensive National Fisheries Industry Development Plan held from late 2015 to early 2016, and the consultation-series with FMAs and subsectors • Prioritize management & conservation of resources for local food security (oftentimes, the high value of exported commodities promotes unsound fishing/culture practices) • Integrate mandates of concerned National Government Agencies, particularly the DENR (for habitats) & BFAR ( for fisheries resources) • Strengthen regional capabilities of the BFAR to assist Province & LGUs in fisheries management • Increase and strengthen engagement of the academe and research institutions to assist in fisheries management capacity building • Formalize and strengthen partnerships of all institutions involved in capacity building for fisheries management • Strengthen the role of the Provincial Government for integrating & coordinating LGU management efforts within common fishing grounds • Require LGUs to formulate and implement Fisheries Management plans • Implement conservation/protection efforts within the larger context of Fisheries Management • Establish Fisheries Management Areas (FMAs) based on a balance between biological/ ecological soundness and realistic manageability • Determine harvest control rules (HCRs) & reference points by FMAs based on - status & distribution of stocks - fishery-dependent & -independent investigations - regular monitoring of fishery independent parameters - periodic review of HCRs to allow adjustments - partnerships between BFAR, Academe/Research Institutions & NGOs • Apply reference points for Highly migratory species/straddling stocks from WCPFC • Establish Licensing system specific to FMAs & based on reference points of FMA • Form a Science Advisory Group (SAG) to provide guidance on data collection, standard methodologies in monitoring and assessment, as well as policy recommendations for the fisheries sector 63 B. Sectoral Targets Targets for the Capture Fisheries Sector Given the history and the status of the country’s major fisheries resources, the declining trend is expected to continue in the coming years. However, the implementation of effective management interventions through the strategies and key and specific action plans outlined in this CNFIDP, the municipal fisheries sub-sector can target a 5% increase in production above the projected decline over the next 5 years. Similarly, the commercial fisheries sub-sector can target a 4% increase in production above the projected decline in 2021 to 2025. Table 3.1 presents the target while Figure 3.26 illustrates the CNFIDP projection for commercial and municipal fisheries for 2021-2025. Table 3.1 Targets for Capture Fisheries, 2021-2025 Sector Target Municipal Fisheries Sub-Sector To increase municipal fisheries production by 5% above the projected decline over the next 5 years through the implementation of effective management interventions Commercial Fisheries Sub-Sector To increase commercial fisheries production by 4% above the projected decline over the next 5 years through the implementation of effective management interventions iCa1ptu re Ush eri,es.p ~od uction 2002 . . 25 Thfi. w il bet he production trend if v~e target 50% 20 reduuron l· proj~ed ,. decifn e 1 1.fi - vr ..·Ga'n" (5 .4%) n pr odu ;:·r on re at '"l,,'e to Pf Gij e::ted dee ·n e 1.0 Th is. is. the projected decline p jel:t: ' ~~ ••• ~2.SK mt/yr =-11.2.li<mt In .S.yl .2.025p in municipal production ·• most like . •utu re trend Can on •be ,ch anged •• managem ent measures.are ......... ~ J re - - Cr:i rllinl • -- nlll imp em ented Figure 3.26. Targets for Capture Fisheries, 2021-2025 64 C. Strategies and Action Plans C. Strategies and Action Plans SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC ACTION Key performance Implementation Mechanism STRATEGIES PLANS indicators Lead Supporting Source of funds implementer implementer For Both Municipal and Commercial Fisheries Sub-Sectors Strengthen Anti- Improve compliance to boat/vessel No. of innovative LGU (for PCG and NTC (for LGU Illegal, and gear licensing and fisherfolk systems developed municipal CFV) BFAR Unreported and registration and deployed to fisheries) Unregulated increase compliance Fishing (IUUF) to fisherfolk and boat BFAR (for Measures & gear licensing commercial No. of new registrants fisheries) Within municipal waters Strict implementation of relevant % decrease in no. of LGU PNP, BFAR, PNP, LGU, BFAR, laws IUUF cases filed DENR, PCG DENR, PCG Proportion of cases filed with court decisions Continuous monitoring, control and Area covered by MCS MLGU, Bantay PLGU, PNP, BFAR LGUs surveillance (MCS) operations by LGU Dagat Frequency of MCS operations by LGU Creation of Bantay Dagat with % of coastal LGUs LGU LGUs appropriate budget with functional Bantay Dagat Training of LGUs on law % increase in no. of DILG BFAR, LGU DILG, LGUs enforcement trainings conducted Outside municipal waters and within EEZ 65 66 SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC ACTION Key performance Implementation Mechanism STRATEGIES PLANS indicators Lead Supporting Source of funds implementer implementer Institutionalized timely and No. of programs BFAR PFDA BFAR accurate data collection programs developed and implemented BRPs to lead during monitoring, Area covered by MCS BFAR Navy, PCG BFAR, Navy, PCG inspection, operation and operations surveillance Frequency of MCS conducted Implementation of Vessel 75% compliance BFAR LGU BFAR, Private Monitoring Systems for commercial among commercial sector fishing vessels fishing vessels Beyond EEZ Compliance to Conservation and Proportion of relevant BFAR RFMOs BFAR Management Measures (CMMs) CMMs implemented Timeliness of BFAR RFMOs BFAR implementation of CMMs Compliance to Vessel Monitoring 100% compliance BFAR BFAR System among offshore Philippine fishing vessels Implement programs for timely and No. of programs BFAR PFDA, RFMOs accurate catch documentation and implemented traceability Enhance Fishery Observer Proportion of Fishery BFAR Program among Philippine distant Observers and fishing vessels registered fishing fleet SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC ACTION Key performance Implementation Mechanism STRATEGIES PLANS indicators Lead Supporting Source of funds implementer implementer Adopt Development and implementation 75% of coastal LGUs LGUs FMA MB, BFAR, LGUs Ecosystems of CRM or Fisheries Management with approved CRM NGOs, Academe Approach in Plans by coastal LGUs and/or Fisheries Fisheries Management Plans Management Establishment of LGU alliances in No. of fisheries/ CRM PLGUs FMA MB, DILG, LGUs (EAFM) in all managing shared aquatic alliances established MLGUs BFAR, POs, FMAs resources (especially in bays and or revived NGOs, Academe gulfs) Strengthened governance No. of chief local BFAR FMA MB, DILG, BFAR, structures through continuous executives trained on DILG Academe LGUs capacity building activities fisheries governance No. of MAOs trained BFAR FMA MB, BFAR, LGUs, on fisheries LGUs Academe governance No. of FARMC heads BFAR FMA MB, BFAR, LGUs, and members trained LGUs Academe on fisheries governance Strengthen/facilitate/capacitate No. of proposals LGU Academe LGU organizations of registered submitted for funding NGOs Academe fisherfolk multi-purpose NGOs cooperatives & associations to enhance access to financial services and livelihood opportunities and other purposes (for both municipal & commercial 67 fisherfolk) 68 SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC ACTION Key performance Implementation Mechanism STRATEGIES PLANS indicators Lead Supporting Source of funds implementer implementer Enhanced award systems for best No. of awardees BFAR LGUs BFAR, DILG practices/ leaders/ seal of good DILG governance Inclusion of all sectors in planning 100% of all public BFAR BFAR and formulation of fisheries-related consultations LGU LGU policies attended by relevant sectors Facilitate options for alternative No. of beneficiaries DILG TESDA, LGUs, DILG livelihood opportunities in (1) areas who complete skills BFAR, private LGU affected by closed seasons (short- and retooling trainings sector BFAR term but regular need), and (2) most heavily-fished areas in Central Philippines in parallel with measures regulating fishing effort. Enhanced IEC of fisheries No. of IEC materials LGU BFAR LGU, BFAR management plans, policies, law developed and FMA MB enforcement, results of research activities conducted studies, preferably in layman’s per LGU and FMA language and in local dialect Identify, plan and Establish marine protected areas Additional 5% of LGUs POs, NGOs, LGUs implement (MPAs) to protect spawners, fish municipal waters FMA MB Academe, RIs appropriate and larvae, endangered species, and/or converted into MPAs socially habitats acceptable Conduct of habitat restoration No. of restoration LGUs POs, NGOs, LGUs, BFAR fisheries projects projects conducted BFAR Academe, RIs SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC ACTION Key performance Implementation Mechanism STRATEGIES PLANS indicators Lead Supporting Source of funds implementer implementer management Establish close season for fisheries No. of close seasons LGUs BFAR, NGOs, tools in the FMA, established and FMA MB Academe in accordance implemented with EAFM and Adoption of technological No. of technological LGUs BFAR, Academe, supported by regulations regulations adopted RIs scientific Address pollution No. of programs, LGUs DENR, BFAR, information projects and activities NGOs conducted to address pollution Conduct research to support No. of research NFRDI BFAR, LGUs, NFRDI, DOST, management decisions projects conducted Academe NGOs, DOST, CHED, DA, RIs CHED, DA Academe Set Reference Establishment of LRPs and TRPs At least 3 LRP/TRP NFRDI FMA MB, NFRDI Points/ Harvest of major species in each FMA for top 5 species Research DOST, CHED, DA Control Rules, established (including institutions (DOST, based on shark in relevant CHED, DA, scientific FMAs) Academe, RIs) information, for Reduction of proportion of juveniles No. of policies BFAR LGU, FMA MB BFAR the sustainability in landed catch formulated of top fisheries 10% of juveniles in LGU FMA MB LGU stocks landed catch reduced PFDA PFDA Establishment of harvest control At least one harvest FMA MB BFAR, Academe, BFAR rules for major species in each control rule RIs FMA established for the top 5 species in the FMA 100% compliance to LGU FMA MB BFAR, LGU harvest control rules BFAR 69 70 SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC ACTION Key performance Implementation Mechanism STRATEGIES PLANS indicators Lead Supporting Source of funds implementer implementer Continuous conduct of research Biological parameters NFRDI Academe, RIs, NFRDI, DOST, and monitoring of biological and of top 5 species BFAR CHED, DA, ecological parameters monitored and Academe, RIs estimated Catch and effort data NFRDI Academe, RIs, NFRDI, DOST, monitored BFAR CHED, DA, Academe, RIs Marine habitats NFRDI Academe, RIs, NFRDI, DOST, (including MPAs) BFAR CHED, DA, monitored and Academe, RIs assessed in each FMA Capacitate LGUs and their No. of LGUs or BFAR LGUs, Academe & LGU alliances to design catch and effort alliances with catch NGOs BFAR monitoring system to supplement and effort data NSAP efforts as needed by the monitoring systems FMAs Conduct policy Conduct of scientific studies on No. of studies NFRDI BFAR, DILG, NFRDI, DA, DILG, reviews and marine productivity vis-à-vis marine conducted Research DOST recommend zonation, bathymetry, and other institutions (DOST, appropriate physical profiles CHED, DA, amendments to Academe, RIs) relevant national Conduct policy review on municipal Recommendations on DA BFAR, Academe, DA and local laws and small commercial vessel (1) optimum scale of NEDA FMA, DOST NEDA based on best operations in terms of optimizing operations, and (2) DOST scientific contributions to both food security mechanisms for information and livelihood equity. financing SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC ACTION Key performance Implementation Mechanism STRATEGIES PLANS indicators Lead Supporting Source of funds implementer implementer recommended measures Compile & analyze existing and No. of policy reviews NFRDI BFAR RO, NFRDI, DA, DILG, available information already conducted BFAR CO Commercial DOST required of commercial fishing Fishing Operators, operations, in support of policy DOST, DA, review on delineation of municipal Academe waters and fisheries productivity Compliance to National Tuna Management Plan % accomplishments BFAR LGUs national National Sardine Management of management plans management Plan targets framework and/or National Management Plan for commodity Blue Swimming Crabs roadmaps National Management Framework for Octopus For Commercial Fisheries Sub-Sector Strengthen Procurement and deployment of Number of BFAR Navy, DFA, security for “whiteships” in strategic fishing “whiteships” procured NSC Research fishing operations grounds in Philippine waters institutions (DOST, in the West CHED, DA, Philippine Sea Academe, RIs) Area covered by BFAR, Navy, DFA, whiteships Academe, RIs Research institutions (DOST, CHED, DA, Academe, RIs) 71 72 SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC ACTION Key performance Implementation Mechanism STRATEGIES PLANS indicators Lead Supporting Source of funds implementer implementer Frequency of BFAR, Navy, DFA, whiteship deployment Academe, RIs Research institutions (DOST, CHED, DA, Academe, RIs) Number of diplomatic DFA BFAR protests filed Conduct of scientific studies in the Scientific NFRDI, BFAR, Navy, NFRDI, DOST, West Philippine Sea, Philippine surveys/studies Academe, RIs DOST, CHED, DA, DA, CHED Rise, the Philippine eastern conducted in the WPS NARFleet seaboard, and Sulu-Celebes seas Promote offshore Better fishing access to other No. of fishing access BFAR DA, DFA fisheries coastal states in the western and acquired for Philippine central Pacific Ocean and Indian fishing fleet Ocean Tax breaks/incentives, subsidies to No. of tax breaks, BFAR Bureau of Customs help CFV upgrade and modernize incentives and fishing vessels and gears subsidies provided Promote Enabling actions to support No. of programs BFAR Private sector, appropriate investments towards long term implemented financial fishing financing institutions technologies Comprehensive review of No. of reviews NFRDI BFAR, academe, NFRDI, Academe, competitiveness of Filipino fishers conducted RIs DA and strategies to address issues related to globalization (e.g., compliance to international SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC ACTION Key performance Implementation Mechanism STRATEGIES PLANS indicators Lead Supporting Source of funds implementer implementer standards, subsidies, technology adoption, etc) Scientific studies on gear No. of studies NFRDI BFAR, academe, NFRDI, Academe, selectivity conducted RIs DA Improve well- Proper benefits for crew members No. of benefits and BFAR Congress being of incentives provided to members of the crew members commercial Appropriate alternative/ additional No. of programs LGU TESDA, NGOs, LGU, TESDA fisheries sector livelihood for wives and other implemented BFAR and their household members households Implement pilot sites wherein At least 3 pilot sites BFAR NFRDI, LGUs, BFAR fishers are organized into implemented Academe, NGOs cooperatives that shall serve as “commercial fishers” Assistance to distressed Filipino No. of fishers assisted BFAR DFA fishers in foreign lands Enhanced safety on board fishing No. of admin orders BFAR Congress vessels or appropriate laws enacted Other Recommendations Other Recommendations 1) Establish mechanisms for review and assessment Establish mechanisms for review assessment 2) Incorporate globalization issues and climate change adaptation across all sectors (including zero emissions for all sectors) 2) Incorporate globalization issues and climate change adaptation across all sectors (including zero emissions for all sectors) 1) 3) The CNFIDP (2021-2025) shouldand have sustainable finance as its major pillars. 73 4) The CNFIDP (2021-2025) should include strategies that address risks of pandemics that include disruptions in supply chain and loss of 3) The CNFIDP (2021-2025) should have sustainable finance as its major pillars. livelihoods. 4) The CNFIDP (2021-2025) should include strategies that address risks of pandemics that include disruptions in supply chain and loss of livelihoods. Literature Cited Alino, P.M., C. Nanola, W. Campos, V. Hilomen, A. Uychiaoca and S. Mamauag. 2004. Philippine coral reef fisheries: diversity in adversity, p. 65-69. In DA-BFAR (Department of Agriculture- Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources). In turbulent seas: The status of Philippine marine fisheries. Coastal Resource Management Project, Cebu City, Philippines. 378 p. Armada, N.B. 2004. State of the demersal fisheries, p. 42-46. In DA-BFAR (Department of Agriculture- Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources). In turbulent seas: The status of Philippine marine fisheries. Coastal Resource Management Project, Cebu City, Philippines. 378 p. Armada, N. B. 1998. Effects of excessive fishing on the composition of demersal resources in Manila Bay, In: Campos, WL (ed). Proceedings of the Symposium on Marine Biodiversity in theVisayas and Mindanao. Univ. of the Philippines in the Visayas, Miag-ao, Iloilo, pp 74-76. Barut, N.C., M.D. Santos and L.R. Garces. 2004. Overview of Philippine marine fisheries, p. 22-31. In DA-BFAR (Department of Agriculture-Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources). In turbulent seas: The status of Philippine marine fisheries. Coastal Resource Management Project, Cebu City, Philippines. 378 p. Calumpong, H.P., L.J. Raymundo and E.P. Solis-Duran (eds). 1994). Resource and ecological assessment of Sogod Bay, Leyte, Philippines. Final Report. Campos, WL, PM Alino, VV Hilomen, R. Samson, N. Lasola and C. Villanoy. 2004. Enhancing sustainable fisheries through improved marine fishery reserves (MFRs): Summary of results, p. 103-112. In: Arceo, H.O., W.L. Campos, F. Fuentes & P.M. Alino (eds). 2004. Proceedings of the 3rd and 4th National Workshops on the Formulation of the Philippine Marine Sanctuary Strategy (PhilMarSaSt). University of the Philippines – Marine Science Institute, Diliman, Quezon City, 148p Campos, W. L. et al. 2014. Development of robust tools for managing sardine fisheries in the Philippines: Zamboanga Upwelling-Bohol Sea System: 3. Estimating early life stage mortality and sources of recruits. Terminal report submitted to PCAARRD, Miag-ao, Iloilo, 57p. Dalzell, P. 1996. Catch rates, selectivity and yields of reef fishing. In Polunin NVC, Roberts CM (eds) Reef fisheries, pp 161- 192. Chapman and Hall, London Dalzell, P., P. Corpuz, R. Ganaden and D. Pauly. 1987. Estimation of maximum sustainable yield and maximum economic rent from the Philippine small pelagic fisheries. BFAR Tech. Pap. Ser. 10 (3): 23p. Dalzell, P. and R.A. Ganaden. 1987. A review of the fisheries for small pelagic fishes in Philippine waters. BFAR Tech. Pap. Ser. 10(1), 58 p. ICLARM, Manila, Philippines and Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources, Quezon City, Philippines. Green, S.J., A.T. White, J.O. Flores, M.F. Carreon III and A.E. Sia. 2003. Philippine fisheries in crisis: A framework for management. Coastal Resource Management Project of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Cebu City, Philippines. 77 p. 74 Hilomen, V.V., W. Licuanan, P. Aliño and L. Jimenez. 2002. Status of the fisheries resources in Lingayen Gulf: Easing the pressure and enhancing the resources. Paper presented at the National Conference on Fisheries Resource and Social Assessments, Development Academy of the Philippines, Tagaytay City. Fisheries Resource Management Project, Department of Agriculture, Quezon City, Philippines. Ingles, J.A. 2004. Status of the blue crab fisheries in the Philippines, p. 47-52. In DABFAR Department of Agriculture-Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources). In turbulent seas: The status of Philippine marine fisheries. Coastal Resource Management Project, Cebu City, Philippines. 378 p. Marine Environment and Resources Foundation, Inc. (MERF). 2006. Sustainable Philippine Fisheries Agenda – National Report. Final report submitted to the Bureau of fisheries and Aquatic Resources – Fisheries Resource Management Project, 64p. Mindanao State University at Naawan. 2003. Resource and ecological Assessment of Butuan and Gingoog Bays. Terminal Report submitted to the Bureau of fisheries and Aquatic Resources – Fisheries Resource Management Project Silvestre, G.T. 1989. Philippine marine capture fisheries: Exploitation, potential and options for sustainable development. Work. Pap. No. 48. Stock Assessment Collaborative Research Support Program, College of Fisheries, University of the Philippines- Visayas, Quezon City, Philippines. Silvestre, G. and D. Pauly. 1986. Estimate of yield and economic rent from Philippine demersal stocks 1946-1984. Paper presented at the IOC/WESTPAC Symposium on Marine Science in the Western Pacific: The Indo-Pacific Convergence, 1-6 December 1986, Townsville, Australia. Silvestre, G.T. and D. Pauly. 1989. Estimates of yield and economic rent from Philippine demersal stocks (1946-1984) using vessel horsepower as an index of fishing effort. Fish. J. 1(2); (1/2); 3(1/2): 11-24. University of the Philippines-Visayas, Iloilo, Philippines. Tandog-Edralin, D.D., E.C. Cortez-Zaragoza, P. Dalzell and D. Pauly. 1987. Some aspects of the biology and population dynamics of skipjack (Katsuwonus pelamis) in Philippine waters. IPTP Gen. Rep. (12): 100-111. Uychiaoco, A. and F. Torres, Jr. 2002. The fisheries of selected villages of Northern Palawan. Resource and ecological habitat assessment of the island-ecosystems in Northern Palawan and training on participatory coastal resource assessment, p. 89-99. Final Report. Path Foundation Philippines, Inc. Warfel, H., and P. Manacorp. 1950. Otter trawl explorations in Philippines waters. Research Report 25, Fish and Wildlife Service. US Department of the Interior, Washing, D.C., USA. 75 Chapter 4 AQUACULTURE 76 AQUACULTURE A. Subsector Overview Agriculture and Fisheries Census 2012. The Agriculture and Fisheries Census of 2012 (PSA 2012) is the latest formal census which gives a glimpse of the status of the aquaculture subsector. The next few figures show the results of this census. Figure 4.1 shows the status and types of aquaculture farms as of 2012. Aquaculture farms are classified as either household or non-household. Household farms may either be individual proprietorships or partnerships, while non-household farms include corporations, cooperatives, other private institutions, government corporations and others. Based on this classification and the results of the survey, almost all the aquaculture farms are household farms. As can be seen in the graph, the number of household farms almost equals the total number of aquafarms. 160000 140000 120000 100000 80000 60000 I 40000 20000 0 ■ Figure 4.1. Status and type of aquafarms (PSA 2012) Many of these aquafarms are either fish tanks or hatcheries. Looking at Figure 4.2, we see the distribution of fishtanks and hatcheries throughout the country. Except in Regions 2, 3, 4-A, 9 and 12, fishtanks outnumber the hatcheries. This trend is most evident in Regions 4-B and 10, where fishtanks were five times more numerous than the hatcheries. ■ Fishtank ■ Hatchery Figure 4.2. Distribution of fishtanks and hatcheries throughout the country (PSA 2012) 77 Figure 4.2. Distribution of fishtanks and hatcheries throughout the country (PSA 2012) If we look at the types of aquaculture farms and their respective environments, we see that Ifthe wemost numerous look at type is the types of the fishpond, farms aquaculture followedand by the seaweed their farm and then respective the fishcage. environments, we see Based on the environment, more than half of fishponds as well as fish that the most numerous type is the fishpond, followed by the seaweed farm and then thecages are in freshwater, while atBased fishcage. least on one-third the of both are in brackish environmenton water. Expectedly environment, more than all half seaweedof farms are inas fishponds marine well as fish water. cages are in freshwater, while at least one-third of both are in brackish water. Expectedly all seaweed farms are in marine water. Fishpens, on the other hand, can be found in all three environments with half in freshwater Fishpens, on the other hand, can be found in all three environments with half in freshwater and the remainder is almost proportionally divided between brackishwater and marine water. and the remainder is almost proportionallyproportionately divided between brackishwater and Of the shellfish farms, most oyster farms are in brackish water while most of mussel farms are in marine water. Of the shellfish farms, most oyster farms are in brackish water while most of marine water. mussel farms are in marine water. Table 4.1. Distribution of aquafarms in various environments (PSA 2012) Table 4.3. Distribution of aquafarms in various environments (PSA 2012) Type of Aquafarm Total Fresh Brackish Marine Water Water Fishpond 75,002 49,065 21,987 3,950 Fish Pen 3,102 1,623 785 694 Fish Cage 16,353 9,683 2,323 4,347 Seaweed Farm 48,494 - - 48,494 Oyster Farm 2,856 - 1,988 868 Mussel Farm 1,040 3 250 787 Fish Tanks 1,029 929 57 43 Hatchery 590 352 138 100 Others 228 40 5 183 The number of farm operators is compared to the number of aquafarms. Based on the patterns shown in Figure 4.3, we see that there is slightly more aquafarms than operators. From P this, we can deduce that there are some individuals who operate more than one aquafarms. Comparing the numbers throughout the country, ARMM dominates the group with 20,000 farms and almost the same number of farm operators. It is almost double the number of the next region in line. Regions 3, 4-A, 4-B, 5, and 6 form a cluster of regions with almost the same numbers (between 10,000 and 15,000) and showing the same trend. This group is followed by Regions 1, 2, 7, 8, 9 10, and 12 (between 5,000 and 10,000). 78 NEG ROS ISLAtlO REG ION (N IR) - ARMM Region XIII (Caraga) _. Region XII (SOCCSKSARGEN) RegionX l ()AVAOREG ION) _. Region X (NORTHERN M INDANAO) Region IX (ZAMBOAtlGA PEN INS ULA) Region V III (EPSTERN V ISAYAS) Region V II (CENTRAL V ISAYAS) Region V I (WESTERN V ISAYAS) Region V (BICOL REGI ON) M IVIAROPA Reg ion Ri:giu11 IV-A (CALA6RAZON) Region Ill (CENTRAL LUZON) Region II (CAGAYAN VALLEY) Region I (ILOCOS REG ION) CORDILLERA ADM IN ISTRATIVE REG ION .. NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION (NCR) I' 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 ■ Nunber of Aquafarms ■ Number of Aquaculture Opera:ors Figure 4.3. Regional distribution of aquafarms and aquaculture operators (PSA 2012) The volume of production Shrimps/ from aquaculture of the various Prawns species in 2019 (PSA 2020) is 66,251 dominated by seaweeds, which 3% ' composes 64% of total production. This is followed by the finfish – milkfish and then tilapia. Milkfish production is only 5% higher than that of tilapia. After the finfish follow shrimps and prawns consisting of 3% of the entire aquaculture production. All other aquaculture commodities make up the last 4% of production. Source: PSA data as of Nav 11, 20]f) Figure 4.4. Proportion of the various aquaculture species produced (PSA 2020) Subsector Performance 2016-2020. The performance of the aquaculture subsector within the coverage of the CNFIDP 2016-2020 is shown in Figure 4.5. From the relative high recorded production of 2014 and 2015, production dips significantly in 2016. From this relative low, production steadily climbs up through 2019 to surpass slightly the 2015 production. Afterwhich, production dips again in 2020 although it is higher than 2018 levels. 79 2400000 140000000 2350000 120000000 Chapter 4: AQUACULTURE 100000000 -:;;- 2300000 a. E 80000000 ...c a. E 2400000 2250000 140000000 (1) ::J 60000000 ::J 2350000 120000000 g 2200000 ~ 40000000 100000000 2300000 Volume (mt) Value (PhP) 2150000 20000000 80000000 2250000 2100000 060000000 2200000 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 40000000 2150000 - Volume (mt) - Value (PhP) 20000000 Figure 4.5. Volume and value of aquaculture production, 2014-2020 Philippines (PSA 2016, 2018, 2021) 2100000 0 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Given this performance, the Philippines ranks relatively high in the global aquaculture production. Table 4.4 shows that Volume (mt) ranks Value the country within (PhP) the top 15 aquaculture producing countries in the world, with the highest ranking achieved for seaweed (4th) to the lowest (14th) Figure 4.5. Volume and value of aquaculture production, 2014-2020 Philippines (PSA 2016, 2018, 2021) for marine and coastal production of molluscs (i.e., mussels and oysters). The country ranks within the topthe within tentop in ten in production of seaweeds, production of marine and seaweeds, coastal marine production and coastal of finfish, production of and inand finfish, marine in and marine and coastal production coastal production of crustaceans. of crustaceans. Table 4.2. World Table 4.4. Worldranking rankingof of thethe Philippines Philippines in in aquaculture aquaculture production production (FAO 2020) (FAO 2020) Seaweed AQ fish Inland AQ Marine & Marine & Marine & (finfish) coastal AQ coastal AQ coastal AQ (finfish) (crustaceans) (molluscs) 4 11 11 5 9 14 Formatted: For the CNFIDP 2016-2020, the following targets (Figure 4.6) were set for the six major aquaculture commodities: milkfish, tilapia, shrimp (including prawns), seaweeds, shellfish (mussels and oysters), and mudcrab. The performance of each commodity is described in the succeeding sections. PAGE 80 \* For the CNFIDP 2016-2020, the following targets (Figure 4.6) were set for the six major aquaculture commodities: milkfish, tilapia, shrimp (including prawns), seaweeds, shellfish (mussels and oysters), and mudcrab. The performance of each commodity is described in the succeeding sections. 4% annual increase in MILKFISH • ~ roduction 25% 0 increase in SEAWEED • production ~ 6% in 5 years 10% \j annual increase inTILAPIA annual increase proc;l11ction in SHRIMP production 10% increase in SHELLFISH 5.4% production in S years increase in MUDCRAB production in 5 years Figure 4.6. Aquaculture targets for the CNFIDP 2016-2020 (BFAR 2016) Figure 4.7 shows the performance of the finfishes: milkfish and tilapia from 2014 to 2020. The performance of 2014 and 2015 are shown to set the baseline for the trends that follow. As well as the performance recorded by PSA, we also show the trend lines for the targeted annual increase for the commodity. The top two lines in the graph represent the milkfish trends. The orange line represents the trend of the annual target of 4% increase. The blue line represents the trend based on production statistics from the PSA. Production meets target in 2016 and 2017 but declines in 2018. The production gradually increases to 2017 levels but remains much lower than the annual target. The trends for tilapia are relatively similar but unlike for milkfish where early production met targets, tilapia production was lower than the set targets all throughout the time coverage of this plan. Production has been increasing very slightly up to 2019 but declined to 2016 levels in 2020. 450000 400000 350000 300000 250000 200000 150000 100000 50000 0 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 - Milkfish {PSA) - Milkfish {+4% p.a.) - Tilapia (PSA) - Tilapia (+6% p.a.} Figure 4.7. Production of milkfish and tilapia, 2014-2020 Philippines (PSA 2016, 2018, 2020) 81 The performance of shrimp species is shown in Figure 4.8. The straight light blue line at the top shows the 10% targeted annual increase, while the yellow line below shows the production trend based on PSA data. Shrimp include the tiger prawn (Penaeus monodon), Pacific White Shrimp (P. vannamei) and giant freshwater prawn (Macrobrachium rosenbergii), which are represented by the orange, blue and gray lines, respectively. As in the case of tilapia, production since 2016 has not kept up with targets. Although production of P. vannamei has generally increased, the volume has not been enough to make up for the downtrend in the production of P. monodon, which is the major contributor to shrimp production performance. 100000 90000 - 80000 - 70000 - 60000 - 50000 40000 - 30000 - 20000 - 10000 - 0 r --------------------- 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 - Pacific White Shrimp - Tiger Prawn - Freshwater Prawn - Total (PSA) - Total (+10% p.a.) Figure 4.8. Production performance of shrimps, 2014-2020 Philippines (PSA 2016, 2018, 2020) The CNFIDP target for the production of seaweeds is 25% over the five years of the current CNFIDP. Figure 4.9 shows this target as the orange line, while the blue line represents the production statistics in the PSA database. Based on this visualization, seaweed production has not met targets since 2016. The current CNFIDP lists a 10% increase in production over five years for shellfish, specifically mussels and oysters (tahong and talaba). Figure 4.10 shows the trends for targets and production for both shellfish. 2500000 2000000 - 1500000 <:..::.:..__ 1000000 500000 0 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 - Seaweed (PSA) - Seaweed (+25%) Figure 4.9. Production performance of seaweeds, 2014-2020 Philippines (PSA 2016, 2018, 2020) 82 The orange and yellow lines represent the oyster and mussels targets. As far as production however, the trend of mussels production almost kept pace with demand up to 2018 but then declined in 2019. The decline continued in 2020 and thus did not meet the target. Oyster production, on the other hand, was lower than the targets since 2016 but dramatically increased in 2020 to surpass the set target. 60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 - - 0 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 - Oyster (PSA) - Oyster (+10%, 5 yrs) - Mussel (PSA) - Mussel (+10%, 5 years) Figure 4.10. Production performance of shellfish, 2014-2020 Philippines (PSA 2016, 2018, 2020) The final major commodity under the current CNFIDP is mudcrab, for which the target is a 5.4% increase over five years. The target trend is represented by the orange line while the blue line represents the PSA data. Among the aquaculture commodities, mudcrab production has surpassed the target from 2016 and consistently increased up to 2018 when production plateaus 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 - Mud crab (PSA) - Mud crab (+5.4%) 83 Chapter 4: AQUACULTURE B. Proposed Targets B. Proposed Targets The production performance of the aquaculture subsector from 2016 to 2020 is compared to the targets in the current CNFIDP in Table 4.5. Except for shellfish and mudcrab, production in The production performance of the aquaculture subsector from 2016 to 2020 is the other aquaculture commodities has neither met nor approximated the targets set in the CNFIDP. compared to the targets in the current CNFIDP in Table 4.5. Except for shellfish and mudcrab, The proposed production targets in the otherfor the samecommodities aquaculture commoditieshasunder the met neither newnor CNFIDP are also the approximated presented. targets The proposed set in the CNFIDP. The proposed targets for the same commodities under the new CNFIDPmaps targets are based on the current targets and accomplishment, and the commodity of arethealso various commodities. presented. The proposed targets are based on the current targets and accomplishment, and the commodity maps of the various commodities. Thus, Thus,targets targetsfor fortilapia, tilapia,shrimp, shrimp,and andseaweed seaweedare aretempered temperedfrom fromthe thecurrent currenttargets, targets,while that whilefor milkfish that has been for milkfish increased has been only only increased by two percent. by two For For percent. shellfish andand shellfish mudcrab, mudcrab,thethe targets have been increased by 2.5 times and 5 times, respectively. targets have been increased by 2.5 times and 5 times, respectively. Table Table 4.3. 4.5. Comparison betweencurrent Comparison between currentargets targets and and accomplishment accomplishment within within CNFIDP CNFIDP 2016- 2016- 2020 and proposed 2020 targets of and proposed the of the targets aquaculture sector aquaculture sector COMMODIT TARGET ACCOMPLISHMENT PROPOSED Y TARGET Milkfish 4% increase p.a. Average = 1.05% 6% increase p.a. Tilapia 6% increase p.a. Average = 0.35% 3% increase p.a. Shrimp 10% increase p.a. Average = 2.66% 5% increase p.a. Seaweed 25% increase, 5 yrs -5.73% 10% increase, 5 yrs Shellfish 10% increase, 5 yrs 40.14% 25% increase, 5 yrs Mudcrab 5.4% increase, 5 yrs 22.11% 15% increase, 5 yrs 1. STRATEGIES

1. STRATEGIES The identification of the strategies and priority activities is based on the overarching The identification guidance of the strategies of four important and priority concepts: activities management byisFisheries based onManagement the overarching guidance Area (FMA), the Formatted of four important concepts: management by Fisheries Management Area (FMA), the Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management (EAFM), the Garcia-Mandanas Ruling, and agri- Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management (EAFM), the Garcia-Mandanas Ruling, and fisheries industrialization (as part of the New Thinking in agriculture.) agri-fisheries industrialization (as part of the New Thinking in agriculture.) For the CNFIDP 2020-2025, the implementation of the six strategies under the current plan will be continued. This is based initially on the performance of the sub sectors under the current plan, the recommendations from the series of consultations on the updating of the plan, the recommendations from existing plans, notably the Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (AFF) section of the Philippine Development Plan 2017-2022 (PDP), and the commodity maps for the major aquaculture commodities. The consultations were approached through a progressive process, starting with initial consultations and then moving on to consultation with representatives of FMAs, sub sectoral consultations, and then to the National Consultation. The consultation with BFAR provided the initial guidance for the updating of the CNFIDP (Albaladejo, 2021). This guidance was based inPAGE turn on the commodity roadmaps for milkfish, tilapia, shellfish, shrimps, and mudcrab, as follows: \* 84 • Philippine Milkfish Industry Roadmap 2021-2040 • Tilapia Industry Roadmap 2021-2025 • Shrimp Roadmap 2021-2040 • TnT Roadmap (Shellfish Commodity Industry Roadmap) • The Philippine Seaweed (Kappaphycus) Industry RoadmapChapter 2022-2026 4: AQUACULTURE These strategies are listed in Table 4.6 below. Table 4.4. Strategies Table 43.6 forCNFIDP Strategies for CNFIDP2021-2025 2021-2025 (based (based onon CNFIDP CNFIDP 2016-2020, 2016-2020, PDPPDP 2017- 2017-2022, 2022, Consultations, and Commodity Maps) Consultations, and Commodity Maps) PHILIPP CON COM INE SULT MODI DEVELO ATIO TY PMENT NS ROA CNFIDP STRATEGIES PLAN D 2017- MAP 2022 S 1 Secure quality fry/seed supply through coordinated investments in propagation facilities (broodstock hatchery, nurseries, laboratories) 2 Institutionalize GAqP for key commodities and promote sustainable aquaculture 3 Assure quality and traceability of aquaculture inputs and outputs 4 Invest on species with high commercial potential 5 Optimize operation of mariculture parks 6 Ensure climate/disaster resilience of the aquaculture sector 2. PRIORITY ACTIONS

2. PRIORITY ACTIONS The priority actions identified here are those most commonly arising from the discussions during the consultations mentioned earlier as compared to the current CNFIDP and the commodity The priority actions identified here are those most commonly arising from the discussions Formatte industry roadmaps. These are presented under each of the strategies mentioned in the prior during the consultations mentioned earlier as compared to the current CNFIDP and the section. commodity industry roadmaps. These are then presented under each of the strategies mentioned in the prior section. Priority Actions are clustered according to the following: production, governance, funding/ Priority Actions financing, are clustered human resources, according postharvest, to the and marketing following: production, trade, and governance, R&D. Again, these clusters funding/financing, human resources, postharvest, marketing and trade, and R&D. Again, reflect the discussions with stakeholders during the aforementioned consultations. these clusters reflect the discussions with stakeholders during the aforementioned consultations. Table 4.7 shows priority actions that apply universally to all the strategies. The succeeding Table show tables 4.7 shows priority priority actions actions that of for each apply universally to all the strategies. The succeeding the strategies. tables show priority actions for each of the strategies. PAGE \* 85 86 Table Table 4.5. Priority actions 4.7. Priority actions that that may may apply apply to to all all strategies (from consultations) strategies (from consultations) PRODUCTION GOVERNANCE FUNDING/ HUMAN POSTHARVEST, R&D FINANCING RESOURCES MARKETING, TRADE Apply nanotechs Include FISH, Comprehensive More information & PH facilities in Technical efficiency especially bangus investment strategy training on laws barangay of AQ among prime Subsidies [repair of More fisheries Agency to buy Assess cost & commodities damage due to coops seaweed harvest impact of Data updating and weather; loan or Establish AQ skills interventions given rationalization [Map credit access; certification program to fisherfolk of ALL aquafarms; insurance, fast track Aqua-R = international standard database] certification] Effective Comms Program Secure quality fry/seed supply through coordinated investments in propagation facilities (broodstock hatchery, nurseries, laboratories) 1 PRODUCTION GOVERNANCE FUNDING/ HUMAN POSTHARVEST, R&D FINANCING RESOURCES MARKETING, TRADE Improve/upgrade Rationalize Private investment in Increased personnel Reduce price of Breeding and existing facilities & establishment of satellite hatcheries to handle hatcheries locally-produced fry to broodstock establish new ones: hatcheries Subsidy for rehab Training on be competitive with fry development of hatcheries (multi- Accreditation of due to damaged hatcheries techs and from Indonesia high value species species, satellite), municipal &/or equipment or management Tech verification of labs (Seaweed private hatcheries facilities genetically culture, feeds), Establishment of Subsidies for improved breeders broodstock Municipal Fisheries insurance etc… multiplication centers, Offices (headed by shrimp schools licensed FT) Improve/upgrade broodstock 87 88 Institutionalize GAqP for key commodities and promote sustainable aquaculture 2 PRODUCTION GOVERNANCE FUNDING/ HUMAN POSTHARVEST, R&D FINANCING RESOURCES MARKETING, TRADE Prevention & Biosecurity of Profiling of Assessment, Establish depuration Advanced control of diseases aquafarms traditional & formation & stations diagnostics for Cost-effective Assess TOS potential strengthening of Regulate price of diseases feeds capacity & production areas FARMCs dried seaweeds, Identify MSY as Stock performance tilapia, etc. basis for fishing enhancement in Conduct of FPIC Market assistance ban municipal waters for AQ in ancestral (seaweeds, bangus) Verification of Production with IP waters eco-friendly AQ of AQ species in Harmonize CRM systems ancestral waters and fisheries dev’t Access to R&D plans of LGUs, results; tech BFAR, DENR, etc transfer from RDIs & SUCs LC-MS/MS analysis for AQ 3 Assure quality and traceability of aquaculture inputs and outputs 3 PRODUCTION GOVERNANCE FUNDING/ HUMAN POSTHARVEST, R&D FINANCING RESOURCES MARKETING, TRADE Alternative feed Feed traceability Training on feed Farm consolidation Low cost diets stocks (less PRODUCTION GOVERNANCE Support to co-op FUNDING/ HUMAN & clustering formulation & POSTHARVEST, R&D Alternative feeds expensive, better feed mills/ Subsidy FINANCING postharvest RESOURCES Traceability & food MARKETING, Insect farming for quality, locally Shellfish Sanitation Organize bangus TRADE safety guidelines for feeds Alternative feed produced) Feed traceability Program Training fry on feed collectors consolidation Farm AQ products Low cost diets stocks (less Feedmill for every Support co-op Regulartomonitoring formulation & & clustering Price disparity Alternative feeds expensive, region better feed of water mills/quality Subsidyin postharvest Traceability between & food fish Insect farming for quality, locally Shellfish Sanitation Organize bangus safety guidelines for feeds AQ areas produced in upland produced) Program fry collectors AQ products and lowland Feedmill for every Regular monitoring Price disparity region of water quality in Price between fishcontrol for AQ AQ areas inputs produced in upland and lowland Price control for AQ inputs 89 90 Invest on species with high commercial potential 4 PRODUCTION GOVERNANCE FUNDING/ HUMAN POSTHARVEST, 1. R&D FINANCING RESOURCES MARKETING, TRADE Seaweed species Implement rules to Support for Training on Processing for Biology of goby diversification regulate AQ equipment for production of high bighead carp Value chain Hatchery protocols investors in the fishpond value species & studies on priority for economically LGUs development native or endemic and emerging AQ important native/ Private sector species commodities endemic species investment in (biya, ayungin, hatchery and in tawilis) AQ production Production protocols for grouper, and hito Optimize operation of mariculture parks 5 PRODUCTION GOVERNANCE FUNDING/ HUMAN POSTHARVEST, R&D FINANCING RESOURCES MARKETING, TRADE Observe correct Regulate operators Certification and Establishment of Carrying capacity stocking density in re. observation of skills upgrading for cold storage and ice of MPs cages/ prevent carrying capacity fishers and production plants Water quality over intensification Enforcement of fisheries workers monitoring Implement IMTA existing ordinances protecting mariculture parks Review, harmonize and amend current ordinances, laws and regulations 91 92 Ensure climate/disaster resilience of the aquaculture sector 6 PRODUCTION GOVERNANCE FUNDING/ HUMAN POSTHARVEST, R&D FINANCING RESOURCES MARKETING, TRADE Location-specific Mangrove Funding for Training on DRRM Development of production reforestation in equipment (e.g. esp. on AQ climate-smart AQ in small water AUU ponds backhoe, dredging production impoundment Seaweed nursery machine to rehab technologies materials, waterways/ guidelines and irrigation canals for technologies must AQ) be climate-resilient Co-implementation & co-enforcement of environmental and fisheries laws & regulations STRATEGIES AND ACTION PLANS SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key performance indicators Implementation Mechanism STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Lead Supporting Source of funds implementer implementer Increase Develop, resource Integrated investment plan BFAR LGU, Private DA, BFAR investment in the and implement an developed, resourced and sector aquaculture integrated investment implemented subsector plan % increase in private sector BFAR DA, LGU, Private DA, BFAR investment sector % increase in subsidy for BFAR DA, Private DA, BFAR various concerns: sector

1. Rehabilitation of damaged facilities and/or equipment

2. Crop insurance

3. Rehabilitation of waterways/irrigation canals % increase in number of BFAR LGU, DA BFAR, DA personnel to handle/manage new/upgraded facilities % increase in BFAR ATI, SUCs, LGU BFAR, DA training/capacity building initiatives for new and current personnel Traditional and potential BFAR SUCs, LGU, DA, DOST production areas profiled SEAFDEC 93 94 SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key performance indicators Implementation Mechanism STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Lead Supporting Source of funds implementer implementer Regional feed mills BFAR LGUs DA, DPWH established or upgraded Market assistance program BFAR DA, PCAF BFAR, DA established and implemented (policy) (include price regulation)

1. Secure quality Improve/upgrade No. of facilities established or BFAR LGU, SUC BFAR, LGU, DA, fry/seed supply existing facilities and improved/upgraded DPWH through establish new ones according to established coordinated guidelines investments in 1. multi-species and propagation satellite hatcheries facilities 2. Seaweed culture (Broodstock laboratories and feeds hatchery, laboratories nurseries, 3. Broodstock multiplication laboratories centers

4. Shrimp schools No. of hatcheries accredited BFAR LGU BFAR, LGU No. of Municipal Fisheries LGU BFAR LGU Offices established (headed by licensed FTS) Improve/upgrade No. of relevant research NFRDI BFAR, SUC DA, BFAR, broodstock proposed and funded DOST SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key performance indicators Implementation Mechanism STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Lead Supporting Source of funds implementer implementer Lines improved or broodstock upgraded (emphasis on target, high value species) No. of verified technologies SUCs NFRDI, BFAR, DOST, DOST, on genetically improved DA BFAR breeders and technologies

2. Institutionalize Identify, No. of advanced diagnostics NFRDI SUCs, BFAR DA, BFAR, GAqP for key prevent/control processes or kits for disease DOST commodities and and/or sustainably identification or detection promote manage diseases sustainable Increased % control of aquaculture common diseases Biosecurity protocols NFRDI SUCs, BFAR, DA, DOST, developed especially for LGU, SEAFDEC DENR shrimp and shellfish farms Municipal depuration stations BFAR LGU, SUCs DA, LGU, DOST established (Cross (for equipment reference to Strategy 3) support) Develop alternative Feed materials identified SUC NFRDI, BFAR DA, DOST and cost-effective (include potential of insect feeds using locally- farming, e.g., black soldier fly available materials larvae) (Less expensive, Feeds developed and BFAR Private sector, DA better quality, locally produced LGUs 95 96 SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key performance indicators Implementation Mechanism STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Lead Supporting Source of funds implementer implementer produced) (Cross ref to Strategy 3) Stock enhancement % increase in municipal BFAR LGU, Private DA BFAR in municipal waters waters stocked sector No. of aquaculture BFAR LGU, NCIP, BFAR, DA undertakings with IP in Private sector, ancestral waters (with FPIC) SUCs Assess TOS capacity TOS capacity and BFAR NFRDI, ATI BFAR, DA and performance performance assessed Evaluate/assess Identify MSY as basis for SEAFDEC NFRDI, SUC, DOST, DA measures for fishing ban BFAR, sustainable Conducted technology production verification of eco friendly AQ systems Increased use of LC-MS/MS NFRDI SUC, BFAR, DOST, DA analysis for AQ SEAFDEC Enabled/enhanced access to SUCs NFRDI, BFAR, DA, DOST, relevant R&D results from LGU, SEAFDEC CHED RDIs and SUCs Co-management of Harmonize CRM and BFAR LGU, PCAF, DA, DENR, LGU fishery resources and fisheries development plans Private sector co-implementation of of LGUs, BFAR, DENR, etc. fisheries and/or Assessment, formation & BFAR ATI, LGU, Private DA, BFAR fisheries-relevant strengthening of FARMCs sector policies SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key performance indicators Implementation Mechanism STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Lead Supporting Source of funds implementer implementer

3. Assure quality Develop alternative Feed and feed material NFRDI BFAR, SUC, DA, DOST and traceability of and cost-effective traceability protocol Private sector, aquaculture feeds using locally- developed and implemented SEAFDEC inputs and available materials outputs (Cross reference to Strategy 2) % increase in BFAR ATI, SUCs DA, LGU training/capacity building on feed formulation and feed processing Establish shellfish Municipal depuration stations BFAR LGU, SUCs DA, DPWH, LGU sanitation program (Cross reference to strategy 2) Shellfish sanitation protocol BFAR SUC, NFRDI, DA, DOST established PCAF (policy) Regular monitoring of Water quality in AQ areas BFAR SUCs, LGU, DA, DENR, water quality in AQ meeting established DENR, DOST DOST areas standards for AQ use Establish traceability Developed and implemented BFAR SUCs, NFRDI, DA, DOST and food safety traceability and food safety Private sector, guidelines for AQ guidelines for AQ products SEAFDEC products Ensure quality and Bangus fry collectors BFAR LGU, SUCs, ATI, DA, BFAR traceability of wild- organized and capacitated Private sector caught bangus fry 97 98 SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key performance indicators Implementation Mechanism STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Lead Supporting Source of funds implementer implementer

4. Invest on species Develop production No. of value chain studies SUCs NFRDI, BFAR, DA, DOST with high protocols for high conducted on priority and LGU, Private commercial value species emerging AQ commodities sector, potential SEAFDEC Biology of goby described NFRDI SUCs, BFAR DA, DOST Hatchery protocols for SEAFDEC BFAR, SUCs, DA, DOST economically important LGU native/ endemic species (biya, ayungin, tawilis) Production protocols for SEAFDEC SUCs, BFAR DA, DOST grouper, and hito % increase in BFAR ATI, SUCs, LGU, DA, DOST, training/capacity building on TESDA TESDA production protocols for high value and native species Diversify seaweed No. of seaweed species SEAFDEC NFRDI, SUCs, DA, DOST species for AQ tested and production BFAR, LGU protocols developed Regulate private Guidelines for private BFAR PCAF, Private DA, DTI investment in AQ , investment in LGU sector, DTI, LGU especially in LGU aquaculture ventures areas developed, disseminated, and implemented SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key performance indicators Implementation Mechanism STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Lead Supporting Source of funds implementer implementer

5. Optimize Review, harmonize, % increase in implementation BFAR LGU, Private DA, BFAR operation of amend, and/or of correct stocking density sector mariculture parks implement production and/or carrying capacity guidelines and No. of studies conducted on NFRDI SUCs, DA, DOST relevant policies carrying capacity of SEAFDEC, mariculture parks proposed, Private sector funded and implemented % increase or improvement BFAR LGU, private DA, BFAR in compliance to existing sector ordinances % increase in implementation BFAR LGU, private DA, BFAR of IMTA sector Improve performance Certification and skills BFAR ATI, SUCs, DA, DOLE of maricultural parks upgrading programs TESDA, DOLE developed for fishers and fisheries workers Cold storage and ice BFAR LGU, Private DA, DPWH production plants established sector Water quality monitoring BFAR DENR, SUCs, DA, DENR, implemented (Cross DOST DOST reference to Strategy 2)

6. Ensure Develop/Enhance Location-specific production NFRDI SUCs, BFAR DA, DOST climate/disaster location-specific technologies developed and 99 resilience of the disseminated 100 SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key performance indicators Implementation Mechanism STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Lead Supporting Source of funds implementer implementer aquaculture production Expansion of AQ into small BFAR SUCs, BSWM, DA sector technologies water impoundment and NIA other similar areas Climate resilient production BFAR ATI, SUCs, DA, PCCC, technologies developed and LGUs, private DOST disseminated sector Capacitate fishers No. of training/capacity BFAR ATI, SUCs, DA, TESDA, and fisheries workers building programs conducted/ TESDA, DOST DOST on DRRM strategies implemented for aquaculture % increase in knowledge and skills of participants REFERENCES/SOURCES OF INFORMATION • 2012 Agriculture and Fisheries Census, PSA • 2016, 2018, 2020 Fisheries Statistics, PSA • 2017, Philippine Development Plan, NEDA • 2019, Fisheries Profile, BFAR • 2020, CNFIDP Assessment, BFAR • 2020, Status of the World’s Fisheries and Aquaculture, FAO • 2020, Commodity Roadmaps (Bangus, Mudcrab, Shrimp, Shellfish), BFAR • 2016, CNFIDP 2016-2021 (BFAR) • 2021 Various consultations • FMA Cluster consultations • Training on Strategic Planning • Sub-sectoral consultations • Meetings with BFAR focal persons : Albaladejo, Maaria Abegail. 2021. Fisheries Indus try Development Direction Setting. Presentation made on October 29, 2021 for the updat ing of the CNFIDP. Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR), Quezon City. 101 Chapter 5 POST HARVEST 102 PHILIPPINE FISHERIES POST-HARVEST Status and Challenges A. OVERVIEW AND STATUS 1.1 Brief Introduction The CNFIDP 2006-2025 generally provides the strategic direction and an all-inclusive framework for the Philippine fisheries industry from 2006 to 2025. Guided by the vision of having “a sustainable and competitive fisheries industry that contributes to food security and provides optimum socio-economic benefits to Filipinos”, the CNFIDP specifies the following goals for the Philippine fisheries sector: (a) Sufficient contribution to national food security; (b) Inclusive growth within the industry; (c) Sustainable science-based fisheries and aquatic resources management practices; (d) Compliance to international laws, policies, and standards, and enforcement of local laws and regulations; (e) Strengthened capacities in infrastructure, technologies, human resource, and information sharing; and (f) Resilience to environmental hazards. The CNFIDP Medium Term Plan (2016-2020) likewise reiterates these goals and the need to help overcome the key and interlinked challenges/issues confronting the sector. These challenges/ issues include the overexploitation or depletion of various fishery resources, degradation of fishery habitats, intensified resource use competition, and conflict due to rampant illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing, unrealized full potential of aquaculture, high post-harvest losses (20%- 40%) due to underdeveloped cold storage value chain and unsatisfactory hygiene and sanitation practices, uncompetitiveness of fish and fishery products both in the local and international markets, and weak institutional partnerships among government and non-government agencies, civic society organizations, and commodity-based industry associations. Quite recently, more pressing challenges demand the attention of the entire sector. Measures have to be in place to tackle the issues related to the impacts of climate change, the insufficient investment and focus on coastal resilience, and the devastating impacts to the fisheries value chains of the present COVID-19 health pandemic. Against this backdrop of challenges and uncertainties, efforts must be focused on addressing strategic issues and concerns to help the Philippines overcome them. One of the important fisheries sub-sectors that need to be focused on is the fisheries post-harvest sub-sector, with its identified core perennial problems that are related to high post-harvest losses and the uncompetitiveness of fish and fishery products both in the local and international markets. Hence, this report highlights the status and the current issues and concerns besetting the fisheries post-harvest sub-sector of the country. Consultations were conducted with the stakeholders from the different Fisheries Management Areas to gather information on relevant issues and concerns and their recommended priority actions and strategies. Literature search of technical reports were conducted to gather information on the commodity roadmaps of a select list of commercially important commodities. 103 1.2 Status of the Fisheries Post-Harvest Sector of the Philippines The Fisheries Post-harvest sub-sector in the CNFIDP Medium Term 2016-2020targets a 10 The crafting % reduction of this reportlosses in post-harvest has been guided in five by theand (5) years relevant 100%provisions complianceof the United Nations’ to hygiene and 17 Sustainable Development Goals (17SDG), the strategies and actions as stated sanitation standards of all fish processing establishments in the Philippines. in the Philippine Development Plan (Ambisyon Natin 2040), and the recent Eight Paradigms of the Department of Agriculture thatafter Five years characterize the “new thinking” the implementation for Philippine of the medium-term plan,Agriculture and the status of Fisheries. the fisheries Likewise, post- important strategies as stipulated harvest sub-sector is as follows: in the Comprehensive Post-Harvest, Marketing, and Ancillary Industry Plan (CPHMAIP) for 2018-2022 were also largely taken into consideration. 1.2.1 On the improvement of fisheries post-harvest and cold chain technology and 1.2 Status of the Fisheries facilities Post-Harvest Sector of the Philippines (STRATEGY 1) The 1.2.1.1 FisheriesAssessment Post-harvestof sub-sector post-harvest losses in the CNFIDP Medium Term 2016-2020targets a 10 % reduction in post-harvest losses in five (5) years and 100% compliance to hygiene and sanitation standards ofThe allCNFIDP Mediumestablishments fish processing Term 2016-2020 in stipulates that fisheries post-harvest losses in the Philippines. Fivethe Philippines years ranges after the from 25%-40%. implementation To medium-term of the verify these values and plan, to status the come upofwith the appropriate fisheries post- intervention harvest measures, sub-sector is the NFRDI conducted several fisheries post-harvest losses studies in as follows: 2018 onwards. The results of these studies revealed varying percent post-harvest losses in 1.2.1theOn different nodes of the of the improvement supply chainpost-harvest fisheries of the different andfisheries commodities cold chain in the technology country and facilities (Table (STRATEGY 1) 5.1). 1.2.1.1 Assessment of post-harvest losses The CNFIDP Medium Term 2016-2020 stipulates that fisheries post-harvest losses in the Philippines ranges from 25%-40%. To verify these values and to come up with appropriate intervention measures, the NFRDI conducted several fisheries post-harvest losses studies in 2018 onwards. The results of these studies revealed varying percent post-harvest losses in the different nodes of the supply chain of the different fisheries commodities in the country (Table 5.1). Table 5.1. Results Tableof5.1. theResults studiesofconducted on the assessment the studies conducted of post-harvest on the assessment losses in the of post-harvest different parts of the Philippines losses in the different parts of the Philippines Description Species Estimated % Estimated References Chapter 5: POST HARVEST losses financial loss (PhP) Landed catch of Description Tuna Species 12.61 – % Estimated 223,192,519 Estimated Montojo et References ice-chilled carrier 24.29 losses financial loss al. 2020 boats from HSP-1 (PhP) (ave = PAGE 17.25) \* Capture Small 1.86 – 2.14 466,409.70 Tadifa et al. commodities – pelagics, (total loss = landing sites sardines 4.00) Capture Small 0.17 – 0.27 13,570.00 Tadifa et al. commodities – wet pelagics, (total loss = market sardines 0.44) Aquaculture Tilapia, 0 – 0.07 12,591.09 Tadifa et al. commodities – shrimp, (total loss = landing area mussel, 0.07) mangrove crab Aquaculture Tilapia, 0.01 – 0.13 15,642.52 Tadifa et al. commodities – wet shrimp, (total loss = market mussel, mud 0.22) crab Undersized capture Small 0.79 – 20.14 10,444,808. Banicod et 104 commodities pelagics, blue (total loss = 38 al., 2021 swimming 0.97) crab, squid, commodities – wet pelagics, (total loss = market sardines 0.44) Aquaculture Tilapia, 0 Table 5.1. Results of the studies conducted– 0.07 12,591.09 on the assessment Tadifa et al. of post-harvest commodities – losses shrimp, in the different (total loss parts of the=Philippines landing area mussel, 0.07) Description Species mangrove Estimated % Estimated References crab losses financial loss Aquaculture Tilapia, 0.01 – 0.13 (PhP) 15,642.52 Tadifa et al. Landed catch–ofwet commodities Tuna shrimp, 12.61 (total –= loss 223,192,519 Montojo et ice-chilled carrier market mussel, mud 24.29 0.22) al. 2020 boats from HSP-1 crab Undersized capture Small 0.79 – 20.14 10,444,808. Banicod et PAGE commodities pelagics, blue (total loss = 38 al., 2021 \* swimming 0.97) crab, squid, oceanic tuna, by-catch Undersized Tilapia, 0 – 9.61 4,790,481.3 Banicod et aquaculture milkfish, (total loss = 9 al., 2021 commodities mussel, 4.02) oyster, shrimp, mangrove crab These findings indicate the need to come up with additional studies to cover the assessment These findings indicate the need to come up with additional studies to cover the assessment of post-harvest losses in other nodes of the supply chain of various commodities. Incidentally, of post-harvest losses in other nodes of the supply chain of various commodities. Incidentally, NFRDI (2020) pointed out the need to conduct the studies to estimate losses in the following: NFRDI (2020) pointed out the need to conduct the studies to estimate losses in the following: from catching (or capture fisheries) using medium and small scale commercial fishing boats; from from catching (or capture fisheries) using medium and small scale commercial fishing boats; catching (or capture fisheries) using municipal boats; during receipt of raw materials in processing from catching (or capture fisheries) using municipal boats; during receipt of raw materials in plants; and the waste and by-products from processing plants and fishing by-catch. processing plants; and the waste and by-products from processing plants and fishing by-catch. Montojo et al. (2020) released an information and education material titled “ Proper Post- Montojo et al. (2020) released an information and education material titled “ Proper Post- Harvest Handling Practices in Fisheries: Reduce Post-Harvest Losses NOW – a guide for fisherfolk”. Harvest Handling Practices in Fisheries: Reduce Post-Harvest Losses NOW – a guide for This publication aims to promote awareness on the different post-harvest practices in the fisheries fisherfolk”. This publication aims to promote awareness on the different post-harvest practices supply chain and to encourage the fisherfolk to observe proper techniques that would help reduce in the fisheries supply chain and to encourage the fisherfolk to observe proper techniques that losses. would help reduce losses. 1.2.1.2 Inventory of post-harvest infrastructure facilities a. Post-Harvest 1.2.1.2 Infrastructure Inventory of and post-harvest Trading Facilities infrastructure facilities Regional Fish Ports PAGE \* Major fish trading activities all over the country are centered in the regional fish ports that are managed by the PFDA.. As a government-owned and controlled corporation under the DA, PFDA maintains a total of nine (9) regional fish ports (Figure 1) that provide post-harvest infrastructure facilities and essential services that are aimed at improving efficiency in the post- harvest handling, marketing, and distribution of fish and fishery products. These regional fish ports include the following: 105 a. Navotas Fish Port Complex (NFPC) - It is the major fish port and fish market complex among the nine (9) regional fish ports that are being managed by PFDA. Centrally located in Metro Manila, NFPC is located in the northeastern section of Manila Bay and is within the five-kilometer radius of the cities of Manila, Caloocan, Navotas, and Malabon. This fish port operates daily, with an estimated 15 commercial fishing vessels from other nearby provinces that call port, unload, and trade their fish catch in the complex, reporting approximately 300 tons of traded fish daily, with overland vehicles from different provinces bringing in and trading additional 50 tons of fish per day (PFDA 2020). As the major fish trading and market center of the country, NFPC provides a wide range of services and facilities that include the following: Piers (No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5); Market Halls (No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5); ar- eas for ice plants and cold storage, fish processing facilities, canneries, and shipbuilding and ship repair facilities; and buildings and facilities for ancillary services, e.g. “Bañera” (aluminum tubs) warehouses, power sub-station, elevated water tank and cylindrical water tanks, pump houses, salt water filtration systems, fire station, large parking area, motor-pool compound, food service area, offices for brokers and other clients, administration building (PFDA, 2020). The NFPC provides the following services: (1) unloading and marketing of fish (oth from commer- cial and municipal fishing vessels); (2) provision of facilities for harbor operations (e.g. drydock- ing, fishing gear repair, ice, water and fuel conveyance and product transshipment); (3) provision of processing and refrigeration facilities and services; (4) marketing information dissemination of fish prices, species processed inside the port, and volume of processed products in the port; and (5) provision of communication facilities, office spaces, and land areas for the establishment of fishery-related factories (PFDA, 2021). b. Sual Fish Port Complex (SFPC) - It is the only regional fishport strategically located in the northern luzon specifically in the 3.8 hectare-reclaimed land in Barangay Poblacion, Sual, Pan- gasinan.The SFPC was established to provide basic post-harvest facilities and services including a multi-purpose pier (70 meters long) that was designed to accommodate bigger fishing boats and cargo vessels, a banca landing quay that is 60 meters long, a trading / market hall with a total area of 200 m2 with five bay areas, a refrigeration building with an area of 2,400 m2 that houses their ice plant and refrigerated/cold storage facilities and a building for ancillary services such as the fabrication building (1,000 m2), carpentry shop (150 m2), foundry shop (100 m2), and the administration building (170 m2). The SFPC provides the following services: (1) unloading & marketing facilities for fish & other fishery/aquatic products of Lingayen Gulf, the adjacent waters of the western part of Pangasinan, and for the harvests from the province’s inland waters and aquaculture facilities; (2) provision of facilities for harbor operations and product transshipment; (3) information dissemination on fish prices, volume of processed products, species unloaded in the port, and volume of unloaded materials; and (4) office spaces and land areas for establishment of fishery-related factories within the SFPC. c. Lucena Fish Port Complex (LFPC) - It is located at Barangay Dalahican, Lucena City which is about five km from the city proper and about 162 km from Manila. It is situated in a 7.8 hectare reclaimed area and was constructed in 1991\ but had started its operations in early 1992. 106 The operations and services at the LFPC include the following: (1) Unloading and marketing of fish both from commercial and municipal fishing vessels as well as fish supplies from overland vehicles; (2) Use of harbor facilities including dry docking and repair activities; (3) provision of fuel, oil, water and ice supplies for product transshipment and for other fishing activities; (4) lease of space and raw land for fishery-related establishments; (5) refrigeration inclusive of processing space, cold storages, ice plant and freezing equipment; and (6) provision of fish market information (PFDA, 2021). The major facilities in the LFPC include a multi-purpose pier (115 x 15 LM), w@ s < a banca landing 0 ::0100 X,:. - = -'<iilmlll!!!~ quay (450 LM), a 390 LM breakwater,

51.IAL ASH PORTCOMRB< .. .r Legend [ ~j FMA a market hall that NAVO11>.S ASH PORTCOMRB< covers a 1914 m2 1 area, a refrigeration building that WCENA FISH PORTCOMRB< covers a 2,556 m2 which houses an --- - ice making plant CAMAUGAN RSH PORTCOMREX •• - ·- · , l2 ,-------- with 25MT/day { ~ ,~.··· ~ \., capacity, a main ice EU.AN ASH PORTCOMRB< storage facility with 75 MT capacity, a ll.CIL.O FISH PORTCOMRB< daily ice storage facility with 25 MT ._. __ --'-'-t • I I 4 ZAMBOANGA FISH PORTCOMREX ► , capacity, a -5°C cold - ./ _ storage with 50 MT DAVAO ASH PORTCOMRB< - - - - - 1~ / capacity, a -35°C Cold Storage with 50 MT capacity, GENB'IALSAN10S ASH PORT COMRB< a contact freezer with a capacity of 200 kgs / cycle, shipyard facilities, a warehouse (with an area of 960 m2), elevated water tank of 50,000L capacity, ice crusher with a capacity of 40 tons per hour, an industrial area (2.5 hectares), a commercial area (1,500 m2), dormitory and guest house (140 m2), and an administration building. d. Camaligan Fish Port Complex (CFPC)- This fish port is located in Barangay Dugcal, about 1.5 km from the poblacion and only four km from Naga City, Camarines Sur. It is built on a 4 ha property by the PFDA and serves as the main trading area in the Bicol Region. The operations and services at the CFPC include the following: (1) Unloading and marketing facilities for fish and other fishery/aquatic products both for local and foreign markets; (2) Provision of facilities for harbor operations such as ice, water and fuel conveyance and product transshipment; (3) Lease of processing and refrigeration facilities including pre-processing, product preservation through cold storage and contact freezer; (4) Information dissemination regarding fish prices, volume of processed products, species unloaded and volume of unloading; and (5) Lease of office spaces and raw land for establishment of fishery-related factories (PFDA, 2021). 107 Some of the major facilities in CFPC include a multi-purpose pier that is 105 linear meters, banca landing quay (456 linear meters), 300 m2 market hall, administrative building, staff house building, refrigeration building that houses an ice making plant with 15 MT/day capacity, an ice storage facility with 15 MT capacity, a cold storage with a total of 65 MT capacity, 4 units of contact freezers, 5 units of refrigerated vans, a processing area (340 m2), and a 2.4 hectare space for lease. e. Iloilo Fish Port Complex (IFPC)- This complex serves as the major center of fish trading and marine products processing in Region VI. It is strategically located in a 21 ha reclaimed area at Barangay Tanza, Iloilo City. The operations and services at the IFPC include the following: (1) Unloading and marketing facilities for fish and other fishery/aquatic products both for local and foreign markets; (2) Services and facilities for harbor operations such drydocking/repair shop, fuel, oil, water and ice conveyance and for transshipping products; (3) Processing, refrigeration and other post-harvest services including product pre-processing, freezing through contact freezer, cold storages and top- grade facilities for the processing of marine products such as Prawn, Abalone, Cuttlefish, Lobster, Nylon Shell, Octopus, Slippertail, Squid, Whiting and Bangus; and, (4) raw land for establishment of fishery-related factories (PFDA, 2021). The major facilities at the IFPC include a breakwater, a landing Quay, for tuna Boat, trawlers & purseiners, “basnigans”, and bancas, and a refrigeration building with several cold storage facilities. f. Zamboanga Fish Port Complex (ZFPC) - This port is considered as the largest and the most important center for trading and processing of marine products in the Zamboanga Peninsula, providing the trade links between the provinces of Zamboanga del Norte, Zamboanga del Sur, the cities of Dapitan and Dipolog (both in Zamboanga del Norte), and Pagadian (in Zamboanga del Sur), as well as trade links with Basilan and Zamboanga City (PFDA, 2020). ZFPC is located in a 12.5 ha complex in Barangay Sangali, Zamboanga del Sur that offers the following facilities and services: a multi-purpose pier that is 160 linear meters long; landing quays for basing (for commercial fishers; 137 linear meters) and bancas (for municipal fishers (172 linear meters); a trading / market hall, with a total area of 1,300 m2; a refrigeration building that houses their ice plant and refrigerated/cold storage facilities; plug-in outlets for refrigerated van, 5 units (440 volts) and 2 units (220 volts); a commercial area (1,500 m2); and buildings and facilities for ancillary services, e.g. boat repair and dry docking facilities (500 gross tonnage), water supply system for freshwater, seawater, water treatment plant and waste water treatment, fishing gear mending, ice crushing (capacity of 40 tons per hour), a dormitory and guest house (140 m2); and a 300 m2 administration Building (PFDA, 2020). The ZFPC provides the following service: (1) unloading and marketing of fish both from commercial and municipal fishing vessels; (2) provision of facilities for harbor operations (e.g. drydocking, fishing gear repair, ice, water and fuel conveyance, and product transshipment); (3) provision of processing and refrigeration facilities and services (e.g. product pre-processing, freezing through contact freezer, and product preservation); (4) marketing information dissemination on fish prices, species processed inside the port and volume of processed products in the port; and (5) provision of communication facilities, office spaces, and land areas for the establishment of fishery-related factories (PFDA, 2020). 108 g. Davao Fish Port Complex (DFPC) - This port) is located in Daliao, Toril District, about 16 km south of Davao City. Its strategic location makes DFPC readily accessible either by land or sea transport from downtown Davao City and nearby provinces, including Davao del Norte and North Cotabato. Built in 1993, the DFPC is the third major fish port in the country that is being administered by the PFDA. The services and operations at the DFPC include berthing and discharging of fish cargoes by both domestic and foreign fishing vessels, processing of fish and other marine products, quick freezing and storage of fish and other marine products, trading and auction of fish and other marine products, and block ice production and trading. The major facilities in the DFPC include the following: (1) harbor basin (480 L.M.); (2) a landing quay (235 L.M.); (3) breakwater (north = 125 L.M.; south = 225 L.M.); (4) a market hall, with an area of 1,700 m2; (5) a refrigeration building with an ice Making Plant with 30 T/day capacity, a -35oC common cold storage facility with 80 ton capacity, 3 units of contact Freezer with a total of capacity of 940 kg, 2 units ice crushers with 5 Tons/hour and 10 Tons/hour capacity; (6) refrigerated vans with capacities that range from 5 tons to 10 tons; (7) a water supply system that consists of a fresh water reservoir , a water treatment plant, and a wastewater treatment facility; and (8) support facilities such as a fishing gear mending area, the administration building, a drainage system, public toilets, parking areas, solid waste garbage receptacle, organic waste compost, and a bañera warehouse. In addition to the standard fish port operations, the DFPC provides areas for collection, processing, storage, and packaging of fish and fishery products for both local and international markets. The DFPC is also recognized as the transshipment port in the Asia Pacific Region. h. General Santos Fish Port Complex (GSFPC)- Strategically located at Brgy. Tambler, General Santos City in South Cotabato, itcovers a 32 ha land area and lies along the shores of Sarangani Bay, about 17km south of the central General Santos City. Built in 1998, GSFPC is the second largest fish port in the Philippines, next to NFPC. The GSFPC was designed to provide for the following port activities: (1) unloading and trading / marketing of marine products both for local and foreign markets; (2) harbor operations that cater to local tuna handline boats and purse seiners, as well as to foreign-flagged refrigerated vessels; and (3) processing and refrigeration services. Major facilities in the GSFPC include the following: (1) a port area that covers 32 hectares that also include an agro-industrial area; (2) harbor facilities that has Harbor Basin I with a 1.5M wharf, with 400 meters berthing length and a concrete stair landing, Harbor Basin II with a 3.5M wharf, with 400 meters berthing length and a multi-level quay area, Harbor Basin III with a 6.0M wharf, with 360 meters berthing length and quay as landing areas, Harbor Basin IV with 1.5M wharf (with breakwater), with a 325 meter berthing length and a concrete stair landing, Wharf I that is 9M (depth), with 320 meters berthing length and a quay type landing, and Wharf II that is 9M, with 200 meters berthing length and a quay type landing. The market facilities of the GSFPC consist of Market Halls 1,2, and 3. Market Hall 1 has a floor area of 1,150 m2, with 102 stalls. Yellowfin tunas are usually traded in MH1 that come from two main sources: from the boats or fish carriers that are docked in Harbor 1 and from the overland trucks from coming fish landings or trading stations in other municipalities and provinces. Market Halls 2 and 3 have floor areas of 2,290 m2 and 3,168 m2, respectively. The fish species that are usually traded in Market Halls 2 and 3 include: (i) small fresh yellowfin tunas (weighing less than 30 kgs/ piece) from domestic purse seine and ring net fleets; (ii) fresh skipjack tunas caught by Philippine- flagged vessels; (iii) aquacultured species (e.g. milkfish, tilapia, and shrimps); (iv) other species of marine fishes from Davao del Sur, Tawi-tawi, Davao Oriental, and Saranggani province, and from 109 the overland trucks from different landing or trading areas (Davao City, Saranggani, Sultan Kudarat, etc.); and (v) frozen yellowfin and skipjack tunas from Philippine-flagged vessels and from foreign flagged-vessels. In addition, the market hall presently have extensions areas covering 1,590 m2, a bañera warehouse that occupies an area of 280 m2, with10 doors, 4 locker rooms, and mezzanine offices with a total area 350 m2 that have been partitioned into 17 rooms. i. Bulan Fish Port Complex (BFPC)- The Bulan Municipal Fish Port (BMFP) was upgraded in 2017 to become the 9th regional fish port in the country. The PFDA and the local government of Bulan, Sorsogon initiated this upgrade to transform the BMFP to BFPC to cater to the increasing needs of the area. It is located in the south-westernmost tip of the Luzon Island, in the province of Sorsogon, in the Bicol Region. Its strategic location makes it an ideal landing and trading area for the fishing boats and fish investors from Sorsogon and nearby provinces of Northern Samar, Masbate, and Leyte. With an original lot area of 4,000 m2 of the BMFP, its upgrade to BFPC comes with an additional 11,000 m2 for the Phase 1 of the complex and another 13,000 m2 for its Phase 2. These expansion projects are expected to include ice stalls, food stalls, a “banyera” warehouse, a spacious parking area and much bigger market halls. MUNICIPAL FISH PORTS In 2017, the Philippines has a total of 928 coastal municipalities with 86 municipal fish ports that were established through the efforts of PFDA. These ports are now either under the management of the PFDA or the local government units of the different municipalities. In 2021, PFDA reported a total of 133 municipal fish ports, with the 47 new ports constructed in the last 4 years (PFDA, 2021). Figure 2 shows an example of a municipal fish port in Barangay Barra in Dipolog City. At present, some of the municipal fish ports in the country need rehabilitation and improvement, since most of these ports have been constructed several decades ago. Nonetheless, with the regional fish ports that are strategically located in the different parts of the country, these municipal fish ports serve as the satellite trading centers that provide easy access especially to the municipal fishers in the country. COMMUNITY FISH LANDING CENTERS (CLFC) The answer of the BFAR to the pressing problem related to the handling and trading of fish in the coastal communities is the construction of Community Fish Landing Centers or CFLCs across the country. The project is in collaboration with the PFDA, the National Anti-poverty Commission (NAPC) and the different Municipal Local Government Units. The main objective of this project is to provide each targeted coastal community with a CFLC that is equipped with fish stalls and chest freezers, among others. These facilities are designed to help reduce fish post-harvest losses and to improve the socio-economic conditions of the fishing communities. 110 The project started in 2015 with an initial target of 252 CFLCs. Additional CFLCs were funded in the succeeding years using the funds from the General Appropriations Act (GAA) allotted to BFAR. As of 2021, a total of 729 CFLCs that are situated in the different parts of the country have already been in place, with 54% of them are now operational, 37% have been constructed and are ready for operation, and the remaining 9% is for completion (Table 5.2). Figure 5.3 shows an example of a CFLC that was constructed in Ilocos Norte. Table 5.2. Status of the Community Fish Landing Centers or CFLCs in the Chapter different 5: POST regions HARVEST of the country, as of September 2021 (Source: BFAR 2021) Region Total No. of Number of CFLCs CFLCs For Construction Completed Damaged (FY 2015- Completion For Operational 2020) Operation I 43 43 - II 25 5 7 13 - III 27 3 24 - IV-A 51 4 22 22 3 IV-B 54 2 41 11 - V 77 2 21 54 - VI 61 1 8 50 2 VII 54 5 27 22 - VIII 69 2 36 31 - IX 45 2 11 32 - X 48 1 47 - XI 24 1 8 15 - XII 15 1 2 11 1 XIII 40 21 19 - BARMM 91 16 49 26 - CAR 1 1 - TOTAL 725 41 257 421 6 Percentage 5.66 % 35.45 % 58.07 % 0.82 % Figure 5.3. The Community Fish Landing Center in Ilocos Norte (Source: Islam et al., 2021) Figure 5.3. The Community Fish Landing Center in Ilocos Norte (Source: Islam et al., 2021) B. Post-Harvest Infrastructure and Ice Plants and Cold Storage (IPCS) and other 111 Support Facilities B. Post-Harvest Infrastructure and Ice Plants and Cold Storage (IPCS) and other Support Facilities The PFDA has been focusing on the improvement and rehabilitation of the refrigeration and cold storage facilities of the major regional fish ports such as the GSFPC, DFPC, and ZFPC. The strategic locations of these ports enable the fishermen and operators to trade large volumes of fish and fishery products to these ports, thus, the need for improvement and rehabilitation. Like the Navotas fish port and General Santos fish port complex, the possibility of having privately financed refrigeration and cold storage facilities in these ports is being looked at.. The number of refrigeration and cold storage facilities are expected to increase when the proposed improvement and expansion of the ZFPC and the GSFPC materialize in the next five years. This ZFPC project, for example, includes the improvement and rehabilitation of the port complex, construction of a fish-processing unit, provision of cold storage facilities, and other ancillary facilities (such as administrative blocks, a warehouse complex, a logistics terminal, housing units for employees, power-related facilities, and the installation of safety and security systems). In any of these regional ports, the operations of the privately owned refrigeration and cold storage facilities are under specific Memorandums of Agreement with the PFDA that indicate, among others, the lease agreements on the use of space for these facilities, as well as the operation and management of these facilities. On the other hand, the government-owned and managed refrigeration and cold storage facilities in the major fish ports are leased to private companies or individuals, following government-prescribed conditions, rental fees, and other pertinent regulations. At present, there is a need to augment both the big and small fish ports with government- owned or PFDA-managed post-harvest facilities and/or privately owned facilities for better cold chain management system in these fish ports that is very crucial in the reduction of post-harvest losses. For both the municipal fish ports and the CFLCs, on the other hand, post-harvest facilities, such as ice making facilities and refrigerated/cold storage facilities, are very minimal. As conceptualized, these municipal fish ports, in particular, only include trading halls, an administrative office, public comfort rooms, fish stalls, a guard house, and structures for utilities such as drainage and sewerage 112 Table 5.3. Status of refrigeration and ice plant facilities housedChapter 5: POST HARVEST at the regional fish ports, including their capacities (as of 2015; see CNFIDP 2016) REFRIGERATION FACILITY FISH PORT STATUS Cold Storage (MT) Contact Plate Freezer, Kg. TOTAL Blast Fr eezer TOTAL Ice Plant, MT/ day

1. Davao Fish Port Complex 80 270 30 st ill operational 270 - st ill operational 400 940 - still operational

2. Gen. Santos Fish Port Complex 1, 500 250 60 still operational 250 still operational 250 still operational 250 1, 000 3, 500 3, 500 st ill operational 1, 500 400 st ill operational 400 st ill operational 400 still operational 400 1, 600 3, 500 7, 000 still operational

3. Zamboanga Fish Port Complex 250 1,000 35 still operational 1,000 still operational 1,000 still operational 1,000 st ill operational 1,000 5, 000 5,000 5, 000 st ill operational

4. Sual Fish Port Complex 210 15 st ill operational 1,000 - st ill operational 1,000 2, 000 still operational

5. Camaligan Fish Port Complex 65 400 - still operational 400 - still operational 400 - still operational 1,000 2, 200 - st ill operational

6. Lucena Fish Port Complex 100 - 25 st ill operational - st ill operational st ill operational 7. llollo Fish Port Complex 250 100 still operational 600 still operational C. C. Laboratory LaboratoryFacilities Facilities The National Fisheries Laboratory Division (NFLD) of the BFAR administers several laboratory The National Fisheries Laboratory Division (NFLD) of the BFAR administers several facilities all over the country. This is in line with its mandated function that include: laboratory facilities all over the country. This is in line with its mandated function that include: a. To develop plans and programs on the operation of the fisheries laboratories and its a. Tocompliance develop plans with and programs17025 PNS/ISO/IEC on thelaboratory operationstandards; of the fisheries laboratories and its compliance with PNS/ISO/IEC b. To coordinate, 17025 laboratory monitor, and evaluate standards; the operation of the regional laboratories; b. To coordinate, monitor, and evaluate the operation c. To develop and implement plans and programs on the of the regional control laboratories; of residue and manage c. Toaquatic developanimal health and promote the safety of fish and fishery products; and manage and implement plans and programs on the control of residue aquatic animallaboratory d. To provide health andservices promote to the the safety of fish regulatory and fishery services products; of BFAR; d. To provide laboratory services to the regulatory services of BFAR; e. To provide updates on the national status of the country in terms of: (a) usage of e. Tochemicals provide updates on the national status of the country in terms of: (a) usage of chemicals and drugs; (b) level of marine biotoxin of bivalve mollusks in harvest area; andand drugs; (b) level of marine biotoxin of bivalve mollusks in harvest area; and (c) the (c) the presence and absence of significant diseases. presence and absence of significant diseases. f. To provide technical support to the regional laboratories and harmonize methods and f. To provide technical support to the regional laboratories and harmonize methods and procedures procedures NFLD has three (3) sections: the Fish Health Laboratory (FHL), the Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory (ATL), and the Fisheries Product Testing Laboratory (FPTL), the FPTL tasked to NFLD has three (3) sections: the Fish Health Laboratory (FHL), the Aquatic Toxicology ensure the proper implementation of the Food Safety Act of the Philippines (series of 2013), Laboratory (ATL), and the Fisheries Product Testing Laboratory (FPTL), the FPTL tasked to ensure through the provision of chemical and microbiological analyses of fish and fishery products the proper implementation of the Food Safety Act of the Philippines (series of 2013), through to different clientele in the industry. the provision of chemical and microbiological analyses of fish and fishery products to different clientele NFLDinlikewise the industry. coordinates the operation of Regional Fisheries Laboratories (RFL) that are located in the different parts of the country, as shown in Figure 5.4. These are located in the NFLD likewise Department coordinates of Agriculture the operation Compound of Regional in the Manila Fisheries South Harbor Laboratories (Region (RFL) 4A), in the that are BFAR located in the Offices Regional differentinparts of the6,country, Regions as 11, 7, 9, and shown andininFigure 5.4. These 3 satellite sites are located in in General the Department Santos City. These laboratories that are maintained by BFAR serve as support facilities, and as such, it is 113 PAGE \* of Agriculture Compound in the Manila South Harbor (Region 4A), in the BFAR Regional Offices in Regions 6, 7, 9, and 11, and in 3 satellite sites in General Santos City. These laboratories that are maintained by BFAR serve as support facilities, and as such, it is important to have them assessed and accredited by internationally recognized accreditation bodies. Incidentally, the FPTL located in the NCR and in Region 6 presently have a PNS/ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation. Some other private companies have their own laboratories that are accredited by some accreditation bodies. \ :&Ji\ w\(.jS7f lllilON Department of A • 4Ac gnculture s Manila South Harboormpound, ~Pl,l(lffl&lb ' & Legend 1·- . FMA R~ lK)~LCAPITAL 8 enesProducts~ lllilON 60Arcad1a a.uldmg~~.,u~Laboratory, 1 QuezonCity :zcnAvenue, IBilON6 Muelle Loney, lloib City Arel~n~ION 7 Cty Svd,Cebu RT L.m IBilON9 . Zim::l oanga Cfy ue,11 Magsaysa~ ! N Oavao Cty I . Gene I lllilON 12

2. Dole P1 IS,ntosClly Pobm~·ra~•n~s. Inc Cannery Ste ~ V

3. Ph,&ppnes uth Cotabato • Laboratory ortQuahtyControl Figure 5.4. Locations of the different laboratory testing facilities of the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (Source: Yap, 2021) 1.2.1.3 Capability Building Activities in Fisheries Post-Harvest The different fisheries post-harvest activities in the Philippines are summarized in Figure 5.5. The figure also illustrates the functions and support service providers along a typical value chain of a fishery commodity. To augment the resources of the small-scale processors and other stakeholders in the coastal communities, BFAR had been extending help through distribution of different post-harvest equipment through its Special Areas for Agricultural Development (SAAD) Program. As shown in Table 4, BFAR has been distributing different post-harvest equipment to individuals and/or associations/ groups all over the country for the past several years. This constitutes the Bureau’s post-harvest interventions to its beneficiaries as a solid measure of their desire to provide sustainable livelihood in the different provinces in the country. 114 Chapter 5: POST HARVEST Table 5.6. List of Philippine National Standards for Fish and Fishery Products, as as of of 31 31 December December 20202020 (Source: (Source: BAFPSBAFPS 2021)2021) PNS/BAFPS Description Use Number 1 PNS/BAFPS Code of Hygienic Practice for the Sale of Fresh Code of 46:2006; 2020 Agriculture and Fishery Products in Markets and Practice Authorized Outlet 2 PNS/BAFPS Milkfish – Fresh chilled and fresh frozen Product 66:2008; 2020 Standard 3 PNS/BAFPS Tilapia – Live, fresh chilled and fresh frozen Product 67:2008 Standard 4 PNS/BAFPS Dried Danggit Product 68:2008 Standard 5 PNS/BAFPS Quick Frozen Raw Squid Product 69:2008 Standard 6 PNS/BAFPS Quick Frozen Shrimp or Prawns Product 70:2008 Standard 7 PNS/BAFPS Quick Frozen Finfish, Uneviscerated and Eviscerated Product 71:2008; 2021 Standard 8 PNS/BAFPS Live, Chilled/Frozen Abalone Product 72:2009 Standard 9 PNS/BAFPS Live, Fresh Chilled/Fresh Frozen Grouper Product 73:2009; 2021 Standard 1 PNS/BAFPS Aquaculture Feeds Product 0 84:2010 Standard 1 PNS/BAFPS Dried Raw Seaweed – Specification Product 1 85:2012 Standard 1 PNS/BAFPS Live and Raw Bivalve Molluscs Product 2 89:2011 Standard 1 PNS/BAFPS Quick Frozen Fish Fillets Product 3 90:2011 Standard 1 PNS/BAFPS Quick Frozen Lobsters Product 4 91:2011 Standard 1 PNS/BAFPS Halal Agriculture and Fishery Products Product 5 101:2011 Standard 1 PNS/BAFPS Dried Sea Cucumber Product 6 128:2013 Standard 1 PNS/BAFPS Code of Good Aquaculture Practices (GAqP) Code of 7 135:2014 Practice 1 PNS/BAFPS Fresh and Frozen Cephalopods Product 8 136:2014 Standard 1 PNS/BAFPS Fresh-chilled and Fresh-frozen Tuna for Sashimi Product 9 137:2014 Standard 2 PNS/BAFPS Fresh-chilled, Fresh-frozen and Treated Tuna Product 0 138:2014 Standard PAGE 115 \* Chapter 5: POST HARVEST PNS/BAFPS Description Use Number 2 PNS/BAFPS Dried Anchovies Product 1 176:2016 standard 2 PNS/BAFPS Live Mangrove Crab Product 2 177:2016 standard 2 PNS/BAFPS Pasteurized Crab Meat Product 3 178:2016 standard 2 PNS/BAFPS Organic Aquaculture Feeds Product 4 187:2016 standard 2 PNS/BAFPS Good Aquaculture Practices for Milkfish and Tilapia Code of 5 196:2017 Practice 2 PNS/BAFPS Good Aquaculture Practices for Shrimp and Crab Code of 6 197:2017 Practice 2 PNS/BAFPS 205- Fresh-chilled and Fresh-frozen Small Pelagic Finfishes Product 7 2017 (round scad, mackerel and sardines) standard 2 PNS/BAFPS 206- Live, Fresh-chilled and Fresh-frozen Pompano Product 8 2017 standard 2 PNS/BAFPS 207- Code of Good Aquaculture Practices for Oyster and Code of 9 2017 Mussel Practice 3 PNS/BAFPS 208- Code of Good Aquaculture Practices for Seaweeds Code of 0 2017 Practice 3 PNS/BAFPS 235- Fresh-frozen Soft Shell Crab Product 1 2018 standard 3 PNS/BAFPS 236- Code of Practice for Live and Raw Bivalve Molluscs Code of 2 2018 Practice 3 PNS/BAFPS 237- Fresh Chilled and Fresh Frozen Siganid Product 3 2018 standard 3 PNS/BAFPS 240- Fresh and Quick Frozen Raw Scallop Products Product 4 2018 standard 3 PNS/BAFPS 279- Code of Practice for Fresh and Quick Frozen Raw Code of 5 2019 Scallop Products Practice 3 PNS/BAFPS 280- Code of Good Aquaculture Practices on Hatchery for Code of 6 2019 Shrimp Practice 3 PNS/BAFPS 281- Code of Good Aquaculture Practices on Hatchery for Code of 7 2019 Freshwater Prawn Practice 3 PNS/BAFPS 297- Code of Practice for the Processing of Shrimps and Code of 8 2020 Prawns Practice 3 PNS/BAFPS 298- Code of 9 2020 Code of Practice for the Processing of Lobsters Practice 4 PNS/BAFPS 299- Code of 0 2020 Code of Practice for the Processing of Cephalopods Practice 4 PNS/BAFPS 300- Code of 1 2020 Code of Practice for the Processing of Minced Fish Practice PAGE \* 116 1.2.4 On the increase and strengthening of fishery-based livelihood and entrepreneurial programs in coastal communities (STRATEGY 4) 1.2.4 On the increase and strengthening of fishery-based livelihood and entrepreneurial programs in coastal The Bureau communities of Fisheries (STRATEGY and Aquatic Resources4)(BFAR) has been consistently providing technical assistance to the different micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs) all over The Bureau the country, of Fisheries as shown andThese in Table 5.7. Aquatic Resources include (BFAR) capability hasprograms, building been consistently providing activities, and technical technicalassistance support ontoentrepreneurial various micro, skills, small,marketing, and medium enterprises post-harvest (MSMEs)for processing allsustainable over the country, as shown in Table livelihood, among5.7. These include capability building programs, activities, and technical support others. on entrepreneurial skills, marketing, post-harvest processing for sustainable livelihood, among others. Table Table 5.7. 5.7. Listofofmajor List major programs, programs,activities and activities andtechnical assistance technical provided assistance by the by provided BFAR the BFAR to the to the different different MSMEsMSMEs in the in the Philippines Philippines from2017 from 2017to to 2021 2021 (Source: (Source:BFAR BFAR2021) 2021) Year BFAR Major Programs, Activities and Technical Assistance Implemented for MSMEs 2021 ⮚ Implementation of Seafood Kadiwa ni Ani at Kita on Wheels (Nationwide); ⮚ Consultation Meeting on February 11, 2021 with Seafood Exporters to risk assess the country’s’ participation in Seafood Expo Global on September 7-9, in Barcelona ; ⮚ Business to Business Meeting between fish buyers and suppliers via Zoom ON August 12, 2021; ⮚ Fisheries Investment Forum on August 11, 2021 via Zoom Webinar; ⮚ Entrepreneurial Development Skills on Fishery Based MSMEs via Zoom by cluster on the following dates: ● Luzon –August 16-27, 2021 ● Visayas and Mindanao- September 6-17, 2021 ⮚ Facilitation of DA-ACPC (E-Sure Covid-19 & Calamity Loan) and LANDBANK ACEF Loan Programs for Fisherfolks and MSMES Note: Updated until October 2021 only. 2020 ⮚ Implementation of Seafood Kadiwa ni Ani at Kita on Wheels (Nationwide) ⮚ DA Kadiwa ni Ani at Kita (Participated) ⮚ Consultation meeting re: Supply of marine fish for Seafood Kadiwa on Wheels on May 29, 2020 with fish producers ⮚ Consultation meeting with Feedmix, BFAR Region 3 re: tilapia farmers and their farmed tilapia affected by taal Volcano ⮚ Facilitated the implementation of DA-ACPC (E-Sure Covid-19 & Calamity Loan) and LANDBANK ACEF Loan Programs for Fisherfolks and MSMEs 2019 ⮚ Tienda Farmers and Fisherfolk Outlet ⮚ Dialogue Meeting among fish producers, market administrators, vendors/traders operating in the wet markets on the pricing of fish and fishery commodities on March 19, 2019 at DA Compound, Quezon City; PAGE \* 117 Chapter 5: POST HARVEST Year BFAR Major Programs, Activities and Technical Assistance Implemented for MSMEs ⮚ International Food Exhibition (IFEX on May 24-26, 2019 ) at the World Trade Center of the Philippines; ⮚ Manila Food and Beverages Expo(MAFBEX) on June 12-16, 2019 at the World Trade Center of the Philippines ⮚ Seafood Expo Global (SEG) on May 7-9, 2019 at Brussels, Belgium; and ⮚ Fisheries Industry Forum on June12, 2019 at the World Trade Center of the Philippines. 2018 ⮚ Seafood Expo North America on March 11-13, 2018 at Boston ,MA USA, participated by Stakeholders and Exporters; ⮚ Implementation of Tienda Farmers and Fisherfolk Outlet; ⮚ Manila Food and Beverages Expo(MAFBEX) on June 12-18, 2021 at the World Trade Center of the Philippines ; ⮚ Seafood Expo Global (SEG)on April 23-26, 2018 at Brussels, Belgium; ⮚ Fisheries Industry Forum on June 13, 2018 at the World Trade Center of the Philippines; ⮚ Fisheries Credit Matching on June 16, 2018 at the World Trade Center of the Philippines; ⮚ BFAR Tienda during the Fish Conservation Week on September 17, 2018 at PCA Covered Court; ⮚ Fisheries Business Matching on October 5, 2018 at the World Trade Center of the Philippines; ⮚ Techno-Forum on Investment Opportunities on October 4, 2018 at the World Trade Center of the Philippines. 2017 ⮚ Fisheries Business Matching at the World Trade Center of the Philippines on the following dates: a. May 19, 2017 b. October 6, 2017 ⮚ Seafood Expo Global (SEG) on April 25-27, 2017 at Belgium; ⮚ China Fisheries and Seafood Expo on November 1-3, 2017 at Quingdao, China; ⮚ International Food Exhibition (IFEX) on May 18-21, 2017 at World Trade Center of the Philippines; ⮚ Agrilink/Foodlink/Aqualink on October 5-7, 2017 at the World Trade Center of the Philippines; ⮚ Implementation of Tienda Farmers and Fisherfolk Outlet; and ⮚ Credit and Investment Forum on October 5, 2017 at the World Trade Center of the Philippines. PAGE \* 118 1.2.5 On the formulation and implementation of consistent policies on granting of incentives and other support services to all domestic companies vis-à-vis grants to foreign companies in relation to post-harvest fisheries (STRATEGY 5) As of December 2020, there are no implemented policies that deals with tax incentives for the construction of new and upgrading of existing post-harvest facilities / businesses. The CNFIDP Medium Term Plan (2016-2020), stipulates that such policy is important for ease of importation of processing equipment, better utilization of public spaces by MSMEs, and for domestic companies to enjoy the same incentives given to international investors. 1.2.6 The Comprehensive Post-Harvest, Marketing, and Ancillary Industries Plan (CPHMAIP) In line with the provision of the Philippines Fisheries Code, the BFAR, together with relevant government agencies and different stakeholders from the different sectors of the fisheries industry, developed the Comprehensive Post-Harvest, Marketing and Ancillary Industries Plan (CPHMAIP) for 2018-2022. The series of industry-wide consultation and consensus building included a total of 250 key representatives from relevant national government agencies, industry stakeholders of major fisheries and aquatic commodities, post-harvest facilities, processing and ancillary service providers, SIVE POST-HARVEST, MARKETING academe and research institutions, civil ARY INDUSTRIES PLAN 2018-2022 society organizations, non-government organizations, National Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Management Council (NFARMC), local government units, and other relevant stakeholders. The CPHMAIP specifically focused on major action plans and strategies that are based on the sectoral targets, as specified in the CNFIDP Medium Term Plan for 2016- 2020. B. CURRENT ISSUES AND CONCERNS At the end of the implementation period of the CNFIDP Medium Term Plan for 2016- 2020, the following issues and concerns on fisheries post-harvest were raised during the consultative meetings with the different stakeholders from the different FMAs on 15 -29 June 2021: 2.1 On post-harvest losses a. A needed for better estimates of post-harvest losses – Although the efforts of the NFRDI research team on the determination and quantification of post-harvest losses have been recognized, there is still a need to come up with better estimates and more comprehensive studies not only on the physical losses, but also on the losses in market values of the different fishery commodities. As noted above, there is still a need to conduct studies that will estimate losses in, but not limited 119 to, the following: from catching (or capture fisheries) using medium and small-scale commercial fishing boats; from catching (or capture fisheries) using municipal boats; during receipt of raw materials in processing plants; and the waste and by-products from processing plants and fishing by-catch. Standardized protocols on how to estimate post-harvest losses along the supply chain, i.e. production sites (in aquaculture facilities and on-board fishing vessels), trading facilities (in regional and municipal fish ports, CFLCs, and traditional landing areas), processing facilities (including pre-processing facilities in some commodities), marketing and distribution channels, and in institutional markets (i.e. restaurants, resorts, hotels, others) are still lacking. b. Unavailability and/or limited access to post-harvest facilities – The recent efforts of the PFDA in constructing new municipal ports (i.e. the construction of 47 new ports during the last 4 years; see discussion above) is commendable. Likewise, the upgrading of the BMFP to become BFPCt in 2017 provided better facilities for the fishers and other stakeholders in Sorsogon and other nearby provinces. With the 9 regional fish ports that are strategically located in the different parts of the country and the PFDA-constructed municipal fish ports, as well as the BFAR- constructed CFLCs, there appears to be enough main and satellite trading centers that can provide easy access especially to the small municipal fishers in the country. The future construction of similar trading facilities by national government agencies (such as the PFDA and BFAR), however, might encounter different challenges due to the implementation of the Mandanas Ruling in 2022. The said law, as promulgated by the Supreme Court in 2018 (and confirmed in 2019), increases the internal revenue allocation (IRA) of the local government units by 55% in the 2022 budget thus expecting to increase the financial capability of the LGUs in implementing projects related to fisheries, among others. In terms of post-harvest facilities, most of the trading centers in the country, with the exception of the major regional fish port complexes (i.e. NFPC, GSFPC, DFPC, and ZFPC), have limited post- harvest facilities and equipment. Added to this is the fact that some of the facilities are still non- operational (see Table 3 above), with some municipal fish ports needing rehabilitation. Even the equipment housed in the regional fish ports (see Table 3) and those meager equipment in the CFLCs are still not enough in number, considering the numerous coastal communities and the municipal fishers in the entire archipelago who need easily accessible trading centers and equipment for their catch. c. Limited application of Appropriate technologies for processing waste, by-catch, and by- products – Proper waste utilization is necessary to achieve significant reduction of post-harvest losses and wastes in each of the nodes along the supply chains of the different fisheries commodities in the country. Although there have been reports on existing methodologies on proper utilization of processing waste, their applications in the different fisheries are still lacking. Together with the quantification of post-harvest losses due to poor handling practices, by-catch, and processing by- products, it is equally important to look at methodologies on how to maximally utilize them. 2.2 On food safety and traceability a. Non adherence to relevant food safety and traceability regulations – Relevant laws and regulations that govern food safety and traceability include, among others the Food Safety Act of 2013 (or RA 10611) which is “an act to strengthen the food safety regulatory system in the country to protect consumer health and facilitate market access of local foods and food products, and for other purposes” and the BFAR Administrative Circular No. 251, series of 2015 (Traceability System for Fish and Fishery Products) which is a circular that establishes the traceability system for wild-caught and farmed fish and other aquatic products and shall apply to all Fisheries and Aquatic Business Operators (FABOs) and business operators directly and indirectly involved in the production and processing of fishery and aquatic products for export. 120 Despite the presence of these laws and regulations, improper hygiene and sanitation practices, as well as the non-adherence to pertinent food safety requirements are still prevalent among the key players in the fisheries post-harvest sector. Efforts on capacitating individuals Despite and/or of the presence associations/groups on proper improper these laws and regulations, post-harvest handling hygiene andprotocols have sanitation been as practices, exerted, well as the but the improper non-adherence practices to pertinent aresafety food still observed, most requirements especially are still in the prevalent coastal among the key communities all across the country. players in the fisheries post-harvest sector. Efforts on capacitating individuals and/or associations/ groups on proper post-harvest handling protocols have been exerted, but the improper practices In terms are still of Philippine observed, National Standards, most especially it iscommunities in the coastal quite evident, all as across shown the in Table 6 above, that country. after the release of the CNFIDP 2006-2025 in 2006, there has been a dramatic increase in the number In terms of PNS that of Philippine have been National approved Standards, (i.e. it is fromevident, quite 1 PNS in as2005 shownto in a total Tableof620 PNS that above, as ofafter the end of the release of the 2015). Quite 2006-2025 CNFIDP interestingly,inthe figure 2006, evenhas there went up due been to the release a dramatic of another increase 21 in the number new of PNS and that 1 been have revised PNS approvedfrom (i.e.2016 fromto 2020. 1 PNS in The worka on 2005 to these total of 20 have PNS as been continuous; of the end of 2015). however, the implementation of these PNS is another matter of concern that have Quite interestingly, the figure even went up due to the release of another 21 new and 1 revised to be looked PNS into. from 2016 to 2020. The work on these have been continuous; however, the implementation of these PNS is another matter of concern that has to be looked into. b. Non Registration of post-harvest establishments – Table 5.8 shows the present status of registration/accreditation/recognition b. Non Registration of post-harvest establishmentsof the different–post-harvest Table 5.8 showsfacilities/establishments the present status of in the different regions in the Philippines. From 2016 to 2020, in general, registration/accreditation/recognition of the different post-harvest facilities/establishmentsthere has been an in increase regions the different in the number of establishments in the Philippines. Fromwith 2016accreditation / recognition to 2020, in general, there(Table 5.8),an has been except increase for the number of accredited cold storage establishments that showed a huge drop in the number of establishments with accreditation / recognition (Table 5.8), except for the number in number. Interestingly, of accredited coldthere storageareestablishments now recent figures that on the number showed a huge of droptraders and exporters in number. withoutthere Interestingly, are now recent figures on the number of traders and exporters without processing plants fish processing plants and the establishments for carrageenan, and dried and smoked and the processing, both of which were not previously reported. establishments for carrageenan, and dried and smoked fish processing, both of which were not previously reported. Table Table 5.8.5.8. Numbers Numbers of accredited/recognized post-harvest of accredited/recognized post-harvest establishments in the establishments in Philippines the Philip- as and pines as of 2015 of 2015 and 2021. 2021. Type of Accreditation / Recognition Number of Establishments as of as of 2021 2015 * Accredited Cold Storage Establishments 239 117 EU Approved Fishing/Freezer Vessels 45 71 EU Approved Establishments 52Chapter 5: 70 POST HARVEST BFAR Approved Establishments 95 115 GMP Recognized Establishments 60 75 PAGE Traders/ Exporters w/o Processing Plants nd 32 \* Carrageenan, Dried & Smoked Products nd 21 Establishments *see *see CNFIDP CNFIDP 2016 2016 c. Value chain analysis of specific commodities to improve industry performance - Value chain analysis has been extensively applied in fisheries and aquaculture commodities all over the Despite these figures, the previous target of 100% compliance to (at least) hygiene and world (e.g., Janthaya & Silva 2010; Loc et al. 2010; Jiménez-Toribio & García-del-Hoyo 2010; De Silva sanitation standards of all fish processing establishments in the Philippines has not been 2011). Pido et al. (2018) describe the different value chain studies conducted in the Philippines, achieved. noting the varying levels of information on the activities, operators or actors, and enablers along the value chain. c. Value Quiteanalysis chain recently,ofrapid valuecommodities specific chain analysestoofimprove differentindustry aquaculture commodities performance - in different Valueparts chainofanalysis the country, including has been milkfish, extensively tilapia, applied shrimp, and in fisheries mussel, and seaweed, aquaculture have been commodities conducted all overin thedifferent parts world (e.g., of the country Janthaya (BFARLoc & Silva 2010; 2019). et al.These are in line with & 2010; Jiménez-Toribio the development García-del- of roadmaps for these commodities. Hoyo 2010; De Silva 2011). Pido et al. (2018) describe the different value chain studies conducted in the Philippines, noting the varying levels of information on the activities, operators or actors, and enablers along the value chain. Quite recently, rapid value chain analyses of different aquaculture commodities in different parts of the country, including milkfish, tilapia, shrimp, mussel, and seaweed, have been conducted in different parts of the 121 country (BFAR 2019). These are in line with the development of roadmaps for these Although these studies (and all other related VCA studies in the Philippines) provide important information, there is still a need to come up with more comprehensive analyses to clearly establish the bottlenecks, challenges, opportunities, gaps, and inefficiencies along the chains of specific fisheries commodities. These are necessary to enable the determination of necessary interventions, reduction of the key actors along the supply chains, and appropriate technology transfer mechanism for the improvement of the performance of these commodities. d. Limited laboratory facilities for product analyses – As shown in Figure 5.8, there is a total of seven (7) Regional Fisheries Laboratories (RFL) that are located in the different parts of the country, i.e. in Manila South Harbor (Region 4A), in the BFAR Regional Offices in Regions 6, 7, 9, and 11, and in 3 satellite sites in General Santos City. Currently maintained by BFAR as support facilities, these laboratories are still not enough to handle the needs for chemical and microbiological analyses of fish and fishery products in the country. 2.3 On appropriate post-harvest technologies a. Production of low-valued fishery products using traditional processing methodologies – Despite all the technological developments, non-competitive fishery products are still being produced, most of which are marketed locally. There have been activities among MSMEs on the production of value added products but these are more focused on their distribution in the international market. Still, these products are not able to compete with their counterparts in the international arena. b. A need to locally fabricate fish processing equipment to avoid dependence on imported spare parts – Fish processing establishments, including trading facilities are mostly dependent on machinery and equipment from other countries. To minimize the dependence on imported spare parts of these machinery and equipment, there should be activities that are focused on local fabrication of these post-harvest facilities. c. Limited technical support to stakeholders/MSMEs – The stakeholders identified the limited technical support given to them, as one of the concerns that have to be looked into. Although efforts on the part of the government (e.g., BFAR, academe, research institutions) have been extended to the different stakeholders at varying degrees, these are still not enough due to the increasing concerns among the stakeholders, more particularly the MSMEs. 2.4 On recent issues affecting post-harvest activities a. Climate change and coastal resilience – In addition to the challenges/issues that are related to high post-harvest losses due to, among other things, underdeveloped cold storage value chain and unsatisfactory hygiene and sanitation practices and the uncompetitiveness of fish and fishery products both in the local and international markets, one of the more recent and pressing challenges besetting the fisheries post-harvest sector include the impacts of the slow-onset of climate change on the different activities of the sector. At present, there is insufficient investment in coastal resilience, more particularly on the appropriate infrastructure facilities for proper handling and processing of fish and fishery products. These facilities, once in place, can help the industry adapt and therefore, lessen the impacts of climate change. In addition, problems on the reduction of post-harvest waste (e.g. fish spoilage, non-utilization of by-catch and processing by-products) still exist. If left to rot or if disposed of in landfills or elsewhere, these fish waste will generate methane gas and can contribute then to greenhouse gas 122 (GHG) emissions, with methane gas known to contribute 25 times more global warming potential than carbon dioxide. b. Concerns related to fisheries sustainability – Based on the stakeholders’ consultation, one problem related to fisheries sustainability is the insufficiency of raw materials for processing. Related reports reveal that fishers and other stakeholders believe that El Niño/Southern Oscillation (ENSO) and climate change affect their catch, as shown in their decreasing catch in recent years (e.g. Yap et al. 2017). On a global scale, one of the recent challenges in the international market is the increasing attention being given to sustainable fisheries practices. Organizations or groups such as the Seafood Watch, Marine Stewardship Council (MSC), and other similar initiatives, provide ratings to internationally traded commodities, and although voluntary in nature, these ratings tend to affect the performance of the “rated” commodities in the market. But the more pressing challenge is the impending restriction due to the strict implementation of the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) of the United States that aims to reduce marine mammal by-catch associated with fishing operations. By January 1, 2022, exportation of several Philippine fisheries commodities would be affected unless their classification under the List of Foreign Fisheries (LOFF) has been changed from being “Export Fisheries” to “Exempt Fisheries”. c. Health pandemic – The effect of the present health pandemic cannot be denied. Although there have been efforts on the part of the Department of Agriculture, in particular, so as not to break the supply chain of the different fisheries commodities, the future effects of the present pandemic on the lives, most especially among the small scale processors and traders in coastal communities must be looked into. d. Political, Economic, Sociological, and Technological (PEST) uncertainties – The entire Philippine fisheries have been witnessing Political, Economic, Sociological, and Technological (PEST) uncertainties for the past several years. Unless these are overcome via more organized and improved stakeholders’ participation and comprehensive review and streamlining of policies and guidelines, the performance of the sector would be affected. Against this backdrop of development challenges and PEST uncertainties, therefore, efforts must be focused on addressing strategic issues and concerns to help the Philippines overcome them. C. RECOMMENDED PROVISIONS IN THE CNFIDP 2021-2025 The following recommended provisions for the post-harvest sub-sector in the Plan is as a result of the stakeholders’ consultations and the review of the accomplishments of the Philippines fisheries post-harvest sub-sector, based on the provisions as stated in CNFIDP Medium Term Plan for 2016- 2020: 3.1 Revised Sectoral Targets The CNFIDP for 2021-2025 has the following sectoral targets for the Fisheries Post-Harvest Sub- sector, namely, a 10 % reduction in post-harvest losses in five (5) years and 80% compliance to hygiene and sanitation standards of all fish processing establishments in the Philippines. 3.2 Revised Strategies and Action The strategies and key action plans as stipulated in the plan have been revised, as shown in Annex A. 123 3.3 Implementation Mechanism In the implementation of the strategies and action plans for the fisheries post-harvest sub-sector, prioritization of the action plans in the revised CNFIDP must be conducted via a participatory, consultative, and stakeholder-centered scheme. This prioritization may be based on the following:

1. For each of the strategies on fisheries post-harvest, each of the action plans shall be categorized based on the current status and the present issues and concerns that confront the fisheries post- harvest sub-sector. In this case, priority shall be given to those strategies that have not been given emphasis during the last implementation period (i.e. 2016 – 2020). On the other hand, the emphasis to be given to those strategies with significant accomplishments must be maintained.

2. Alternatively, for more responsive action plans, prioritization could be FMA-specific, province- specific, or commodity-specific. In this case, initial prioritization Chapter criteria may include, but not 5: POST HARVEST limited to the following: a. Contribution c. to thecompliance Increased attainmenttof the sectoral seafood target quality and of 10%standards safety reduction of post-harvest losses and/or 80% compliance to proper hygiene and sanitation practices d. Opportunities for public-private-community collaborations b. Enhancement to product competitiveness in the local and international markets e. Provision c. Increased complianceof to employment seafood to keyand quality players safetyin a particular fisheries supply chain standards d. Opportunities for public-private-community f. Potential collaborations contribution to the socio-economic status of the stakeholders e. Provision of employment to key players in a particular fisheries supply chain g. contribution f. Potential Positive environmental / ecological status to the socio-economic impactof the stakeholders g. Positive h. environmental Improvement /ofecological impact governance-related concerns h. Improvement of governance-related concerns i. Sensitivity to gender issues and concerns i. Sensitivity to gender issues and concerns j. Consistency j. with the with Consistency CPHMAIPthe and CPHMAIPthe DA’s andNew the 8 Paradigms DA’s New 8 for Agriculture Paradigms for and Fisheries Agriculture and Fisheries 3. The FMA-specific, province-specific, or commodity-specific plans should likewise be aligned with

3. The FMA-specific, province-specific, or commodity-specific plans should likewise be the provisions as stated in the different national management plans (NMP) and commodity roadmaps. aligned with the provisions as stated in the different national management plans (NMP) Table 5.9 summarizes the status of the drafting of commodity roadmaps and NMP of the different major and commodity roadmaps. Table 5.9 summarizes the status of the drafting of commodities in the Philippines. commodity roadmaps and NMP of the different major commodities in the Philippines. Table 5.9. List Table 5.9. of commodity List maps of commodity andand maps management plan management forfor plan specific fisheries specific fisheriescommodities commoditiesin the Philippines in the Philippines List of Commodity Roadmaps / Status National Management Plans National Tuna Management Plan Started implementation in 2018 National Sardines Management Plan Started implementation in 2019 National Management Plan (NMP) for For implementation in 2021 Blue Swimming Crabs National Management Framework for For implementation in 2021; will be the Octopus basis for the drafting of the NMP for Octopus Commodity Roadmap for Milkfish Drafted; for implementation (2021-2040) Commodity Roadmap for Shrimp Drafted; for implementation Commodity Roadmap for Tilapia Drafted; for implementation Commodity Roadmap for Seaweeds Drafted; for implementation 124 SECTORAL STRATEGIES AND ACTION PLAN Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance Partner Sources of STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Implementer Implementers Funds Standardize the estimation,

1. Reduction of and the mechanisms for HEI, BFAR, NFRDI NFRDI, LGU post-harvest reduction, of post-harvest LGU losses along the losses value chain of - Develop and standardize # of assessment different PHL assessment instruments instruments fisheries for the different nodes of the standardized commodities fisheries supply chain - Conduct comprehensive estimated % PH assessment of PHL losses - Devise mechanisms to # of strategies reduce PHL in specific nodes formulated of the fisheries supply chain - Launch massive information # of IEC materials dissemination activities and developed and similar programs for the disseminated different stakeholders Develop appropriate PS, NFRDI, technologies for the NFRDI, DOST, HEI DOST, LGU, utilization of processing DA-BAR NGO waste and by-products - Conduct comprehensive assessment and list of possible characterization of processing waste and processing wastes and by- by-products products - Formulate strategies on # of appropriate appropriate utilization of technologies for waste 125 126 Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance Partner Sources of STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Implementer Implementers Funds processing wastes and by- utilization; % products in the production of contribution to PH food and non-food products losses via R&D activities - Conduct market analyses of the newly developed acceptability rating for products from processing the new products wastes and by-products Conduct value chain analysis PS, NFRDI, of specific commodities to NFRDI, DOST, HEI DOST, LGU, improve industry DA-BAR, NGO NGO performance - Stocktake available information on VCA of list of VCA studies different fisheries conducted, including commodities; identify gaps in results information - Conduct VCA of different commercially important fisheries commodities that # of VCA conducted have not been identified in the stocktaking activity - Formulate an intervention framework that can be used intervention in the finding solutions to the frameworks and identified challenges along strategies on how to each of the fisheries value apply it chain Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance Partner Sources of STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Implementer Implementers Funds Improve fisheries post- harvest and cold chain technologies and facilities, such as ice plants and refrigeration and cold storage PS, Foreign Dev’t PFDA / LGU PS, BFAR, CA facilities, trading facilities Projects (e.g. CFLC, municipal and regional fish ports), private ports, and post-harvest facilities - Conduct comprehensive inventory of the status of the list of PH and cold different fisheries post- chain facilities harvest and cold chain facilities - Rehabilitate, improve, and # of PH and cold chain upgrade the existing facilities rehabilitated, fisheries post-harvest trading improved and and cold chain facilities upgraded - Conduct feasibility studies for the establishment of new # of FS conducted post-harvest trading and cold chain facilities - Establish (based on the results of the feasibility # of PH and cold chain studies) new post-harvest facilities 127 trading and cold-chain established/provided facilities in strategic locations 128 Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance Partner Sources of STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Implementer Implementers Funds via private-public-community partnerships Provide policies/programs to ensure equitable access to LGU, HEI, post-harvest facilities, BFAR, PFDA BFAR, PFDA NGO, CSO including but not limited to cold chain facilities - Review all existing policies, # of policies, rules and rules, and regulations related regulations reviewed to fisheries post-harvest - Conduct stakeholders' consultations to determine # of stakeholders' strategies on how to provide consultations equitable access to post- conducted harvest trading and cold chain facilities - Formulate and implement policies/programs that will provide equitable access to # of policies/ programs post-harvest trading and cold formulated chain facilities among the different stakeholders Conduct capability building activities on post-harvest handling and cold chain HEI, NGO, PS, Foreign Devt management systems, BFAR LGU, CA Projects, BFAR different quality systems (GMP, SSOP, HACCP, TQM, etc.), and maintenance of Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance Partner Sources of STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Implementer Implementers Funds post-harvest handling facilities - Assess the training needs of key stakeholders on post- # of stakeholders harvest handling, cold assessed storage management, and different quality systems - Develop programs for appropriate capability # of programs building activities based on developed the results of the Training Needs Assessments - Come up with various information and education materials (brochures, # of IEC materials posters, manuals, training developed and modules) that can be disseminated disseminated to the different stakeholders - Conduct training and post- # of training conducted training monitoring and and monitored evaluation Extend technical assistance

2. Increase in to fish processing the production establishments / NFRDI, DOST, BFAR, DOST- of value added stakeholders in developing & BFAR DTI, HEI, CA IDTI products from improving the quality, fish and fishery packaging & presentation, by-products and nutritional value, and 129 130 Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance Partner Sources of STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Implementer Implementers Funds processing acceptability of value-added wastes products using traditional species, low volume high value species, and other emerging species - Organize different pools of technical experts/panels that # of pools of technical can provide assistance to the experts organized different fish processing establishments/stakeholders - Develop a system that shall allow quick response of the # of queries responded technical experts/panels to / assistance extended specific needs of the stakeholders/clientele - Organize study tours for key stakeholders as benchmarking activities that # of study tours shall allow them to get conducted familiar with recent market trends and developments - Develop short-term training # of short-term courses for MSMEs on new trainings developed fishery product development and implemented Increase R&D efforts on the development of new value NFRDI, PS, NFRDI, DOST, added products from fish and HEI DOST, DAR- DA-BAR, HEI fishery by-products and BAR processing waste Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance Partner Sources of STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Implementer Implementers Funds - Comprehensive assess the existing technologies and initiatives related to the list of technologies and development of new value initiatives assessed added products from fish and fishery by-products and processing waste - Conduct R&D programs on appropriate utilization of # of technologies processing wastes and by- generated and tested products in the production of food and non-food products - Develop partnership between different key # of partnerships stakeholders in the conduct established of R&D activities on new product development Increase production of fishery products using NFRDI, PS, NFRDI, DOST, different technological HEI DOST, DAR- DA-BAR, HEI advances and innovative BAR strategies - Organize study tours for key stakeholders as benchmarking activities that # of study tours shall allow them to get conducted familiar with recent technological advances and innovative strategies 131 132 Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance Partner Sources of STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Implementer Implementers Funds - Develop new fishery products using state-of-the- art, technologically advanced, and innovative # of new fishery strategies that will position products developed provide competitive advantage to Philippine fishery products - Extend assistance to establishments for wider # of technical exposure of their products assistance extended both in the domestic and international markets Formulate policy on zero- rated VAT for all domestically grown and produced fishery BFAR DTI, PS, CA BFAR products to encourage production of value added fishery products - Review all existing policies, rules, and regulations related # of policies, rules and to all domestically grown and regulations reviewed produced fishery products - Conduct stakeholders' consultations to determine # of stakeholders' strategies on how to provide consultations zero-VAT for all domestically conducted grown and produced fishery products Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance Partner Sources of STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Implementer Implementers Funds - Formulate and implement policies/programs that will # of policies/ programs provide better opportunities formulated to domestic growers and producers

3. Improvement of the Provide assistance to fishery compliance of establishments in complying fishery with the requirements for establishments certification/accreditation DTI, HEI, NGO, BFAR BFAR, DTI to relevant under different national & CA national & international recognized international schemes (e.g. HACCP, EU- regulations on system, GMP, Halal) seafood quality and safety - Organize different pools of technical experts/panels that can provide assistance for # of pools of technical certification/accreditation of experts organized the fish processing establishments/trading facilities - Develop an effectiveness of the accreditation/inspection accreditation / system that shall allow better inspection system management and handling of developed 133 134 Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance Partner Sources of STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Implementer Implementers Funds the specific needs of the stakeholders/clientele - Organize study tours for key stakeholders as benchmarking activities that # of study tours shall expose them to different conducted quality systems being implemented in the food industry - Develop short-term training courses for MSMEs on the # of short-term different internationally trainings developed recognized scheme (e.g. and implemented HACCP, ISO, EU-system, GMP/cGMP, Halal) Implement relevant food NFRDI, HEI, safety and traceability BFAR NFRDI, DOST, LGU, DTI, CA programs DA-BAR, HEI - Develop and implement # of food safety & programs on food safety and traceability programs traceability that are science- developed & based implemented - Implement R&D programs that shall provide science- based information for the # of R&D programs development of food safety implemented and traceability programs (e.g. omics-based researches, DNA barcoding Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance Partner Sources of STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Implementer Implementers Funds techniques, identification of safety hazards) Capacitate stakeholders (MSMEs, traders) to increase LGU, DTI, HEI, compliance to seafood BFAR LGU, BFAR, DTI CA quality, safety, and traceability requirements - Assess the training needs of key stakeholders on the # of stakeholders different quality, safety, and assessed traceability systems - Develop programs for appropriate capability # of programs building activities based on developed the results of the Training Needs Assessments - Come up with various information and education materials (brochures, # of IEC materials posters, manuals, training developed and modules) that can be disseminated disseminated to the different stakeholders - Conduct training and post- # of training conducted training monitoring and and monitored evaluation Apply the provisions in the DA-BAFS, Philippines National BFAR BFAR, DA-BAFS PFDA, DTI 135 Standards (PNS) and Codes 136 Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance Partner Sources of STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Implementer Implementers Funds of Practices (COP) to specific rules and regulations on seafood quality and safety - Review existing PNS and # of PNS & COP COP to identify gaps in the reviewed information - Develop new and relevant # of new PNS & COP PNS and COP drafted & implemented - Mainstream the value chain # of PNS & COP approach in the development developed using the of PNS and COP VA approach - Adopt specific provisions of PNS and COP in the # of PNS & COP used development of policies, in drafting policies rules and regulations on seafood quality and safety Monitor and assess the levels of chemical, microbiological, and physical HEI, BFAR, NFRDI, DOST, hazards in fish & fishery NFRDI DOST, DA- DA-BAR, NGO products (e.g. histamine, BAR, etc.) in the different nodes of specific supply chain - Comprehensive assess existing information on the different fish and fishery # of commodities products and the safety assessed hazards associated with each of these products Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance Partner Sources of STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Implementer Implementers Funds - Conduct R&D programs on the characterization and establishment of control limits # of commodities (rejection levels) for the studied with identified different safety hazards as safety hazards identified in the comprehensive assessments that were conducted - Establish a scheme that # of schemes shall efficiently monitor the established in presence (or absence) and monitoring safety the levels of the identified hazards safety hazards - Develop strategies / # of strategies programs to help eliminate formulated the identified safety hazards Increase the number of laboratory facilities for PS, NGO, LGU, PS, Foreign Devt BFAR product analyses thru PPC CA Projects, BFAR partnerships - Conduct Feasibility Studies for the establishment of new laboratory facilities in # of FS conducted strategic locations in the country - Develop a scheme that shall increase access of # of acceptable 137 stakeholders to the different schemes developed testing laboratories 138 Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance Partner Sources of STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Implementer Implementers Funds - Establish a partnership # of partnerships between government and established private testing laboratories Provide support to MSMEs PS, NGO, LGU, on laboratory analysis and BFAR PS, BFAR, LGU CA fish and fishery products - Develop an incentive scheme that shall increase # of incentive schemes access of the stakeholders to developed and the services of testing implemented laboratories - Link the incentive scheme provided by the testing # of incentive schemes laboratories with other linked to other programs (e.g. sustainability programs program, social compliance program) - Establish a partnership between government and # of partnerships private testing laboratories to established increase support to the different stakeholders - Develop stakeholder- oriented training and information dissemination # of training conducted programs/activities that shall and monitored be offered by the testing laboratories Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance Partner Sources of STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Implementer Implementers Funds DTI, HEI, Organize capability building

4. BFAR NFRDI, CA, LGU, BFAR, DTI activities on: Strengthening LGU of fishery-based (a) entrepreneurship, livelihood and financial management, # of trainings entrepreneurial marketing, bookkeeping, conducted programs in business planning; coastal (b) fisheries post-harvest communities technologies, post-harvest # of trainings handling, good conducted manufacturing practices; (c) disaster risk management # of trainings and mitigation and coastal conducted resilience Increase access to sustainable livelihood BFAR, CSO, opportunities for the different LGU NGO, HEI stakeholders in coastal communities - Conduct of socio-economic # of socio-economic studies of the different sites studies conducted - Identify the municipalities/coastal # of municipalities / communities that shall serve coastal communities as the model sites for the developed as model initial introduction of sites livelihood programs 139 140 Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance Partner Sources of STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Implementer Implementers Funds - Replicate successes of the # of sites developed identified model sites in other using the model sites coastal communities - Provide assistance (e.g. training, other capacity # of technical building programs) to assistance extended extension personnel at the local government units - Organize study tours for extension personnel to get # of study tours them exposed to best conducted practices in the introduction of livelihood programs BFAR, LGU, Generate policies on DTI LBP, ACPC, DTI, BFAR incentivizing local processors DBP - Forge partnership between relevant enablers (DTI, LBP, ACPC, DBP, LGU) for the # of partnerships conceptualization of new and established pro-people incentive mechanisms - Advocate for the immediate implementation of the new incentive schemes (e.g. # of incentive schemes pushing for their inclusion in developed and the legislative agenda of the implemented concerned LGU; mainstreaming of the Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance Partner Sources of STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Implementer Implementers Funds schemes in the activities of NGAs) - Link the incentive schemes # of incentive schemes to other relevant programs linked to other (e.g. sustainability program, programs social compliance initiatives) Promote the use of locally fabricated fish processing DTI, CSO, equipment to avoid BFAR, LGU LGU, BFAR, DTI NGO, HEI dependence on imported spare parts Comprehensive assess the available local materials that # of local materials and --Comprehensively can potentially be used in technologies assessed fabricating fish processing equipment and facilities - Conduct R&D programs on the utilization of locally # of technologies using available materials, to include local materials studies on engineering developed design, functionality testings, and other relevant studies - Commercialize the # of equipment & production of locally facilities fabricated equipment and commercialized facilities - Advertise the use of the # of locally fabricated locally fabricated equipment equipment & facilities and facilities advertised 141 142 Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance Partner Sources of STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Implementer Implementers Funds Provide common service facilities / “One Negosyo” PS, Foreign Devt DTI, PS, PO, centers/ Cold Hubs in BFAR. LGU Projects, BFAR, CSO, NGO strategic locations in the LGU country - Identify strategic locations # of locations assessed for common service facilities / and strategic sites "One Negosyo" centers / identified Cold Hubs - Conduct feasibility studies # of FS conducted for the identified sites # of facilities - Construct the facilities constructed - Establish a mechanism for a private-public-community # of partnerships partnership for each of the established identified facilities to that shall be constructed - Operate the facilities using # of facilities operated a more sustainable scheme Formulate new mechanism to DTI, LBP, increase access to credit BFAR BFAR ACPC, DBP facilities - Forge partnership between relevant enablers (POs, LBP, # of partnerships ACPC, DBP, LGU) for the established conceptualization of new and better access of the Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance Partner Sources of STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Implementer Implementers Funds stakeholders to loans and other financial arrangements - Link the new mechanism to increase access to credit # of lending schemes facilities with other relevant linked with other programs (e.g. sustainability relevant programs program, social compliance initiatives) - Develop capability building programs that are related to # of training conducted financial management and and monitored other similar skills Formulate and implement DTI, LGU,

5. Enhancement consistent policies BFAR BFAR PFDA, CA of the global implemented on: competitiveness - tax incentives for the # of policies/ programs of Philippine fish construction of new and formulated & and fishery upgrading of existing post- implemented products harvest facilities / businesses # of policies/ programs - eased importation of formulated & processing equipment implemented # of policies/ programs - utilization of public spaces formulated & by MSMEs implemented - domestic companies to # of policies/ programs enjoy the same incentives formulated & given to international implemented 143 investors 144 Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance Partner Sources of STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Implementer Implementers Funds Develop and implement HEI, BFAR, Fisheries Improvement Private Sector Private Sector NFRDI, NGO Projects (FIP) - Provide/Seek technical assistance for exporters in # of FIP conducted identifying sites for FIP - Forge partnership with the # of partnerships different key stakeholders for established the conduct of FIP Establish a comprehensive IT-based marketing system that can provide links DTI, BFAR, PFDA, LGU, between trading facilities, fish BFAR Foreign Dev't NGO, CA processing establishments, Projects exporters, importers, and other stakeholders - Comprehensive analyze the existing marketing system in the country to enable the establishment of a more # of marketing systems efficient trading and analyzed exchange of goods and services in the fisheries sector - Develop relevant IT-based apps that can link the # of IT-based apps different trading facilities and developed fish processing establishments Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance Partner Sources of STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Implementer Implementers Funds - Identify strategic # of sites for IT-based locations/sites for the IT- MIS identified based marketing system - Apply the IT-based apps to connect/link the different trading facilities and fish # of sites connected to processing establishments the IT-based MIS for better exchange and marketing/distribution of goods

6. Sustainable Promote programs that utilization of mainstream fisheries PS, NGO, PO, BFAR, NGO, BFAR Philippine sustainability and social CA CSO aquatic compliance resources - Set up community-based management and conservation strategies that # of strategies shall guide the stakeholders developed and on responsible and implemented sustainable utilization of aquatic resources - Mainstream programs that promote fisheries # of programs sustainability and social developed & compliance (e.g. linking them implemented with other programs on incentives, credit facilities) 145 146 Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance Partner Sources of STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Implementer Implementers Funds - Develop capability building programs and information and education materials that # of capability building shall encourage adherence programs developed to measures to mainstream and implemented fisheries sustainability and social compliance. - Engagement of supply chain actors to enter into # of agreements agreements aligned with established MFOs and management measures - Implement self-regulation # of self-regulation measures and monitoring in measures developed & post-harvest activities along implemented the supply chain Develop appropriate post- PS, NGO, CCC, DOST, DA- harvest technologies that are HEI DOST, DA- BAR climate-smart and resilient BAR, NFRDI - Assess the status of existing technologies and their resilience and # of technologies preparedness to challenges assessed brought about by climate change. - Retrofit existing fish post- harvest technologies to adapt # of technologies and to the challenges brought equipment retrofitted about by climate change Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance Partner Sources of STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Implementer Implementers Funds - Develop new and # of new and appropriate post-harvest appropriate technologies to mitigate the technologies and effects brought about by equipment developed climate change - Conduct R&D programs that shall help mitigate and adapt to climate change related challenges (e.g. monitoring and # of R&D programs characterization of nano and implemented microplastics in fish and fishery products, changes in products due to exposure to abuse temperature of storage) Generate technologies that PS, NGO, can mitigate the effects of HEI DOST, DA- DOST, DA-BAR health pandemics and other BAR, NFRDI similar circumstances - Assess the status of existing technologies and their resilience and # of technologies preparedness to challenges assessed brought about by health pandemics and other similar circumstances - Retrofit existing fish post- # of technologies and 147 harvest technologies to adapt equipment retrofitted 148 Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance Partner Sources of STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Implementer Implementers Funds to the challenges brought about by health pandemics and other similar circumstances - Develop new and appropriate post-harvest # of new and technologies to mitigate the appropriate effects brought about by technologies and health pandemics and other equipment developed similar circumstances - Conduct R&D programs that shall help mitigate and adapt to climate change related challenges (e.g. monitoring and # of R&D programs characterization of nano and implemented microplastics in fish and fishery products, changes in products due to exposure to abuse temperature of storage) - Develop strategies (e.g. capability building programs, technical assistance) for # of programs stakeholders who serve as developed and first responders in implemented emergency situations (e.g. floodings, drought, calamities) Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance Partner Sources of STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Implementer Implementers Funds Improve inclusiveness for all gender and circumstances PS, NGO, HEI, DOST, DA-BAR, along the value chain of the BFAR LGU, DSWD, FI NGO different fisheries commodities - Identify the gender roles in # of value chain maps post-harvest fisheries assessed in terms of establishments and facilities gender sensitivity & and provide equal benefits to responsiveness all gender and circumstances - Evaluate the different fisheries supply chains to # of GAD issues identify GAD issues and identifies develop necessary action points - Conduct massive information dissemination # of IEC materials campaigns that emphasize developed and the role of women in fisheries disseminated post-harvest Review and streamline programs to address any Political, Economic, BFAR DTI, LGU LGU, BFAR Sociological, and Technological (PEST) uncertainties - Review the existing # of programs reviewed programs on fisheries post- 149 150 Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance Partner Sources of STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Implementer Implementers Funds harvest that could be affected by the PEST uncertainties - Develop scenario settings # of programs that shall serve as guides in subjected to scenario handling any PEST settings uncertainties - Conduct massive information dissemination campaigns that emphasize the PEST uncertainties and # of IEC materials the strategies to combat developed and them disseminated Note: The consultants prepared a budget estimate to carry out this plan as indicated in Annex 1 Chapter 6 TRADE AND MARKETING 151 TRADE AND MARKETING A. Fisheries Economics, Marketing and Trade Sub-Sectoral Situationer Fish marketing and trade are activities that are essential to the flow of fish and fish prod- ucts from the fishers to the consumers, which essentially intends to link the available supply of producers with the demand of the customers. Especially because consumers and producers are often far apart, particularly in an archipelagic country likethe Philippines, markets play a crucial role in the movement of fish and fish products. While marketing and trade occur in almost all of the stages in the fish supply chain, whether in aquaculture or capture fisheries as shown in Fig- ures 6.1 and 6.2, the marketing and trade of fish and fishery products generally take place between production and consumption. As depicted by the supply chain maps of major fish commodities in the country (Figure 6.3), marketing predominantly happens shortly after the production phase particularly because fish are largely marketed as fresh. Nevertheless, additional post-processing trade and marketing eventuates for some fishery commodities. - - Post Harvest Aquaculture Production Handling & Processing Distribution Storage 11, •' A Auclior\/Broker ~ l91t$-, ~ ..-.(.a,( ~~ "' ~ -~. I i Farm , Feed ~m Dl&tributor Food Servlco s L ·~ • Gold Storage •/k ...L l lti Lo,~""5Colo b uyu,s I -~:•. ToJ.. ''t -~ ~~~ •t• Aquacutlure P1oducll irom dlsoo1d1 O A,-.,1, 0 ' I, ITif' Consrumor Figure 6.1. Supply chain of aquaculture commodities adapted from CNFIDP 2016-2020 152 ~ ~ ..L ~ @,' ~. ~e,( ~~ .Q/j Auction/Broker ==== ._ ~ e ii ,' Distributor Cold Stor.age, . ••..,~ W! ..l. 1fil 41 Product! lrom.dl&oord~ ■Lill = lo19c--5colo buyors ·• t . ~~- e"wra"' J, i 'fiTif' Cons11mer Figure 6.2. Supply chain of commodities from capture fisheries adapted from CNFIDP 2016-2020 Marketing and trade are not limited to the buying and selling as well as transportation of fish and fish products. It also includes other activities such as assemblage or consolidation, storage, sorting, grading, packaging, and labelling, among others. Due to the peculiar skills demanded by marketing of fishes, the marketing phase traditionally involves layers of intermediaries, spanning from the small ones in the barangays up to the large entities supplying the demands of the local and international consumers. It is remarkable though that marketing activities in recent years are being taken up and delivered by other players in the chain. For instance, the fish farmers, particularly those organized as cooperatives, who have substantial output and/or capacity are entering into the trading business. For this reason, vertical integration, which are believed to lead to improved efficiencies, are becoming more apparent in fish supply chains. 153 Chapter 6: TRADE AND MARKETING INPUT PROVISION PROOUCTION POST- HARVEST .. TRADING/ MARKETING I.ill PROCESSING .ill TRADING/ MARKETING .. CONSUMERS .:...............~ •. .............. .• ( ') MILKFISH Hattheries Broken . -: - - - - - - - - .=- - - - - - ..: + Fry gatl'lerers Growers/ ------- ~ Wholesalers Domestic 8nd Foreign . Whol1s.al1rs maricet5 Nurwrles Farmers Retallers Exporters - ■- Processors Retailers Expo<ters . - _,_ TILAPIA n -------~.. ------~ .. -------t.. ----- -~-► ~---~ .. _______ ,__ Domestic market __, .: .: .: .: , - - -- - ~- -, ~ - - - - - - - . - - - - - --: - .► - ..; ► .: • Exporters --: -► . • Domlll!l:rtlc and Forll!llgn Hatcheries Proc.essors lnstltutlonal marklll!lts Growers/ buyers . N1.1rwries Farmers ------- ➔ ➔ LJ------t WholeSillers Consolidators Retailers Dome$tlc market SHRIMP Hatcheries -► nGrowers/ Farmers ------- + - - - - - - - : : + Wholesalen Consolklator:s Rotallors - =- P • l - - - - - - - :- - - - TradoB - - -: -9': Nurseries Brokers Oome:sUc and Foreign ~=::::::..____::::==- L _J ------ ------~ ~- exporters markets Hatcheries - Growers / Famuns . ------ ~ ------ r ------- ~: ------ :~ ► . - - - - - - - ➔ - - - - - - :i- ~ . . Hatcheries - Growers/ Farmers .. .. L Domestic and Forel1n markets Hatcheries - Growers/Fa ~ •n - Proc.essors • t;porters . . SEAWEEDS .• ===== .. - t ----- ~-------- ~ ----- ~ ➔ . . Whole1,11len. . . . Domestic markets - -► Retailers Agents .~--------~----- . .~- Traders (Brgy., . .. .. :.- - - - - - - - .:- - - - - - -:. -► Munlclpol, Provincial) Foreign mart<] - -► Growers/ Farmers EJl:porters H41U;herfe5 Traders Nurseries (Brgy., - -► Munlclpal, -: - ► Provincial) ------1l--. j-i' -- Domestic and Foreign markeu Growlll!lrs / Fa·rmlll!lrs J1-► . - i►. ~-► . _ _ _ _ __ •■■ I ■■ lo ■ \II ■■■■■• .. ■ I ■ ■ _ oo_ •_ ■_o_o_o_ ■_■_ ••-----------~ Figure 6.3. Supply chain of Milkfish, Tilapia, Shrimp and Seaweeds Figure 6.3. Supply chain of Milkfish, Tilapia, Shrimp and Seaweeds Source: Industry Roadmaps of Milkfish, Tilapia, Shrimp and Seaweeds (BFAR, 2021) Source: Industry Roadmaps of Milkfish, Tilapia, Shrimp and Seaweeds (BFAR, 2021) 154 PAGE \* Chapter 6: TRADE AND MARKETING RECENT RECENTSTATUS STATUSAND ANDTRENDS IN IN TRENDS DOMESTIC FISHERIES DOMESTIC TRADE FISHERIES TRADEAND ANDMARKETING MARKETINGIN THE PHILIPPINES IN THE PHILIPPINES The The Philippines has has Philippines posted a total avolume posted total of 4.4 of volume million 4.4metric tons in million 2020, metric valued tons in at more 2020, valued at than Php 273 billion. This volume of fish produced is 5% less than the 4.65 million more than Php 273 billion. This volume of fish produced is 5% less than the 4.65 million metric metric tons produced tons producedin 2015. Many in 2015. of the Many regions of the regionshave exhibited have decline exhibited in the decline inquantity of fishofproduced the quantity fish produced in 2020 from the 2015 output levels. On the contrary, the value of the fisheries produced in in 2020 from the 2015 output levels. In contrary, the value of the fisheries produced in 2020 dis- 2020 displayed improvement by 14% from Php 239.7 billion in 2015. Majority of the regions played improvement by 14% from Php 239.7 billion in 2015. Majority of the regions showed an showed an increase in terms of the value of fish produced in 2020 as compared to 2015 increase in terms of the value of fish produced in 2020 as compared to 2015 production values production values (Table 6.1). Table 6.1. Volume and Value of Fisheries Output by Region, 2015 and 2020 Table 6.1. Volume and Value of Fisheries Output by Region, 2015 and 2020 Volume Value Region 2015 2020 2015 2020 NCR 107,134.58 104,632.41 4,836,630.03 6,723,475.73 CAR 3,866.71 3,701.62 401,228.43 403,554.04 Region 1 161,891.68 179,683.35 16,026,782.38 20,749,132.82 Region 2 56,353.00 43,918.87 5,089,447.31 4,903,400.97 Region 3 276,969.03 346,631.03 31,171,964.53 44,991,094.10 Region 4a 378,522.33 243,008.54 21,694,599.80 20,367,030.79 Region 4b 588,277.45 476,831.54 13,313,238.13 15,474,519.45 Region 5 268,187.77 238,847.69 15,359,164.94 15,679,724.33 Region 6 402,071.05 376,822.38 27,866,523.32 28,973,213.28 Region 7 186,048.70 157,419.86 7,410,202.11 13,379,819.68 Region 8 134,977.46 123,557.67 9,482,642.74 11,830,409.10 Region 9 583,403.76 585,126.52 19,709,511.42 19,925,088.47 Region 10 162,802.68 141,168.69 16,059,749.34 15,264,893.52 Region 11 59,498.46 45,556.23 4,882,532.53 4,993,388.02 Region 12 328,687.25 312,804.71 24,553,930.02 24,168,812.75 Region 13 83,348.70 66,601.73 6,164,041.99 6,643,015.06 BARMM 867,272.00 954,060.15 15,680,184.55 19,017,886.42 PHILIPPINES 4,649,312.63 4,400,373.01 239,702,373.57 273,488,458.53 Source: PSA, 2021 The supply and demand situation for fish and fish products in the different parts of the The supply country and demand determines situation the trade of fishforand fishfish andproducts fish products in the locally different parts or regionally. Theofsituation the country wherein determines the trade of fish and fish products locally or regionally. The situation wherein an an area has more harvest than what it needs signifies the necessity to move the excess portions area has more harvest than what it needs signifies the necessity to move the excess portions to areas that are deficient. For this reason, it is conventional that a large proportion of the food to areas that are deficient. For this reason, it is conventional that a large proportion of the food fishfish produced are being brought from the coastal communities in the provinces to areas with high produced are being brought from the coastal communities in the provinces to areas with number of consumers high number such asuch of consumers the as NCR theand NCRother andmajor cities cities other major nationwide. nationwide. Based on the Based estimated on the population estimated in 2020inand population 2020theand per the capita perfish consumption capita fish based on the consumption based on 2018-2019 Expanded National Nutrition Survey (ENNS) , Table 6.2 exhibits the the 2018-2019 Expanded National Nutrition Survey (ENNS) , Table 6.2 exhibits the regional fish regional fish supply supply and and demand demand analysis. analysis. Thishows This showsthat thathere therewere wereeight eight regions, regions, namely namely Regions Regions 1, 3, 4b, 5, 1, 3, 4b, 5, 6, 9, 12 and BARMM, that reached sufficiency, and about half of the regions do 6, 9, 12 and BARMM, that reached sufficiency, and about half of the regions do not have sufficient not have sufficient amounts of amounts of fish fish to feed to feed their their respective respective populationspopulations in 2020.inOn 2020. the On thehand, other other the hand, the and supply supply and demand situation in 2015 (Table 6.3) presents that there demand situation in 2015 (Table 6.3) presents that there were nine regions whose food fish supply haswere met or nineeven exceeded regions whosethe emand food fish in their supply area. has met or even exceeded the demand in their area. It can be observed that sufficiency rates have gone up for ten regions in the country: Regions 2, 4A, MIMAROPA, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, CAR and Caraga. The biggest drop of 50% was noticed PAGE \* 155 It can be observed that sufficiency rates have goneChapter 6: TRADE up for ten AND regions MARKETING in the country: Regions 2, 4A, MIMAROPA, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, CAR and Caraga. The biggest drop of 50% was noticed in Region 6infrom its 220% Region 6 fromsufficiency in 2015 to in its 220% sufficiency 111% 2015into2020. 111%Meanwhile, the highesttheimprovement in 2020. Meanwhile, highest of 22% was noted in Region 3, from 91% in 2015 to 111% in 2020. improvement of 22% was noted in Region 3, from 91% in 2015 to 111% in 2020. It can It becangleaned in Tables be gleaned 6.2 and in Tables 6.26.3 andthat 6.3the reduction that in the sufficiency the reduction rates ofrates in the sufficiency Regions of Regions 6, 10, 12 and CAR were attributed to three factors, which arethe decrease in the 6, 10, 12 and CAR were attributed to three factors, which arethe decrease in the supply supply andthe andthe increasein increase in both both the thepopulation population and andthethe consumption. Meanwhile, consumption. the decline Meanwhile, in the in the decline sufficiency the sufficiency rates of Regions 2, 4A, MIMAROPA, 11 and Caraga were due to the reduction rates of Regions 2, 4A, MIMAROPA, 11 and Caraga were due to the reduction of ish supply of fish supplyand the and the increase in population of the said regions, whereas for Region 7 it was only due to increase in population of the said regions, whereas for Region 7 it was only due to population population growth. Table 6.2. Regional Total Food Fish Supply and Demand Analysis, 2020 Table 6.2. Regional Total Food Fish Supply and Demand Analysis, 2020 FISH EATING Mean Annual Per TOTAL FOOD FISH POPULATION REQUIREMENT Capita GAP Sufficiency Region SUPPLY 2020 (Total Population PER YEAR Consumption (in MT) Level(%) (in MT) less 9 Years Old (in MT) (in MT) and Below) NCR 104,632.41 10,699,288 0.03035 324,723.39 -220,090.98 32% CAR 3,701.62 1,426,359 0.02406 34,318.19 -30,616.57 11% Region 1 179,677.86 4,206,205 0.03251 136,743.73 42,934.13 131% Region 2 43,882.80 2,924,465 0.02948 86,213.23 -42,330.43 51% Region 3 345,843.96 9,856,411 0.03164 311,856.83 33,987.13 111% Region 4a 242,960.39 12,850,006 0.03007 386,399.68 -143,439.29 63% Region 4b 156,114.33 2,561,709 0.04010 102,724.54 53,389.79 152% Region 5 199,917.99 4,825,913 0.03132 151,147.58 48,770.41 132% Region 6 294,224.42 6,311,699 0.04211 265,785.66 28,438.76 111% Region 7 108,224.78 6,412,678 0.03483 223,353.58 -115,128.80 48% Region 8 105,658.11 3,607,950 0.03970 143,235.62 -37,577.51 74% Region 9 382,520.21 3,075,088 0.04217 129,676.45 252,843.76 295% Region 10 108,980.30 3,985,331 0.03351 133,548.43 -24,568.13 82% Region 11 42,413.97 4,160,500 0.03538 147,198.48 -104,784.51 29% Region 12 312,562.90 3,889,099 0.03925 152,647.14 159,915.76 205% Region 13 57,484.85 2,225,468 0.03892 86,615.20 -29,130.35 66% BARMM 242,918.82 3,494,596 0.03387 118,361.96 124,556.86 205% PHILIPPINES 2,931,719.75 86,514,428.84 0.03427 2,964,849.48 -33,129.73 99% Source of data: PSA Openstat, 2015 Census of Population 156 PAGE \* Chapter 6: TRADE AND MARKETING Table 6.3. Regional Total Food Fish Supply and Demand Analysis, 2015 Table 6.3. Regional Total Food Fish Supply and Demand Analysis, 2015 FISH EATING Mean Annual Per TOTAL FOOD FISH POPULATION REQUIREMENT Capita GAP Sufficiency Region SUPPLY 2015 (Total Population PER YEAR Consumption (in MT) Level(%) (in MT) less 9 Years Old (in MT) (in MT) and Below) NCR 107,134.58 10,513,091 0.03430 360,599.02 -253,464.44 30% CAR 3,866.71 1,361,770 0.02210 30,095.12 -26,228.41 13% Region 1 161,865.21 4,013,158 0.03250 130,427.64 31,437.58 124% Region 2 56,086.54 2,730,497 0.03490 95,294.35 -39,207.81 59% Region 3 275,141.53 8,974,198 0.03360 301,533.05 -26,391.52 91% Region 4a 355,029.60 11,503,934 0.03100 356,621.95 -1,592.35 100% Region 4b 193,151.62 2,263,590 0.05130 116,122.17 77,029.45 166% Region 5 212,805.68 4,404,413 0.03640 160,320.63 52,485.05 133% Region 6 321,498.94 3,576,197 0.04080 145,908.84 175,590.10 220% Region 7 89,460.14 4,711,845 0.03850 181,406.03 -91,945.89 49% Region 8 116,463.97 3,432,079 0.05090 174,692.82 -58,228.85 67% Region 9 379,223.31 2,773,668 0.04840 134,245.53 244,977.78 282% Region 10 123,393.55 3,601,616 0.02820 101,565.57 21,827.98 121% Region 11 51,114.44 3,819,671 0.03950 150,877.00 -99,762.56 34% Region 12 328,328.60 3,487,793 0.03800 132,536.13 195,792.47 248% Region 13 68,549.99 1,984,207 0.04160 82,543.01 -13,993.02 83% BARMM 239,836.50 2,689,926 0.04440 119,432.71 120,403.79 201% PHILIPPINES 3,082,950.93 78,525,169 0.03680 2,889,726.22 193,224.71 107% Source of data: PSA Openstat, 2015 Census of Population The Philippines appears to be self-sufficient, particularly in tuna. In 2015, the country’s The Philippines appears to be self-sufficient, particularly in tuna. In 2015, the country’s aggregate output was 560,160 metric tons. With a mean per capita consumption of 4.83 kg/ aggregate output was 560,160 metric tons. With a mean per capita consumption of 4.83 year (PSA, 2018) and a fish-eating population of 78.5 million (2015 Census of Population), the kg/year (PSA, 2018) and a fish-eating population of 78.5 million (2015 Census of Population), estimated tuna annual requirement was only 379,277 metric tons. The country generated a the estimated tuna annual requirement was only 379,277 metric tons. The country generated surplus a surplusof 180,883 of 180,883metric metrictons tonswhich whichcorresponds correspondsto toa148% a148% self-sufficiency rate. After self-sufficiency rate. Afterfive five years, the national fish-eating population went up to 86.5 million (2015 Census of Population) years, the national fish-eating population went up to 86.5 million (2015 Census of Population) and mean per andcapita meanconsumption slid a littleslid per capita consumption to 4.34 kg/year a little to 4.34(PSA, 2021b). kg/year (PSA,The totalThe 2021b). tunatotal produced tuna then ofproduced 520,167 then metric tons was able to cover the demand of 375,473 metric tons of 520,167 metric tons was able to cover the demand of 375,473 metric tons and even created a surplus and even of 144,694 created ametric surplustons. This situation of 144,694 is commensurate metric tons. This situation iswith the 139% self-sufficiency commensurate with the rate. 139% Albeit that sufficiency self-sufficiency rate. rate Albeitin 2020 that diminish sufficiency byin6%, rate 2020thediminish sufficiency by 6%,rates thein 2015 and 2020 sufficiency still indicates rates in 2015that andthe Philippines 2020 still has that indicates enoughthe domestic Philippinestuna has supply enoughand it is just domestic appropriate tuna supply that and it the is just excess appropriate portion be soldthat the xcess outside portion be sold outside the country. the country. For milkfish, the country delivered a surplus of 197,998 metric tons in 2015 considering the For milkfish, the country delivered a surplus of 197,998 metric tons in 2015 considering the total production of 392,740 metric tons (PSA, 2021), 2.48 kg/year mean per capita total production of 392,740 metric tons (PSA, 2021), 2.48 kg/year mean per capita consumption consumption (PSA, 2018) and population of 78.5 million (2015 Census of Population). This (PSA, 2018)toand translated 202%population of 78.5 million self-sufficiency ratio in (2015 Census that year. of Population). In 2020, This grew the population translated to 86.5to 202% self-sufficiency ratio in million (2015 Census of that year. Inand Population) 2020, the population the national grew to milkfish output 86.5 million climbed (2015 to 414,940 Census of metric Population) and the national milkfish output climbed to 414,940 metric tons. Using the 2020 mean per capita consumption of milkfish of 2.47 kg/year (PSA, 2021b), tons. Using the 2020 mean per capitarequired the Philippines consumption of milkfish approximately of 2.47 a total kg/year of 213,690 (PSA,tons metric 2021b), the Philippines of milkfish in 2020. As required a approximately result, milkfish a total estimatedof surplus 213,690was metric tons of 201,249 milkfish metric tons. in 2020. As athe Equivalently, result, milkfish country estimated would be surplus was 201,249 metric 194% self-sufficient in terms tons. Equivalently, of milkfish. These thereveal countrythatwould be 194% self-sufficient the Philippines remains to bein terms ofmilkfish milkfish. These reveal sufficient. However, that thethe Philippines growth in the remains populationtocount be inmilkfish sufficient. 2020 has However, the caused self- sufficiency growth in theratio to go down. population Nevertheless, count in 2020 hasthis points that the caused country elf-sufficiency hasto go ratio excess supply that down. Nevertheless, can be this alloted points thatforthexports country or has processing excess for futurethat can supply consumption. be alloted for exports or processing for future consumption. Tilapia production in 2015 was 311,684 metric tons (PSA, 2021) and mean per capita consumption was 2.98 kg/year (PSA, 2018). With a national population of 78.5 million (2015 Census of Population), the country’s tilapia requirement was 234,005 metric tons. This PAGE 157 \* Tilapia production in 2015 was 311,684 metric tons (PSA, 2021) and mean per capita consumption was 2.98 kg/year (PSA, 2018). With a national population of 78.5 million (2015 Census of Population), the country’s tilapia requirement was 234,005 metric tons. This resulted to a surplus of 77,679 metric tons and self-sufficiency rate of 133%. Meanwhile, the country’s tilapia output was 304,326 metric tons in 2020 (PSA, 2021). If population count was 86.5 million and mean per capita consumption was down to 2.9 kg/year (PSA, 2021b), then the total national requirement was 250,891 metric tons. In consequence, there was an excess of 53,434 metric tons in the supply. The self-sufficiency rate was 121%. These outcomes indicate that the Philippines continues to be sufficient with tilapia despite the cutback in the total harvest and population increase in 2020. These results thus suggest that the Philippines similarly has a tilapia surplus that can be placed into international trade or processing. With regard to shrimp, the BFAR National Shrimp Production Program (2020 as cited in Shrimp Industry Roadmap, 2021) has indicated that there is81,585,691 shrimp eating people in the country in 2020. This corresponds to a total of 65,268.55 metric ton of shrimps required for that year. If the total production of shrimp in 2020 was 64,132.13 metric tons, it only signifies that the Philippines was only able to meet 98.26 % of the demand and thus is shrimp deficient in that year. B. Economic Status and Activities of Traders and Fishery-Dependent Stakeholders Fish Traders Domestic trading of fish in the country is characterized by a multi-tier distribution channel. Fish produced or caught is not sold directly to consumers instead it undergoeslayers of intermediaries such as brokers, dealers, wholesalers, cooperatives, and retailers before it reaches the consumers. Most of the time, it is the brokers who buy the harvests in major fish terminals which are passed on to wholesalers or viajeros to distribute to other geographical areas. It is only the retailers who serve as the consum- er-facing fish marketers. However, in light of declining supply risks and ensuring to meet customers’ volume requirements, some wholesalers have also considered their own fish production and/or contract farming. A number of traders likewise act as financiers to the fishers. On the other hand, some producer groups or cooperatives have also engaged in fish trade thereby removing a layer of intermediary at the least, to enhance profitability and efficiency. In some cases where fish are processed, processors are also the ones marketing their products. Hence, they act either as local marketers and/or exporters. In 2020, the Municipal Fisherfolk Registration (FishR) of BFAR recorded 121,094 small-scale fish vendors which is a 38% improvement from the 87,467 vendors registered in 2018. Among all regions, Region 6 posted the highest count at 19,471 and this is followed by BARMM with 19,305 fish vendors. All the regions reported an increase in the count of fish vendors but Caraga notably indicated a 142% increment (Table 6.4). 158 Chapter 6: TRADE AND MARKETING Table 6.4. Small-scale Fish vendors and processors in the Philippines, 2018 and 2020 2018 2020 Fish Fish Region Fish Fish Processin Processin Vending Vending g g NCR 1,541 194 2,231 192 CAR 821 64 1,304 118 Region 1 2,498 327 4,006 799 Region 2 4,952 2,081 8,161 3,060 Region 3 6,507 719 9,142 1,033 Region 4-A 4,081 956 6,314 1,209 Region 4-B 6,565 2,480 8,217 2,973 Region 5 3,397 1,194 5,489 1,602 Region 6 13,408 3,636 19,471 4,535 Region 7 3,951 348 6,455 593 Region 8 6,103 947 8,618 1,492 Region 9 3,963 2,010 5,041 2,579 Region 10 2,350 91 3,067 139 Region 11 3,157 224 3,889 310 Region 12 5,875 5,133 6,834 5,483 Region 13 1,469 298 3,550 680 BARMM 16,829 9,972 19,305 11,062 Philippines 87,467 30,674 121,094 37,859 Source: BFAR Fisheries Information Management Center As mentioned As mentionedearlier, processors earlier, also perform processors as marketers also perform of processed as marketers and/or value-added of processed and/or value- products added and and products thusthus maymayalso be considered also be as as considered traders in the traders fishfish in the supply chain. supply BFAR chain. maintains BFAR maintains a record of fish processing establishments in the country. However, data only a record of fish processing establishments in the country. However, data only reflects the bigreflects theplayers big players in the in theincluding industry, industry,the including MSMEs.the MSMEs. Backyard-type Backyard-type processors are processors generallyare left generally leftbut unrecorded, unrecorded, but with the FishR program, small-scale fish processors have with the FishR program, small-scale fish processors have also been documented. The 2020 FishR also been documented. data shows that The from2020 30,674FishR data the in 2018, shows that from registered 30,674ofinsmall-scale number 2018, the registered processors number of have grown small-scale by 23% processors to 37,859 at have the end grown by 23% to 37,859 at the end of 2020. of 2020. The The records on fish records processing on fish establishments processing establishments of of BFAR BFARon the other on the hand other hashas hand documented documented in in 2017 2017 a a total total of of 1,456 1,456 fish fish processing processing establishments establishments in in thethe country, country, includingthe including MSMEs. theMSMEs. With With only 208 establishments recorded in 2015, this exhibits a 600% only 208 establishments recorded in 2015, this exhibits a 600% expansion in the number ofexpansion in the number fishof fish processing processing establishments. establishments. In of In spite spitetheof the hugehuge increase increase on theon the overalloverall and ofand of some some specific regions, such as Region 1 which posted the highest number of 751 establishments in 2017 in specific regions, such as Region 1 which posted the highest number of 751 establishments from none2017in from none 2015, it in 2015, also appears it also appears that that some some establishments establishments might have might have2017. closed by closed by 2017. Some regions, suchSome regions, 2, as Regions such as Regions 8, 10, and 13 as 2, 8, 10,as well and 13 as well BARMM andas CARBARMM and fewer recorded CAR recorded or even fewer zero (0) or even zero (0) establishments establishments in 2017 (Table 6.5). in 2017 (Table 6.5). Table 6.5. Fish Processing Establishments in the Philippines, 2015 and 2017 159 PAGE Chapter 6: TRADE AND MARKETING Table 6.5. Fish Processing Establishments in the Philippines, 2015 and 2017 Fish Processing Establishments REGION 2015 % 2017 % Region 1 0 (0.00) 751 (51.58) Region 2 6 (2.88) 0 (0.00) Region 3 5 (2.40) 36 (2.47) Region 4a 0 (0.00) 78 (5.36) Region 4b 18 (8.65) 26 (1.79) Region 5 22 (10.58) 419 (28.78) Region 6 14 (6.73) 22 (1.51) Region 7 15 (7.21) 19 (1.30) Region 8 35 (16.83) 2 (0.14) Region 9 0 (0.00) 21 (1.44) Region 10 29 (13.94) 15 (1.03) Region 11 0 (0.00) 4 (0.27) Region 12 45 (21.63) 59 (4.05) Region 13 4 (1.92) 0 (0.00) BARMM 12 (5.77) 4 (0.27) CAR 3 (1.44) 0 (0.00) NCR 0 (0.00) 0 (0.00) TOTAL 208 (100.00) 1,456 (100.00) Source: CNFIDP 2016-2020; CPHMAIP 2018-2022 Milkfish Traders Milkfish Traders TheThe partial partial datadata collected collected by the by the DA-BFAR DA-BFAR Regional Regional Offices Offices shows shows thatthat there there are are about about 85 85 locallocal processors of of processors milkfish in in milkfish thethe country (Milkfish country (MilkfishIndustry Roadmap, 2021). Industry Roadmap, 2021). Tilapia Traders Tilapia Traders In the In the Philippines, Philippines, there there are at are least at least(15) fifteen fifteen tilapia(15) tilapia About processors. processors. About half of the half of the processors are located processors are in Region located in 3, while Region 3, the remainder while the are are remainder situated in Region situated 10 with in Region 10 4 processors, with 4 processors, Region Region 9 2, 9 withwithand 2, and Region Region 1 and1 and CAR CAR with 1 with 1 processor processor eacheach (Tilapia (Tilapia Industry Industry Roadmap, Roadmap, 2021). 2021). Seaweeds Traders Seaweeds Traders Unlike in food Unlike fishfish in food such as tilapia such andand as tilapia milkfish, traders milkfish, in seaweeds traders are are in seaweeds classified depending classified depending on on theirtheir locationand location andvolume volume ofof seaweeds seaweeds being beingtraded. traded.AsAsuch, there such, are are there called barangay, called barangay, municipal and provincial traders. The provincial traders are the ones with the highest municipal and provincial traders. The provincial traders are the ones with the highest volume of volume of traded traded seaweeds. seaweeds. According to the report of Philippine Rural Development Project (PRDP), there are 344 According seaweed tradersto in thethe report of Philippine Philippines as Rural of 2018, Development wherein 70 Project traders. are provincial (PRDP),Most thereofare the 344 seaweed traders in the Philippines as of 2018, wherein 70 are provincial traders. traders are ituated in areas where seaweeds production is high. Apart from the individual Most of the traders are there traders, situated areinalso areas where seaweeds seaweeds production buying stations whichisserve high. as Apart from the a rading individual post traders, between the thereseller are (i.e., also farmer seaweedsor trader) and the processing companies. More than 14 buying stations are(i.e., buying stations which serve as a trading post between the seller positioned farmer or in and trader) varioustheparts of the country processing (Table 6). companies. More than 14 buying stations are positioned in various parts of the country (Table 6). Similarly, records on the processors of seaweeds reflect only companies that manufacture and sell carrageenan locally and internationally. The latest count shows that there are 15 Similarly, records on the processors of seaweeds reflect only companies that manufacture seaweeds processors/exporters (Table 6.6). Small local processors of value-added products and sell carrageenan however locally and internationally. The latest count shows that there are 15 seaweeds are unnumbered. processors/exporters (Table 6.6). Small local processors of value-added products however are unnumbered. PAGE 160 \* Chapter 6: TRADE AND MARKETING Table 6.6 Seaweed Traders, Buying Stations and Processors/Exporters in the Philippines, Table 6.6 Seaweed Traders, Buying Stations and Processors/Exporters in the Philippines, 2018 (Source: Seaweeds Industry Roadmap, 2021) 2018 (Source: Seaweeds Industry Roadmap, 2021) Region Traders Buying Stations Processors / Exporters NCR 0 0 0 CAR 0 0 0 Region 1 0 0 0 Region 2 3 0 0 Region 3 0 0 0 Region 4a 22 0 1 Region 4b 55 5 0 Region 5 19 (15) 1 0 Region 6 26 (15) 5 0 Region 7 13 (13) 0 8 Region 8 22 2 0 Region 9 147 (16) Many 6 Region 10 5 (1) 0 0 Region 11 3 (3) 0 0 Region 12 0 0 0 Region 13 10 (1) 1 0 BARMM 22 (6) 0 0 PHILIPPINES 344 (70) 14 15 (w/ others in R9) Tuna Traders Tuna Traders Based Based fromfrom the the National National TunaTuna Management Management PlanPlan (BFAR, (BFAR, 2018), 2018), therethere are are sevenseven (7) (7) tunatuna canneries in the country as of the moment, of which six (6) are located in General Santos canneries in the country as of the moment, of which six (6) are located in General Santos City City and one and (1) is onein (1) is Zamboanga. in In addition, Zamboanga. In there arethere addition, not are less not thanless fifteen than(15) frozen fifteen (15) tuna processors frozen tuna in the Philippines. 80% are situated also in General Santos City and other tuna processors in the Philippines. 80% are situated also in General Santos City nd other tunaprocessors are in processors Metro Manila. are in Metro Manila. Fish Distribution and Transportation Fish Distribution and Transportation ports FishFish and/or ports landing and/or centers are landing centersmain arehubs mainforhubs distribution for of fish for of distribution both local fish forandbothforeign local and markets. foreign Currently, markets. there are Currently, there455 commercial are 455 landing centers commercial landingin the Philippines centers in the (BFAR, Philippines 2018)(BFAR, which includes the 9 major fish ports, the more than 130 municipal fish 2018) which includes the 9 major fish ports, the more than 130 municipal fish ports managed byports managed by PFDAPFDA (PFDA, (PFDA, 2021), 2021), andand the LGU-controlled the LGU-controlled landing landing sites sites and and privatewharves. private wharves.The The Navotas Navotas Fish PortFish Port Complex Complex (NFPC) is (NFPC) is the premier the premier and largest and largest fish center fish center in the in the country. country. It is of It is one onetheofregional the regional ports placed under the jurisdiction, control and supervision of PFDA, which ports placed under the jurisdiction, control and supervision of PFDA, which is landed traditionally is landed traditionally fishing by commercial by commercial fishing boats boats operating in theoperating differentinfishing the different groundsfishing in thegrounds in the Philippines. Apart Philippines. Apart from this, overland vehicles from various provinces also bring fish here. On from this, overland vehicles from various provinces also bring fish here. On a daily basis, about 15 a daily basis, about 15 commercial fishing vessels and overland vehicles unload a total volume commercial fishing vessels and overland vehicles unload a total volume of 300 tons and 50 tons, of 300 tons and 50 tons, respectively. From here, it is not just the major markets of NCR but respectively. From here, it is not just the major markets of NCR but also those in the mainland also those in the mainland Luzon are supplied with fish (PFDA, 2021; Mongoya, 2017). Luzon are supplied with fish (PFDA, 2021; Mongoya, 2017). Besides the commercial landing centers, numerous community fish landing centers (CFLCs) were established Besides by BFAR to the commercial enhance landing fish trade centers, by allowing numerous fisherfolk community fish to maintain landing and (CFLCs) centers sell weregood quality by established fishBFAR and to provide better enhance fishaccess to safe trade by and quality allowing fishtofor the fisherfolk local maintain consumers and sell good at quality the same time. Under the previous CNFIDP, BFAR targeted the establishment of 729 CFLCs fish and provide better access to safe and quality fish for the local consumers at the same time. Under the nationwide. previous CNFIDP, AsBFAR of September 2021, targeted the there are already establishment a total nationwide. of 729 CFLCs of 725 CFLCs in September As of the country2021, there are already a total of 725 CFLCs in the country PAGE \* 161 (Table 6.7),however, only 58% are operational. The remainder are still being constructed (6%) Chapter 6: TRADE AND MARKETING or constructed but not yet operating (35%). The highest number of CFLCs are situated in BARMM, followed by Region 5. CAR and Region 1 had the greatest percentage of CFLCs running, (Table (Table with 6.7),however, all CFCLs 6.7),however, in only only the 58% region 58% are being operational. are operational. operational. The The remainder remainder BARMM arehad are still the being still lowest being constructed proportion constructed (6%)of (6%) operatingor constructed CLFCs with or constructed but 29%. but not not yet operating (35%). The highest number of CFLCs are situated in in yet operating (35%). The highest number of CFLCs are situated BARMM,BARMM, followedfollowed by Region by Region 5. CAR and Region

5. CAR and Region 1 had1 thehadgreatest percentage the greatest percentage of CFLCs running, of CFLCs withrunning, all CFCLs Table in 6.7.region the Community being Fish LandingBARMM operational. Centers,had September the lowest 2021proportion of operating with all CFCLs in the region being operational. BARMM had the lowest proportion of CLFCs with 29%. Total Constructe Constructio operating CLFCs with 29%. Operationa Region Number d / Non- n for l Table 6.7. Community Table 6.7.of Fish LandingFish CFLCs Community Centers, Landing September Operational Centers, 2021 Completion September 2021 CAR 1Total 1 0 Constructe 0 Constructio Operationa 1Region Number 43 43l d / 0Non- n 0 for 2 of25CFLCs 13 Operational 7 Completion5 3 CAR 27 1 241 30 00 4A 1 51*43 2243 220 04 4B 2 54 25 11 13 417 52 5 3 77 27 54 24 213 02 6 4A 61*51* 5022 22 8 41 7 4B 54 54 22 11 41 27 25 8 5 69 77 31 54 21 36 22 9 6 45 61* 32 50 118 12 10 7 4854 4722 27 1 50 11 8 24 69 15 31 36 8 21 9 45 32 11 2 12 15 12 2 1 10 48 47 1 0 CARAG 11 24 15 8 1 A 40 19 21 0 12 15 12 2 1 BARMM CARAG 91 26 49 16 TOTAL A 72540 422 19 257 21 41 0 Source: BARMM BFAR, 2021 91 26 49 16 *With TOTAL damaged725 CFLCs 422 257 41 Source: BFAR, 2021 *With damaged CFLCs The CFLCs were also provided with equipment for processing, selling, and maintaining the The CFLCs were also provided with equipment for processing, selling, and maintaining quality of the fishes. The CFLCs nationwide were supplied mostly with fish stalls and chest the quality of the fishes. The CFLCs nationwide were supplied mostly with fish stalls and chest freezers. The CFLCs Other were itemsalso furnished provided to the with CFLCs equipment include, aquariums, for processing, sealers, selling, and weighing maintaining scales, the freezers. quality Other of the items fishes. furnished The CFLCs to the CFLCs include, nationwide were aquariums, supplied mostly sealers, with fish weighing stalls and scales, chest fish fish containers, cooler boxes, upright freezer, ice making machines, fish dryers, smokehouses, containers, freezers. cooler Otherboxes, items upright freezer, furnished ice making to the CFLCs machines, include, fish dryers, aquariums, sealers, smokehouses, weighing trolley scales, trolley as well as processing packages composed of different utensils, equipment, and tables. as well fish as processing containers, packages composed of different utensils, equipment, dryers, smokehouses, 6.8 and tables. Table Table 6.8 presents cooler boxes, upright the regional distribution freezer, ice making of these itemsmachines, as of Junefish2021. presents trolleythe as regional distribution well as processing of thesecomposed packages items as of of June 2021. different utensils, equipment, and tables. Table Table 6.8.6.8 presentsof Inventory the regional Post-harvest, distribution Tradeof and these items as of June Marketing Equipment 2021.Distributed in Table 6.8. CLFCs, June 2021 Inventory of Post-harvest, Trade and Marketing Equipment Distributed in CLFCs, June 2021 Table 6.8. Inventory of Post-harvest, Trade and Marketing IceEquipment Distributed Fish Stalls Processing in CLFCs, Weighing Fish Cooler Chest Upright Smoke ho cart/ Processing June 2021and Aquarium Sealer,; Scale Container Box Freezer Freezer Making Fish Dryer use Equipment Trolley Tables Region Claddings Machine / Utensils 256 53 86 2 125 24 72 56 3 29 3 146 8 283 75 46 46 2 7 7 4A 395 9 14 92 3 4B 302 63 70 5 722 152 61 6 360 231 734 190 60 3 4 10 8 8 364 118 27 2 9 434 88 10 360 1 180 90 2 3 11 125 22 126 48 6 32 19 27 12 42 22 CARAGA 278 3 72 TOTAL 3909 41 2S7 1278 322 1130 137 13 38 14 94 34 38 Source: BFAR Source: BFAR PAGE PAGE\* \* 162 Fish harvests are typically brought to the buying and trading stations from the landing centers and aquaculture farms. Fish are distributed in the different local markets through various modes including fish carriers and buses for transporting to regional and local markets, tricycles and multi-cabs to nearby public markets, tourist destinations or malls, and motorcycles to remote and upland areas. Table 6.9 presents that as of 2017, there are 256 buying and trading stations all over the country, which are mostly located in the Northern Mindanao region, followed by CALABARZON. Notably, there are no trading or buying posts in the regions of Caraga and CAR. The establishment of CFLCs in these regions hence are significant developments in fish trade and marketing in the area. Accordingly, BFAR has recorded a total of 303 refrigerated vans and fish carriers in 2017 that are being used in maintaining the freshness of the fish during transportation. Table 6.9. Fish Distribution Table 6.9.and Transport Fish DistributionFacilities, 2017Facilities, 2017 and Transport Region Buying Transport and and Trading Distribution Stations (Reefer Vans, Fish Carriers) I – Ilocos Region 35 Chapter 6:207 TRADE AND MARKETING II – Cagayan Valley 2 3 III – Central Luzon 13 - Region Buying Transport IV-A – CALABARZON 56 and 11 and MIMAROPA 22 Trading 16 Distribution V – Bicol Region 6 Stations (Reefer- Vans, VI – Western Visayas 15 Fish - Carriers) VII – Central Visayas 11 2 PAGE VIII – Eastern Visayas 8 - \* IX – Zamboanga 1 - Peninsula X – Northern 72 17 Mindanao XI – Davao Region 8 8 XII – 4 31 SOCCSKSARGEN Caraga - - ARMM 3 8 CAR - - Total 256 303 Source: CPHMAIP 2018-2022 Product Product Forms Forms Filipino consumers still have a high preference for fresh fish. Hence, marketed fish are largely Filipino consumers still have a high preference for fresh fish. Hence, marketed fish are fresh and chilled, with some in frozen forms. Nonetheless, some are also marketed in their largely fresh and chilled, with some in frozen forms. Nonetheless, some are also marketed in their value-added product forms such as dried, smoked, and canned/bottled, among others. value-added product forms such as dried, smoked, and canned/bottled, among others. Amongst many fishes produced in the country, milkfish is one of the common fish present in Amongst the local many market. fishesis a Milkfish produced staple inandthe country, thus has milkfish is a sizable oneofoffish volume the common merchandised fishdaily present in local in the almost all public market. markets Milkfish is ain the staplecountry. Most and thus milkfish has a are sold sizable locally volume of in fishits fresh chilled form merchandised daily in either almost whole or all public deboned. markets in theThe unique country. characteristic Most milkfish areofsold milkfish of in its locally having numerous fresh spines chilled form either constraints whole or its The deboned. marketability. unique With this , of characteristicdeboned milkfish milkfish of have havingbecome numerous a more spinespopular form its constraints of milkfish in both local and international markets. Another milkfish product marketability. With this , deboned milkfish have become a more popular form of milkfish in both that is widely accepted in the market is the milkfish belly. Moreover , milkfish are also being marketed in other processed forms such as marinated, smoked, dried, fermented, canned and bottled (Milkfish Industry Roadmap, 2021). 163 In 2020, 63.8% of total milkfish supply or 262,866 metric tons were marketed and consumed local and international markets. Another milkfish product that is widely accepted in the market is the milkfish belly. Moreover , milkfish are also being marketed in other processed forms such as marinated, smoked, dried, fermented, canned and bottled (Milkfish Industry Roadmap, 2021). In 2020, 63.8% of total milkfish supply or 262,866 metric tons were marketed and consumed locally whereas 131,843 metric tons or equivalently 32% were utilized for processing, which also ended either in local or foreign markets. The total milkfish supply was 392,843 metric tons in 2015, of which 125,676 metric tons were utilized for processing. The proportion of milkfish distributed in the domestic market exhibited a very small reduction from 64.2% in 2015 to 63.8% in 2020 while the percentage of milkfish for processing was maintained at 32% (PSA, 2021b). Tilapia is another fish with large quantities being consumed locally. Similar to milkfish, tilapia is also sold everyday in the wet markets. Tilapia are usually marketed as whole fish in live, fresh, frozen forms. Some are also sold in dried and smoked forms that were produced by small-scale processors. Tilapia fillets are likewise commonly merchandised as fresh and frozen, together with other choice portions and cubes in the supermarkets and other institutional buyers (Tilapia Industry Roadmap, 2021). Tilapia produced in the Philippines are generally distributed to the local market. About 97% of the production is consumed locally. The data on the volume of tilapia used for processing unfortunately is not available (PSA, 2021b). Unlike milkfish and tilapia, shrimps are less consumed by Filipinos although the majority of the harvest is supplied to the local market. Shrimps are marketed in fresh and processed forms. Most of the shrimps that are sold locally are in fresh form. As for processed shrimps, they are in various forms namely head-on (HON); headless, shell-on (HLSON); peeled, deveined, tail-on (PDTO); peeled, deveined (PD); and Nobashi (PDTO, stretched). In particular, processed forms such as the HLSON and peeled shrimps are being supplied to restaurants and food services (Shrimp Industry Roadmap, 2021). Meanwhile, the volume of shrimps that are supplied to the domestic market was 47,099 metric tons in 2020 (PSA, 2021b) which is 15.2% less than the 2015 volume of 55,558 metric tons (PSA, 2018). The percentage share of shrimps distributed to the local market, however, displayed an increase from 90.6% in 2015 to 93.2% in 2020. Additionally, tuna is another common fish consumed by the locals. It is also popular in the local market being sold in the forms of fresh/chilled, specialty cuts such as belly and panga, and canned. For this reason, a sizable portion of the tuna supply is being processed. In 2015, a quarter (179,251 metric tons) of the total tuna supply (714,761 metric tons) was used in processing whereas nearly 68.6% (490,346 metric tons) were put to sale in the local markets (PSA, 2018). Meanwhile, the percentage of the processed tuna in 2020 was 23.9% (168,936 metric tons out of 705,730 metric tons) whereas the local consumption was 68.4% (482,927 metric tons) (PSA, 2021b). Domestic Prices and Margins of Traders Figure 6.4 below exhibits the comparative prices of milkfish at the farmgate, wholesale and retail. The average annual farmgate, wholesale and retail prices of milkfish were generally rising from 2014 to 2019, with steeper increase in recent years. Although contractions were observed, the cutback in the farmgate prices was observed in different years (2016 and 2019) as compared to the wholesale prices which took place in 2019. Farmgate prices of milkfish from 2015 to 2019 grew annually on the average by 3%, while wholesale and retail rose by 1.6% and 7.3% respectively. The estimated average margin of the wholesalers during 2015 to 2019 was about PhP 18.46/kg. Significant reduction in the margin of the wholesalers happened in 2019, but the highest was marked in 2018 at PhP 27/kg. On the other hand, the margin of the retailers for the same period is less than PhP 30/kg, except in 2019 that it ballooned to more than PhP 50/kg. This demonstrates that retailers are receiving profits more than the wholesalers. 164 In like manner, in this period, the share of the retailers on the market price is greater than that of the wholesalers in most years. Retailers have an average share of 27% while wholesalers only 16%. 180 60 160 Ji 50 ...... 140 0. .!: c.. Ji 120 ...... 40 II) C: .f c.. 100 'oi, 30 '- ('tl II) Q,) 80 2 u ·;:: c.. 60 "° 20 .s 40 ..,,~ '- 10 ('tl 20 2 0 0 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 liiiiiiiiiiiiii Prices Farmgate ~ Prices Wholesale liiiiiiiiiiiiii Prices Retail -0..... Marketing Margin Wholesale - 0 -Marketing Margin Retail Figure 6.4. Milkfish Farmgate, Wholesale and Retail Prices, 2015-2019 Source: PSA; Philippine Fisheries Profile 2015-2019 The farmgate, wholesale and retail prices of tilapia for the period 2015-2019, as shown in Figure 6.5, reveals that prices have generally gone up. Wholesale prices posted a minimal growth of 1% from PhP 80.1 per kilogram in 2015 to PhP 80.59 in 2019. Retail prices had a sharper increase of 12% from PhP 106.26 in 2015 to PhP 119.49 in 2019. While the margins of tilapia retailers displayed an upward trend, margins for wholesalers during the period, though fluctuating, were declining. Coming from a margin per kilogram of PhP 5.87 in 2015, it plunged to PhP 0.08 in 2019. The illustration moreover presents that the share of the wholesalers in the price of tilapia was essentially smaller as compared to the retailer. The share of the retailers even displayed expansion through the years. 140 12 120 100 10 -0.0 .),,(, 0. ..c - Q.. 0.0 .),,(, 8 Ill 0. 80 .!: ..c Q.. 6 ... 0.0 ~ Ill (I) 60 2 u 0.0 ·;: C: Q.. 4 -~ 40 <l) ... .),,(, ~ 20 2 2 0 0 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 liiiiiiiiiiiiii Prices Farmgate ~ Prices Wholesale liiiiiiiiiiiiii Price s Retail Marketing Margin Retail - 0 -Marketing Margin Wholesale Figure 6.4. Milkfish Farmgate, Wholesale and Retail Prices, 2015-2019 Source: PSA; Philippine Fisheries Profile 2015-2019 165 As depicted in Figures 6a and 6b, shrimp/prawn prices at both wholesale and retail levels inflated from 2015 to 2018. The wholesale price of the endeavor prawn was PhP 336.87/kg in 2018, with a 36% growth from the PhP 247.67/kg in 2015. Meanwhile, retail price has increased by 22% from PhP 312.77 to PhP 382.82,. The marketing margin of the retailers were fluctuating, exhibiting two peak points in 2015 and 2017 with PhP 65.10/kg and PhP 63.46/kg respectively (Figure 6a). The wholesale price of tiger prawns grew at the same time, although at a lower rate. In 2015, it was only Php 437.33/kg, but in 2018 it increased toPhP 464.48. Retail price shows an increasing trend.. From PhP 500.59 in 2015, it jumped to PhP 583.64 in 2018. The margin of the retailer accordingly expanded by 88%, from PhP 63.26 2015 to PhP 119.16 in 2018 (Figure 6b). 500 80 800 150 400 60 600 300 100 40 400 200 50 100 20 200 0 0 0 0 2015 2016 2017 2018 2015 2016 2017 2018 - Wholesale Price - Retail Price - Wholesale Price - Retail Price . . . -Marketing Margin . . . -Marketing Margin Figure 6.6a Endeavor Prawn Wholesale and Figure 6.6b. Endeavor Prawn Wholesale and Retail Prices, 2015-2018 (Source: Philippine Retail Prices, 2015-2018 (Source: Philippine Fisheries Profile, 2015-2018) Fisheries Profile, 2015-2018) Further the analysis of the financial position of the farmers, traders and retailers in the value chain of fresh P. Monodon and P. Vannamei shrimps in the local market presents that the marketing and trading component of the chain bears the minor portion of the total costs associated in bringing shrimps to the market. Traders and retailers shoulder an equal percentage of the costs Chapter 6: TRADE AND MARKETING - - shoulder 4.3% each for P. Monodon and 6.8% for P. Vannamei. However, the profit gained by middlemen is only less than 4% while retailers receive a seemingly lopsided gain of more than 34% (Table Domestic 6.10 and Table 6.11). Market Chapter 6: TRADE AND MARKETING Table 6.10. Relative Value RevenueFinancial Position of Value Chain Players Costs in Fresh P. Monodon, Profits Price/Margin Domestic Chain Market Added % % Unit Unit Unit Total Player Unit Price Unit Added Total Revenue Cost Costs Profit Profits Margin Margin Price/Margin Value Cost Cost Profit Chain Farmer 400 318.09 Added 318.09 % 91.40 81.91 % 62.10 400 83.3 Unit Unit Unit Total Player Unit Price Unit Added Total Trader 420 Cost 415.00 15.00 4.30 Profit 5.00 3.80 Margin 20 Margin 4.2 Cost Cost Profit Retailer Farmer 480 400 435.00 318.09 15.00 318.09 4.30 91.40 45.00 81.91 34.10 62.10 60 400 12.5 83.3 Trader Total 420 415.00 15.00 348.09 4.30 5.00 131.91 3.80 20 480 4.2 Source: Shrimp 480 Retailer Industry Roadmap, 435.00 2021 15.00 4.30 45.00 34.10 60 12.5 Total 348.09 131.91 480 Table 6.11. Source: Relative Shrimp Financial Industry Position Roadmap, of Value Chain Players in Fresh P. Vannamei, 2021 Domestic Market Table 6.10. Relative Financial Position of Value Chain Players in Fresh P. Monodon, Table 6.11. Relative Financial Position of Value Chain Players in Fresh P. Vannamei, Revenu Domestic Costs Profits Price/Margin Value Market e Chain Added % % Player Unit Unit Unit Unit Total Revenu Unit Added Total Price Cost Costs Profits Profit Price/Margin Margin Margin Value e Cost Cost Profit Chain Added % % 77.10 Farmer 270 Unit 190.64 Unit 190.64 86.40 79.36 Unit 61.30 270 Unit Total Player Unit Added Total % Price Cost Profit Margin Margin Trader 290 285.00 15.00 Cost 6.80 Cost 5.00 3.90 Profit 20 5.70% 17.10 77.10 Retailer Farmer 350 270 305.00 190.64 15.00 190.64 6.80 86.40 45.00 79.36 34.80 61.30 60 270 % Total Trader 290 285.00 220.64 15.00 6.80 129.36 5.00 3.90 350 20 5.70% 17.10 166Source: Shrimp Industry Retailer 350 Roadmap, 305.00 2021 15.00 6.80 45.00 34.80 60 % The Total market price of frigate tuna likewise climbed from the 129.36 220.64 period of 2015 to 2018. It started at 350 The market price of frigate tuna likewise climbed from the period of 2015 to 2018. It started at about PhP 117/kg in 2010 and reached close to PhP 140/kg in 2018. Albeit limited, the data on wholesale price and retail price conveys that the difference between the wholesale price and the income of the retailer was fluctuating (Figure 6.7). 160 26 140 25 120 24 100 23 80 22 60 21 40 20 20 0 19 2015 2016 2017 2018 '--1 Wholesale Price i=i!Retail Price ~ Marketing Margin Figure 6.7. Wholesale and Retail Prices of Frigate Tuna, Chapter 6: 2015-2018 6: TRADE TRADE AND AND MARKETING MARKETING Source: Philippine Fisheries ProfileChapter 2015-2018 In seaweeds In seaweeds seaweeds industry, industry, the the value value chainchain analysis analysis cited cited in thethe in the Industry Industry Roadmap Roadmap (2021) (2021) shows shows In industry, the value chain analysis cited in Industry Roadmap (2021) shows that the that the traders traders per that the traders per se per se (i.e., small (i.e., small se (i.e., and small and large and large traders) large traders) accounts traders) accounts for accounts for approximately for approximately 10% approximately 10% of 10% of the cost of the the produce to cost cost to one produce to produce kilogram of one kilogram one semi-refined kilogram of of carrageenan semi-refined semi-refined (SRC). Small carrageenan carrageenan (SRC). (SRC). traders composed Small traders Small traders almost composed composed 5% almost while large 5% while traders large traders constituted constituted 8-10% of the8-10% costs of of the costs producing almost 5% while large traders constituted 8-10% of the costs of producing SRC. Their shareof producing SRC. Their SRC. share Their in the share profits in howeverthe profits in the profits is however is however minimal comparedminimal is minimal compared compared to other players, other to other to with players, players,8with about with % at about the 88 % about % at the maximum. at the maximum. maximum. Albeit these Albeit Albeit these these appear appear to to be be small small in in light light of of the the farmers farmers and and processors processors which which comprise comprise one- one- appear to third to be small inoflight to one-half one-half of of the farmers the profits profits of and processors of producing producing one one kilogram which kilogram of comprise of SRC, SRC, the one-third the profits profits of totraders one-half of traders in of third the in profits ofnumbers theabsolute producing one are much kilogram much better of SRC, better considering the profits considering the of traders volume of the volume in absolute eaweeds traded of seaweeds numbers traded and are and shortermuch shorter absolute numbers are better time considering period the associated volume with of seaweeds trading as traded compared and to shorter farming andtime period processing time period associated with trading as compared to farming and processing (Tables 6.12, 6.13 associated (Tables with 6.12, trad- 6.13 and 6.14). ingand as 6.14). compared to farming and processing (Tables 6.12, 6.13 and 6.14). Table 6.12. Table Table Relative 6.12. 6.12. Financial Relative Relative Position of FinancialPosition Financial Position Playersof ChainPlayers Value Chain of Value Chain Players SeaweedsIndustry, ofSeaweeds of Seaweeds Industry, Industry, Luzon Luzon Luzon Revenue Revenue Costs Costs Profits Profits Price/Margin Price/Margin Value Value Added Added % % % % Chain Chain Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Total Total Unit Unit Added Added Total Total Player Player Price Price Cost Cost Profit Profit Margin Margin Margin Margin Cost Cost Cost Cost Profit Profit Farmer Farmer 223.30 223.30 65.25 65.25 65.25 65.25 34.26 34.26 158.04 158.04 56.03 56.03 223.3 223.3 47.26 47.26 Large Large 254.10 254.10 242.59 242.59 19.30 19.30 10.13 10.13 11.51 11.51 4.08 4.08 30.8 30.8 6.52 6.52 Trader Trader Processor Processor 472.50 472.50 359.99 359.99 105.90 105.90 55.61 55.61 112.5 112.5 39.89 39.89 218.4 218.4 46.22 46.22 Total Total 190.45 190.45 282.05 282.05 472.5 472.5 Table 6.13. Table Table Relative 6.13. 6.13. Financial Relative Relative of Value Position of FinancialPosition Financial Position of Chain Value Chain Value ofSeaweeds Playersof Chain Players Players of SeaweedsIndustry, Seaweeds Industry, Visayas Industry, Visayas Visayas Revenu Revenu Value ee Costs Costs Profits Profits Price/Margin Price/Margin Value Chain Chain Added Added %% % % Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Total Total Player Player Unit Unit Added Added Total Total Price Price Cost Cost Profit Profit Margin Margin Margin Margin Cost Cost Cost Cost Profit Profit 54.63 54.63 36.80 36.80 Farmer Farmer 92.00 92.00 57.56 57.56 57.56 57.56 34.44 34.44 12.21 12.21 92 92 Large Large 108.00 108.00 100.76 100.76 8.76 8.76 8.31 8.31 7.24 7.24 2.57 2.57 16 16 6.40 6.40 Trader Trader 37.06 37.06 56.80 56.80 Processor Processor 250.00 250.00 147.05 147.05 39.05 39.05 102.95 102.95 36.50 36.50 142 142 Total Total 105.37 105.37 144.63 144.63 250 250 Table 6.14. Table 6.14. Relative Relative Financial Financial Position Position of of Value Value Chain Chain Players Players of of Seaweeds Seaweeds Industry, Industry, Mindanao Mindanao Revenu Revenu Value Value ee Costs Costs Profits Profits Price/Margin Price/Margin Chain Chain Added Added % % % % Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Total167 Total Player Player Unit Unit Added Added Total Total Price Price Cost Cost Profit Profit Margin Margin Margin Margin Cost Cost Cost Cost Profit Profit Farmer Farmer 223.11 223.11 106.29 106.29 106.29 106.29 52.59 52.59 116.82 116.82 59.03 59.03 223.11 223.11 55.78 55.78 Trader 37.06 56.80 Processor 250.00 147.05 39.05 102.95 36.50 142 Total 105.37 144.63 250 Table 6.14. Relative Financial Position of Value Chain Players of Seaweeds Industry, Table 6.14. Relative Financial Position of Value Chain Players of Seaweeds Industry, Mindanao Mindanao Revenu Value e Costs Profits Price/Margin Chain Added % % Unit Unit Unit Unit Total Player Unit Added Total Price Cost Profit Margin Margin Cost Cost Profit Farmer 223.11 106.29 106.29 52.59 116.82 59.03 223.11 55.78 Small 233.10 232.40 9.29 4.60 0.7 0.35 9.99 2.50 Trader Large 266.40 250.62 17.52 8.67 15.78 7.97 33.30 8.33 Trader Processor 400.00 335.40 69.01 34.14 64.59 32.64 133.60 33.40 Total 202.11 197.89 400 RECENT RECENT STATUS STATUS AND AND TRENDS TRENDS IN IN PHILIPPINE PHILIPPINE INTERNATIONALFISHERIES INTERNATIONAL FISHERIESTRADE TRADEAND AND MARKETING MARKETING Global Trade PAGE \* Despite that the majority of fish produce is distributed in the domestic market, the Philippines is considered as a significant player in the global fish trade. It is a sizable fish exporter, albeit it sources some of its fish requirements from other countries given its deficiency in production of some of the fish commodities. Exports The Philippines is a considerable exporter of fish and fishery products. In 2020, it was listed as the 48th exporting country for fish, crustaceans, molluscs and aquatic invertebrates, having contributed 0.3% to the global exports (ITC, 2021). This is however a downgrade from its rank of 41st in 2015. Figure 6.8 below displays that the volume of fish exports of the country has been erratic in the past years, unlike the declining trend of fish production during the same period. Notwithstanding, exports registered 17% and 40% growth rate in volume and value respectively from 2015 to 2019. 5,400,000.00 600,000 5,200,000.00 500,000 5,000,000.00 ;=-- ;=-- ~ ~ 400,000 C: :§_ 4,800,000.00 "' t:'. -e C: .Q 0 0.. u X ::::, 4,600,000.00 300,000 LJ.J "C "C C: c.. 4,400,000.00 ro - ro 0 I- 4,200,000.00 200,000 "'t:'. 0 0.. E 100,000 4,000,000.00 3,800,000.00 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 ~ Total Production ~ Exports ~ Imports Figure 6.8. Fish Production and Volume of Imports and Exports of the Philippines (MT), 2010-2019 (Source: Philippine Fisheries Profile, 2010-2019) 168 Volume and Value of Fishery Exports The volume of the different fishery exports of the Philippines are presented in Figure 6.9. For the past years, tuna (in different product forms) remains the top fishery export of the Philippines in terms of volume. The sizable share of tuna in the total Philippine fish exports explains the trend in most years, particularly the spike in 2017. Seaweeds marketed as phycocolloids in different grades and as dried seaweeds similarly maintain their stance at the second spot. Shrimp/prawns continues to be a major fish export of the country. Although it has been volatile, it somehow recovered in 2019. Exports of crabs/crab’s fat likewise displayed relatively high figures in 2017 and 2018 yet ended at a lower quantity in 2019. Grouper exports moreover started to dwindle towards 2019. Exports of other commodities posted an impressive quantity in 2018. 90,000,000 ■ Tum 80,000,000 ■ seaweejs 70,000,000 ■ shrim::i~ bU,000,UUU ■ C:rr1bc:;/r:rr1h, frlt f(. rr.:ih 11P.:rt ■ uetopus 50,000,000 • CroJ per 40,000,000 • ~q11 rl rinrl C:uttlP:i,1 30,000,000 ornamental Hsh. Lve 20,000,000 • Round.scad • ~p;:i C:ur 1mhPr 10,000,000 ■ other; 201'.; 201G 2017 2018 2019 Figure 6.9. Major Fishery Exports of the Philippines in terms of Volume (MT), 2015-2019 Source: Philippine Fisheries Profile, 2015-2019 The value of Philippine fish exports was progressing from 2015 to 2018 when the export volume reached its peak. However, it drastically fell to PhP 57.9 billion in 2019. Accordingly, it was dominated consistently by tuna, followed by seaweeds, throughout this entire period. The variability in the volume of shrimp/prawn exports appears also to influence its export values as it similarly demonstrated instability during this time. Nonetheless, it regained its position at the 3rd spot in 2019. Meanwhile, crabs/crabs fat has steadily overtaken shrimp/prawns from 2015 to 2018, but immensely dropped at the end of the period. Grouper in the same way has been showing remarkable values during the reference period. Interestingly, other fishery commodities had a substantial contribution to the total exports value in 2018 (Figure 6.10). 500,000 450,000 ■ Tuna 400,000 ■ Seaweeds ■ Shrimps 350,000 ■ Crabs/crabs fat & c 300,000 ■ Octopus 250,000 ■ Grouper 200,000 ■ Squid and Cuttle/is 150,000 Ornamental Fish, L 100,000 ■ Roundscad 50,000 ■ Sea Cucumber 0 ■ others Figure 6.10. Major Fishery Exports of the Philippines in terms of Value (‘000 Php), 2015-2019 Source: Philippine Fisheries Profile, 2015-2019 169 Being the leading export fish commodity of the Philippines, tuna comes in various export product forms: fresh/chilled, loins/whole tuna, canned/pouched and whole gilled/gutted frozen. Canned tuna makes up the bulk of the tuna exports. It is interesting to note that there is an increasing utilization of domestic catch from commercial fishing by the domestic canneries, of which smaller volumes are being processed as smoked, boiled, and frozen for domestic and export markets equally (BFAR, 2018). With a collective volume of 119,955 metric tons valued at PhP 24.56 billion, tuna exports accounted for 45% of the total fishery exports of the Philippines in 2019 (Philippine Fisheries Profile 2019). Seaweeds are moreover consistent top fishery commodities exported by the Philippines. With a total volume of 48,026 metric tons, valued at PhP 12.87 billion, seaweeds constitute 18.2% of the total fish exports of the Philippines in 2019. Seaweed exports are either for human consumption for food or industrial use. The latter comprises the larger share in seaweeds exports when they are further marketed in fresh, chilled/frozen and dried form as well as in carrageenan forms. Carrageenan was 57% of seaweeds exports in 2019 (Philippine Fisheries Profile 2019). Shrimps/Prawns are likewise important fishery export commodities of the Philippines. Exported shrimps are in the forms of HON, HLSON, PDTO, PD and Nobashi. Nobashi is a special form of processed shrimp that are peeled, deveined, tail-on and stretched which is mainly marketed in Japan and commonly used for tempura (Shrimp Industry Roadmap, 2021). In 2019, the combined fresh/chilled or frozen, dried shrimps and prepared/preserved ones totaled to 6,544 MT of shrimps exported by the Philippines or equivalently 2.5% of the total fishery exports (Philippine Fisheries Profile 2019). Compared to tuna, shrimps and seaweeds, milkfish has a very minimal volume being sold in the international market. Roughly 10% are put into the export market, which is fresh frozen whole, split, sliced, or deboned in different forms such as marinated, smoked, dried and vacuum- packed (Milkfish Industry Roadmap, 2021). Tilapia is comparably a domestic fish product rather than an export, such that the quantity exported are very low. The Philippines has only exported a total of 238 metric tons of tilapia from 2015 to 2018 and none in 2019 (PSA, 2018 and PSA, 2021b). Exported tilapia are mostly in fillet form and whole-gutted frozen tilapia. The major country destination of tilapia fillets is USA (Tilapia Industry Roadmap, 2021). Major Destinations of Fishery Exports The Philippine fish and fishery products are essentially exported around the globe. For the past years, the United States of America generally remains as the leading country of destination of Philippine fish and fish products, in terms of volume. It was only in 2017 that exports to Germany surpassed that of the United States of America. Along with the United States of America, the consistent major country destinations of Philippine fish and fishery product exports from 2015 to 2019 are Germany, Spain, UK, Japan, China, and Taiwan. Hongkong is another major export destination for the said period. Recently, countries such as Korea and the Netherlands were becoming part of the top 10 markets of Philippine fish and fishery products. However, France, Canada, Belgium, Singapore and Thailand were no longer part of the major destinations (Philippine Fisheries Profile 2015-2019). In the same way, the United States of America was the principal export destination of Philippine fish and fishery products in terms of value throughout 2015 to 2019, followed steadily by Japan. Other constant key export markets based on value were Germany, Hongkong, UK, Spain, Taiwan and China. Italy, Netherlands and South Korea were also sighted as part of the top 10 destinations in some years 170 (Philippine Fisheries Profile 2015-2019). Fresh/chilled/frozen tuna exports mainly go to Japan, USA and Spain whereas prepared/preserved varieties largely proceed to the countries of Germany, United Kingdom, Japan and USA. It was noted that there were changes in the top destinations of Philippine tuna. The markets of Hong Kong, France, Taiwan and UK were no longer part of the major destinations for fresh chilled/frozen tuna but new countries were cited namely, Switzerland, Portugal, Netherlands and Germany. For prepared/preserved tuna, Canada, Taiwan and Papua New Guinea were not included anymore in the top markets in 2019. Spain, Poland, Italy, France and the United Arab Emirates entered the list (Philippine Fisheries Profile 2015 and 2019). The top countries of destination for Philippine seaweed exports are USA (24.7%), China (12.2%), Spain (6.9%), Russia (4.2%) and Belgium (41.5). China is the main importer of fresh, chilled or dried seaweeds, while the USA is the primary foreign market for carrageenan. Other major export markets for fresh, chilled or dried seaweeds are Brazil and Argentina, and for carrageenan are Denmark, Netherlands, Mexico, Thailand, and Germany. Noticeably, France and South Korea as well as UK, France, Australia, Brazil and China were nonexistent in the major destinations of fresh, chilled/dried seaweeds and carrageenan respectively (Philippine Fisheries Profile 2015 and 2019). Out of the 6,544 metric tons of shrimp exports, 38% and 20% went to Japan and USA respectively. Other major country destinations were South Korea, Taiwan and France for frozen shrimps, United Arab Emirates, Hongkong and Palau for fresh or chilled shrimps, China for dried shrimps, and United Kingdom, Taiwan and Canada for prepared and preserved shrimps. Hong Kong and Canada are apparently not present in the top export markets for frozen shrimps, while there are no more Taiwan, Guam, and South Korea for fresh or chilled shrimps. The major markets of dried shrimps no longer include Taiwan but already consisted of China and US (Philippine Fisheries Profile 2015 and 2019). Exporters It can be observed that a significant proportion of fish exports goes to the different EU countries. Owing to the efforts of BFAR to perform inspection audits on establishments processing and exporting fishery products, to ensure compliance to both local regulations and standards and export market requirements, the Philippines was able to maintain the EU as a major trading partner despite the strict food safety requirements of the said region. As of May 2021, records show that there are 119 export-ready BFAR-approved establishments. Most of these establishments are situated in NCR. It is notable that no establishments have been approved in regions 2, 10, BARMM and CAR. The number of EU-approved establishments on the other hand reached 70. A little over one-third of these establishments are located in Region 12. Approximately 20% are stationed in Region 9 and another 20% in NCR. There are no EU-approved establishments in regions 2, 5, 8, 13, BARMM and CAR (Table 6.15). The same table also shows that, in 2015, BFAR register presents that there is a total of 95 BFAR- approved establishments in the country, with Region 4a comprising most of the establishments. No establishments in regions 3, BARMM, CAR and NCR were approved at this time. Meanwhile, in that same year, there were 52 EU-approved establishments, of which 84% were located in Region 12. BFAR has not approved any establishment coming from regions 2, 5, 6, 8, 11, 13, BARMM, CAR and NCR. On the overall, it appears that the number of establishments approved for exportation of fish and fishery products has improved from the 2015 levels. About 25% and 35% growth were noted in the count of BFAR- and EU-approved establishments respectively. However, it is noticeable that some regions 171 posted negative growth between 2015 and 2021. If it were not for these reductions, the tally would have been higher. For BFAR-approved, the four establishments ofChapterRegion 26:inTRADE 2015 were all gone in 2021. In AND MARKETING Region 4a, the 32 establishments in 2015 fell into 11 in 2021. Further, the lone establishment in Region 10 became non-existent in 2021. Meanwhile, the drop in the count for EU-approved establishments was in only

2021. Meanwhile, observed the drop in Region in the count 4a, wherein for count the 2021 EU-approved establishments is less than wasofonly 10 establishments observed the 2015 statistics. in Region 4a, wherein the 2021 count is less than 10 establishments of the 2015 statistics. Table 6.15. Table 6.15. Number Numberof ofBFAR BFAR Approved Approvedand andEUEU Approved ApprovedFishery FisheryBased BasedEstablishments Establishments in the Philippines per Region, 2015 and 2021 (As of 31 May 2021) in the Philippines per Region, 2015 and 2021 (As of 31 May 2021) BFAR Approved EU Approved REGION Establishments Establishments - 2015 2021 % Growth 2015 2021 % Growth Region 1 1 2 100.0 1 1 0.0 Region 2 4 0 -100.0 0 0 Region 3 0 7 1 3 200.0 Region 4a 32 11 -65.6 14 4 -71.4 Region 4b 7 10 42.9 1 1 0.0 Region 5 1 7 600.0 0 0 - Region 6 7 13 85.7 0 1 Region 7 10 17 70.0 2 4 100.0 Region 8 1 3 200.0 0 0 - Region 9 17 7 -58.8 11 14 27.3 Region 10 1 0 -100.0 1 1 0.0 Region 11 3 4 33.3 0 1 Region 12 9 10 11.1 21 25 19.0 Region 13 2 3 50.0 0 0 - BARMM 0 0 - 0 0 - CAR 0 0 - 0 0 - NCR 0 25 0 15 TOTAL 95 119 25.3 52 70 34.6 Source: CNFIDP 2016-2020; BFAR Website, 2021 Looking Looking specifically specifically into into our our major fish major exportfish export commodities, commodities, Table 6.16 Table 6.16 exhibits exhibits that as that as of end of of May 2021 end of tuna May had the 2021 greatest tuna had the number greatest of establishments number of at 52, establishmentsfollowed at 52, by shrimps followed by with shrimps a with total a oftotal 43 establishments. Milkfish of 43 establishments. have reached Milkfish 21 establishments have reached whilewhile 21 establishments tilapia havehave tilapia 6 6 establishments. Apparently, there are no seaweed establishments in the list. establishments. Apparently, there are no seaweed establishments in the list. The table further reveals that the majority of the establishments for tuna are EU approved (65%), contrary to shrimp, The table milkfishthat further reveals andthe tilapia that have majority of themore BFAR approved establishments establishments for tuna are EU approved at 70%, 57% and 67% respectively. In terms of location, NCR (31%) houses most of these (65%), contrary to shrimp, milkfish and tilapia that have more BFAR establishments, followed by Region 12 (28%) in totality. For tuna and milkfish, the approved establishments at 70%, 57%are establishments andsituated 67% respectively. in Region 12 In termsinstances. in many of location, NCR and Shrimp (31%) houses tilapia most of these establishments establishments, meanwhile are followed by in predominantly Region 12 (28%) NCR. Although in not totality. as For many tuna andRegion as in milkfish,12the establishments or NCR, it is are situated interesting to in Region 12 note that Regionin 4a many instances. houses Shrimp and establishments of tilapia establishments these four commodities. meanwhile are predominantly in NCR. Although not as many as in Region 12 or NCR, it is interesting to note that Region 4a houses establishments of these four commodities. PAGE \* 172 establishments are situated in Region 12 in many instances. Shrimp and tilapia establishments meanwhile are predominantly in NCR. Although not as many as in Region 12 or NCR, it is interesting to note that Region 4a houses establishments of these four commodities. Table 6.16. BFAR Approved and EU Approved Establishments for Tuna, Shrimps, Milkfish and Tilapia, Table 6.16. May BFAR2021 Approved and EU Approved Establishments for Tuna, Shrimps, Milkfish and Tilapia, May 2021 Tuna Shrimps Milkfish Tilapia REGION BFAR EU BFAR EU BFAR EU BFAR EU Approved Approved Approved Approved Approved Approved Approved Approved Region 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 Region 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Region 3 0 0 3 1 3 1 0 0 Region 4a 1 1 5 0 2 0 1 0 Region 4b 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Region 5 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 Region 6 0 0 3 1 1 0 0 0 Region 7 0 1 4 3 0 0 0 0 Region 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Region 9 0 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 Region 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Region 11 3 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 Region 12 6 16 1 4 0 6 0 1 Region 13 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 ARMM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CAR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NCR 6 11 9 3 4 1 3 1 TOTAL 18 34 30 13 12 9 4 2 Apart from shrimp processing-exporting establishments shown above, there are also Apart from exporters shrimp without processing-exporting processing establishments plants but performs shown purely trading above,Asthere business. cited are in thealso Shrimp Chapter 6: TRADE AND MARKETING exporters without processing plants but performs purely trading business. As cited in the Industry Roadmap (2021), a total of seven (7) exporters was recorded by BFAR. These are situated in NCR and Region 3 (Table 6.17). PAGE Shrimp Industry Roadmap (2021), a total of seven (7) exporters was recorded by BFAR. These \* Table in are situated 6.17. NCRShrimp and Traders Region in 3 the Philippines, (Table 6.17). 2020 Province / City Number Table 6.17. Shrimp Traders in the Philippines, 2020 Numbe Province / City r Region 3 Bulacan 2 NCR Manila 2 Paranaque 1 Quezon City 1 Taguig 1 TOTAL 7 Source: BFAR-National Shrimp Production Program In the same way, seaweeds are marketed internationally through two types of exporters: (1) exporters of dried seaweeds In the same way, seaweeds (RDS); and are marketed (2) processor-exporters internationally through twoof carrageenan. The latest (1) types of exporters: record exporters indicates of dried that there are seaweeds at least (RDS); and15 RDS (2) exporters and 16 processor-exporters processor-exporters in the country. of carrageenan. The latest RDS exporters and processor-exporters turned out to be situated in selected record indicates that there are at least 15 RDS exporters and 16 processor-exporters areas such as Cebu, in the Zamboanga country. City, andand RDS exporters Cavite. Though, there is one processor-exporter processor-exporters turned out to beeach in Bulacan situated and Laguna in selected areas such as(Table Cebu,6.18). Zamboanga City, and Cavite. Though, there is one processor-exporter each in Bulacan and Laguna (Table 6.18). Table 6.18. RDS Exporters and Carrageenan Processor-Exporters in the Philippines, 173 2021 Carrageenan such as Cebu, Zamboanga City, and Cavite. Though, there is one processor-exporter each in Bulacan and Laguna (Table 6.18). Table Table 6.18. 6.18. RDS RDSExporters Exportersand andCarrageenan CarrageenanProcessor-Exporters in the Processor-Exporters in the Philippines, Philippines,2021 2021 Carrageenan REGION RDS Exporter Processor- Exporter Region 3 - 1 Region 4a 1 4 Region 7 8 8 Region 9 6 3 TOTAL 15 16 Source: Seaweeds Industry Roadmap, 2021 Imports ImportsInterestingly, the Philippines is also an importer of fish and fishery products. Figure 8 above also illustrates Interestingly, that the the fish imports Philippines is alsoofan theimporter country offromfish2010 andto 2019 was fishery ascending, products. in plain Figure 8 abovesight balancing also the descent illustrates that theinfish theimports domestic of fish production. the country fromThe value 2010 of fishwas to 2019 imports accordingly ascending, was in plain risingbalancing sight during the the said descent period. While thedomestic in the Philippines onlyproduction. fish takes 0.4% The of thevalue total value of global of fish importsfish imports in 2020, it ranks 34th on the overall (ITC, 2021). This is ten notch higher accordingly was rising during the said period. While the Philippines only takes 0.4% of the than the ranking backvalue total in 2015of at 44thfish global . imports in 2020, it ranks 34th on the overall (ITC, 2021). This is ten notch higher than the ranking back in 2015 at 44th . Volume and Value of Fishery Imports Volume and Value of Fishery Imports The volume of fishery imports was essentially on an uphill from 2015 to 2019. More than The volume of fishery imports half of the importation was essentially is composed of chilled oron an uphill frozen from 2015primarily fish, consisting to 2019. ofMore tuna,than half mackerel ofand thesardines. importation Tunaiswas the composed of fish leadingchilled or frozen import of thefish, consisting country primarily in terms of of in volume tuna, thismackerel reference and sardines. Tuna was the leading fish import of the country in terms period except in 2017. Sardines, considered as another top fish import of the Philippines, of volume in this was reference period except in 2017. slowly picking up again starting 2017. Sardines, considered as another top fish import of the Philippines, was slowly picking up again starting 2017. Apart from the chilled/frozen fish, prawn feeds as well as flour, meals and pellets of fish, crus- taceans, and mollusks fit and unfit for human consumption, were major fishery import commodities, PAGE making up an average of 2.5% and 3.7% accordingly of the aggregated fish imports of the country during \* the period of 2015-2019. While volume of imported prawn feeds generally displayed an increasing trend, the flour, meals and pellets exhibited inconsistency during this time (Figure 6.11). 450,000 400,000 350,000 300,000 250,000 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 0 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 ■ Tuna ■ Mackarel ■ Sardines ■ Prawn feeds ■ Flou r, meals and pellets of fish Figure 6.11. Major Fishery Imports of the Philippines in terms of Volume (MT), 2015-2019 Source: Philippine Fisheries Profile, 2015-2019 174 The aggregated value of fish imports has gone up from PhP 18.8 billion in 2015 to nearly PhP 38.9 billion in 2019. An average of about 63% of the total import value from 2015 to 2019 was contributed by the top fishery commodities: 58% from chilled/frozen tuna, mackerel and sardines; 2% from prawn feeds; and 2% from the flour, meals and pellets of fish crustaceans, and mollusks. Throughout these years, tuna supplied the biggest share in the import value, followed by mackerel (Figure 6.12). 25,000,000 20,000,000 15,000,000 10,000,000 5,000,000 0 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 ■ Tuna ■ Mackarel ■ Sardines ■ Prawn feeds ■ Flour, meals and pellets of fish Figure 6.12. Major Fishery Imports of the Philippines in terms of Value (‘000 PhpP, 2015-2019 (Source: Philippine Fisheries Profile, 2015-2019) Interestingly, tuna is also the leading import and export fish commodity of the country. In 2019, total volume imported reached more than 192,000 MT valued at USD 288.8 million. It consists of fresh/chilled/frozen varieties and used as raw materials for canning. Papua New Guinea remains to be the largest source of tuna (Philippine Fisheries Profile 2019). The Philippines is also importing shrimps. The volume imported has been growing overall. The nearly 5,000 MT shrimp import in 2018 was the highest between 2015 to 2020. Shrimp volume imports was on the other hand the lowest in 2020 as adversely affected by the Covid-19 pandemic. The import value of shrimps followed the same trend as with the imports volume. Similarly, the value of shrimp imports that reached USD 30 million in 2018 was the highest in the same period (Shrimp Industry Roadmap, 2021). Imports of milkfish are modest and erratic from 2015 to 2019. The highest import volume during this time was achieved in 2017 when it reached 450 MT (PSA, 2018). Imports were mostly frozen milkfish fillets (Milkfish Industry Roadmap, 2021). Imports of tilapia are similarly low. Importation of tilapia was also at peak in 2017 with 235 MT (PSA, 2018). Tilapia imported in recent years dwindled from 91 metric tons in 108 to 55 metric tons in 2020 (PSA, 2021b). Major Sources of Fishery Imports The People’s Republic of China remains to be the main supplier of fishery products to the Philippines. In 2019, about one-third of Philippine fishery imports volume came from China. In terms of import value, China is also the leading country at Php 10.6 billion. Other major sources of imported fish are Papua New Guinea, Vietnam, Japan, Indonesia, Korea and Taiwan (Philippine Fisheries Profile 2019). 175 Aside from Papua New Guinea, other major suppliers of tuna are China, Kiribati, Taiwan, Indonesia, Vietnam, Republic of Marshall Islands, Spain, South Korea, and the United States of America. Mackerel is mainly sourced from China. Nearly three-fourths of the imported mackerel in 2019 came from China. Other sources of mackerel are South Korea, Japan, New Zealand, Vietnam, Norway, Taiwan, Russian Federation, USA and Malaysia. On the other hand, Japan is the lead supplier of sardines for the Philippines in 2019. In the past, the majority of the imports came from China and India. Sardine imports also came from countries of Oman, Russia, and Pakistan (Philippine Fisheries Profile 2019). In recent years, Vietnam was the major source of prawn feeds, with roughly 90% of the imports coming from them. Smaller amounts of prawn feeds come from China, Taiwan, Thailand, Ecuador, Belgium, Japan, USA and Australia. Fish flour, meals and pellets were principally obtained from Italy. In 2019, 13,598 MT out of 21,404 MT of imports originated from this country. Other suppliers were Peru, Thailand, USA, Argentina, France, Germany and South Korea (Philippine Fisheries Profile 2019). Chapter 6: TRADE AND MARKETING Balance of Trade Table 6.19 shows that the Philippines has a trade surplus for fishery products from 2015 to 2019 despite that there were occasions that the net volume traded were negative. The trade surplus was expanding from 2015 to 2018 but dropped to roughly Php19 billion in 2019. TableBalance Table 6.19. 6.19. Balance of Trade of Trade ofofFishery Fishery Products, Products, 2015-2019 2015-2019 FOB Value Quantity Trade (Million (MT) Balance Pesos) 2015 22,611 -177,019 2016 22,926 -126,946 2017 31,860 -54,636 2018 48,534 -51,657 2019 18,989 -241,938 Source: Philippine Fisheries Profile, 2015-2019 Earlier discussions point that trade balances for specific fish products vary. However, records exhibited that the Philippines is a net exporter, in particular, for tuna, seaweeds, milkfish lier discussions and tilapia.point that trade balances for specific fish products vary. However, ords exhibited that the Philippines is a net exporter, in particular, for tuna, seaweeds, kfish andC.tilapia. Assessment of the Trade and Marketing Sub-sector Targets The overall goal of the trade and marketing sub-sector under the Comprehensive National Fisheries Industry Development Plan (CNFIDP) (Medium Term 2016-2020) was to increase the quantity andof C. Assessment value theof Trade traded fish andandMarketing fishery products for domesticTargets Sub-sector and export and address the challenges of the sector. overall goal Table 6.20 of the outlines trade andthemarketing specific goals and targets under sub-sector of the sector that will lead to the the Comprehensive National achievement of expanding the volume and value of traded fish locally and internationally. The heries Industry Development Plan (CNFIDP) (Medium Term 2016-2020) was to increase table moreover presents the corresponding results and assessment of the accomplishments for quantityeach andtarget valueforof thetraded fishtoand period 2016 fishery 2020. products While the for data on the domestic and accomplishments exportoand is limited 2019-address challenges 2021,ofthe the sector.provides an indication of how far the sector was able to achieve the targets. evaluation The assessment shows that the sector is seemingly half-way through meeting the targets. It also le 6.20 outlines the specific goals and targets of the sector that will lead to the achievement reveals that much of the targets that has been delivered were leaning towards the key business- expanding the services as-usual volumeof the anddivision, valuesuch of as traded fish locally the participation and internationally. and organization The table of trade fairs and eover presents the corresponding results and assessment of the accomplishments for h target 176for the period 2016 to 2020. While the data on the accomplishments is limited to 9-2021, the evaluation provides an indication of how far the sector was able to achieve the exhibits, business matchings, industry and investment fora, price monitoring, credit facilitation and capacity building activities, among others. In consequence, activities that require research work, such as the surveys and review of laws, and relatively immense external workforce, such as development of ICT and webpage, were observed to have nil to low progress. Notwithstanding, these efforts have positively impacted the stakeholders. The CNFIDP survey results disclosed that due to better presentation or display, the products of the marketers become more marketable. The improved quality of the fish products resulted in less spoilage that led to higher profits. The trade fairs were instrumental to the exposure and promotion of different products, easy access to market and market information, gaining new customers and market expansion. The training also imparted knowledge on different marketing strategies. All of these favorably affected the bottom lines of the traders. These effects apparently were manifested further in the achievements of the fishery sector. Principally, the earlier discussions demonstrated that the total production value has gone up despite that there was a decline in the aggregated production volume. Inflation may have played a role in pushing the values up, but it may also signal that enhancement of the quality of the fishery products had something to do with it. While exports displayed volatility from 2015 to 2019, volume and value of fish exported in 2019 still ended at a higher level than the 2015. BFAR’s register displayed an increase in the number of small-scale fish vendors and processors in the country. The number of fish processing establishments, which includes the MSMEs, likewise swelled from 2015 to 2017. The count of BFAR- and EU-approved establishments have also expanded. This implies that more people are engaged in livelihoods dependent on trade and marketing of fisheries in the country. Improved engagement in fish trade and marketing similarly points that trading and marketing of fish commodities is a worthwhile and profitable endeavor and hints that the market is possibly expanding. Fish availability and accessibility further appears to be better. With more CFLCs operating and equipment provided to the communities, they are able to bring harvests faster to the market and avoid post-harvest losses, generating added incomes. In some instances, this venue provided incentives for small-scale fishers to put their harvests together to be able to access the market and increase the value of their products. The establishments of CFLCs are hence significant developments in fish trade and marketing particularly in areas where there were no buying or trading posts for fish, such as in CAR. 177 178 Table 6.20. Assessment of the Trade and Marketing Targets Strategies and Targets Accomplishments Assessment Remarks Expand the market for sustainable fish and fishery products (domestic and export)

1. Conduct fish consumer preference survey Activities to be Target(s): To be completed conducted: - Fish consumer preference survey – 1 - Identification and profiling of survey areas - Preparation of project proposal and MOA - Conduct of survey - Report submission and monitoring data analysis - Presentation of results

2. Conduct industry fora and consultation meetings Source of data: BFAR related to trade and marketing Accomplishment Report Target(s): 2019 and 2020 - Forum 2019: 15 Investment/industry fora To be completed National – 5; Regional – 90 2020: 15 Investment/industry fora Activities to be conducted: - Consultation Meeting To be completed - Fora and Consultation Provincial – 810; Regional – 180 oe meetings - Uploading of report to ICT

3. Facilitation of market access of fishery-related Source of data: BFAR individuals/cooperatives/association/organization to Accomplishment Report domestic and export market 2019 and 2020 A. Organize and/or participate in trade 2020: Completed Need to identify actual fair/seafood show - 326 agri-aqua fair/exhibit number of international Target(s): conducted trade fairs - Organized / Participated trade fairs/seafood - 569 agri-aqua fair/exhibit organized/participated show participated Local – 820; International – 20 2019: Strategies and Targets Accomplishments Assessment Remarks - 179 agri-aqua fair/exhibit participated B. Business and trade missions To be completed Target(s): - Business / Trade Missions – 9 C. Business / market matching 2020: 133 market matching activities Completed Target(s): 2019: 102 market matching activities - Provincial Market Matching – 405 D. Marketing through E-commerce To be completed Activities to be Target(s): conducted: - Suppliers, buyers and traders - Identification of available identified/invited – 500 platforms - Suppliers, buyers and traders registered – - Identification / invitation / 255 coordination with suppliers, buyers and traders - Registration of suppliers, buyers and traders - Monitoring Ensure the availability of sufficient supply in foodfish deficient areas

1. Conduct of market linkages & actions to ensure To be completed Activities to be food security conducted: Target(s): - Identification of food fish - Food fish deficiency/sufficiency data – 1 deficient and sufficient areas - Literature research and baselining - Needs analysis 179 180 Strategies and Targets Accomplishments Assessment Remarks - Baseline data validation - Updating of map/profile - Presentation of validated and updated data

2. Provision and management of infrastructure & 2021: Completed Source of data: institutional services established and BFAR, Status of CFLCs Target(s): distributed: as of Sep 2021 As As of ofSep Sep2021: - Assessment of existing infrastructure and 725 CFLCs BFAR, Inventory and -- BFAR BFARhashasestablished and distributed: institutional • 3,909 Fish stalls and Status of Freezers. Ice • 725 CFLCs services and needs analysis – 1 claddings making and cold storage • • 3,909 Fish stalls and • 41 Aquariums facilities as of June 30, claddings • 5 Sealers 2021 • 41 Aquariums scales • 5 Sealers containers • • 257 257Weighing Weighingscales Boxes • • 1,278 1,278Fish Fishcontainers Chest freezers • • 322 322Cooler CoolerBoxes freezers • • 1,130 1,130Chest freezers machines • • 137 137Upright Uprightfreezers 38 Fish dryers • • 13 13Ice Icemaking makingmachines Smokehouses • • 38 Fish dryers processing • • 14 14Smokehouses equipment/utensils • • 94 94 Fishprocessing Fish Cart/trolley equipment/utensils Processing stainless • • 34 34Cart/trolley tables • • 38 38Processing stainless tables

3. Strengthen inter-agency collaboration and As of Sep 2021: To be completed Source of Data: BFAR, public-private partnership to reduce distribution - Number of CFLCs turned-over and 0 Status of CFLCs as of Sep crisis operational: 422 2021 Target(s): - Infrastructure facilities constructed Activities to be conducted: - MOA established on inter-agency - Consultations with LGUs collaboration and and industry players Strategies and Targets Accomplishments Assessment Remarks - Public consultation - Project proposal preparation and public consultation - MOA signing - Pilot Project implementation - Pilot implementation - Monitoring & evaluation Phase 1 - Project implementation Phase 2 - Monitoring & evaluation Phase 2 - Post evaluation upon project completion

4. Include the investors/businesses located To be completed Activities to be conducted: in/targeting in foodfish-deficient areas in the - Public-private investment priority plan consultation Target(s): - Feasibility study - Investment priority plan - Development of IPP - Proposal and approval of IPP - IPP implementation - Monitoring & evaluation - Review and updating Increase in the number of capacitated / competitive fishery based MSMEs that can enter the market

1. Conduct capacity building / training (on credit, 12% of target stakeholders availed To be completed Source of data: CNFIDP entrepreneurship and marketing) and participation capacity building activities* Survey in trade fairs/fora/meetings and business and trade 10% participated in trade fairs / missions expositions and product promotion* Target(s): Activities to be conducted: - Profiling of fishery-based MSMEs – 1 - Conduct profiling of - Developed training modules - 5 fishery-based MSMEs 181 eo o 182 Strategies and Targets Accomplishments Assessment Remarks - Training on credit access – 136 - Conduct training needs - Training in market access – 136 assessment - Develop and prepare training modules - Conduct trainings for credit access and market access - Participation to seafood trade

2. Facilitation of access to financial support (equipment, infrastructure, capital) Target(s): To be completed - Investment Forums – 85 2020: 15 Investment fora Source of data: BFAR 2019: 15 Investment fora - Status monitoring of credit facilitated – 20 Accomplishment Report - Provision of technical assistance to access 8% target stakeholders availed of o eo 2019 and 2020 credit - 30 credit and investment facilitation Source of data: CNFIDP service * Survey Establish a comprehensive market information system

1. Implementation of a comprehensive market Major fishery commodities research program that will address the trade with VCA as part of the concerns of the primary and emerging markets in roadmap: both domestic and foreign sectors To be completed - Tuna Target(s): - Milkfish - Task force to develop national baseline data – - Tilapia 1 ••o - Seaweeds - Comprehensive National Fisheries Database - Sardines - Shrimp –1 - Market mapping / Regional VCAs Activities to be conducted: - Creation of task force Strategies and Targets Accomplishments Assessment Remarks - Establishment of Comprehensive National Fisheries Database - Conduct of market mapping - Evaluation of regional value chain analysis results - Finalization of regional value chain analysis - Updating of the value chain analysis - National consolidation

2. Development of Information, Education and Source of data: CNFIDP Communication (IEC) program for market Survey, 2021 information and marketing of fishery products Target(s): To be completed Activities to be conducted: - Marketing webpage in BFAR website – 1 - Development of a - Promotional AVP of Philippine Seafood marketing webpage Products – 1 7% of target stakeholders availed of ••o - Develop a promotional IEC materials* AVP - Promotional and service information IEC - Develop IEC materials materials – 5

3. Development and establishment of ICT in Activities to be fisheries To be completed conducted: Target(s): • - Study different country - ICT in fisheries – 1 ICT - Preliminary concept study - Development of 183 specialized platform - Data Analysis Strategies and Targets Accomplishments Assessment Remarks 184 - System maintenance Strengthen enforcement of laws, policies and regulations related to trade and marketing

1. Review and analysis of existing national and To be completed Activities to be conducted: international laws, policies relevant to trade and - Creation of TWG marketing to address gaps and needs of the market • - Scoping of polices, laws, regulations for export market - Review of domestic policies

2. Forging of public-private partnerships towards To be completed Price monitoring program more effective, transparent, accountable regulatory 0 established. Suggest to do schemes in partnership with DTI and other industry stakeholders Enhance capacity / competency of fishery institutions, manpower and professionals specific to marketing

1. Assessment and evaluation of manpower Activities to be competency of fishery institutions conducted: Target(s): To be completed - Development of survey - Manpower competency • form assessment/evaluation – 1 - Conduct of evaluation - Preparation, presentation, and submission of results

2. Development of training programs / modules to Activities to be capacitate the industry and government personnel conducted: Target(s): To be completed - Development of training - Training programs developed – 5 programs - Trainors Training conducted – 2 2021: Trainors Training on - Conduct of national - Regional trainings – 152 Entrepreneurship 000 trainors training Strategies and Targets Accomplishments regional Assessment - Conduct ofRemarks training - Enhancement of training - Post-activity programs evaluation Note: items with asterisk (*) were assessed based on outcomes of the expected outputs/activities Legend: - Nil to low progress, performance target needs attention - Target accomplished partially, needs to continue - Target completed D. Problems and Constraints in Fish Trade and Marketing Fish trade and marketing remains to be challenging albeit its achievements. Below are the key problems in the country’s fish trade and marketing that need to be addressed at present. Potential solutions are also presented herein. Limited access to market information Transparency in the supply chain and the access to market information still need to be improved and strengthened for the industry (Medenilla, 2021; CNFIDP Survey, 2021). Many fishers continue to have inadequate information on the current market prices and lack facilities like phones and other gadgets to be able to obtain enough information to buy and sell their fish products. The existing practice of selling fish through secret auction, particularly in major markets in the country, evidence that no transparency exists in the prices. This limited flow of information and secret auctions lead to variation in prices of the products from one area to another. Improving access to market information is therefore crucial. Developing technologies that will make market information more accessible to the stakeholders may contribute to this aspect. Limited Access to logistics facilities Another challenge in marketing of fish products is the inadequate access to logistics facilities (CNFIDP Survey, 2021). The road and vehicles needed to transport as well as the storage facilities to keep fish products is imperative especially for a highly perishable product like fish. The scarcity of hauling vehicles and poor road networks make the movement of fish products from production to consumption areas difficult. This has resulted to high transportation and distribution costs of fish products in the country (Viron,2019). In addition, trading posts lack infrastructures necessary for preservation of fish products to avoid spoilage (CNFIDP Stakeholders Consultation, 2021; Viron, 2019). Most landing areas do not have complete facilities such as cold rooms and electricity, among others, to maintain the quality of the products. The potential solution put forward by the stakeholders essentially pointed to added provision of facilities, and to include or increase the budget of government institutions, such as BFAR and the LGUs, in order to continue this endeavor. Limited market access Apart from inadequacy of logistics facilities, fishers also have limited networks to sell their produce (Viron, 2019; CNFIDP Survey, 2021; CNFIDP Stakeholders Consultation, 2021). They usually have slim access to the marketing platforms where final consumers go to. Most of the fish producers likewise are only engaged in small-scale production that they only have a little quantity to supply the marketers that need a huge volume to sell to the consumers. For this reason, small fishers are hampered in accessing the market. The distribution of fish products from highly productive areas to food-fish deficient areas therefore are constricted. Accessing the global markets in the same way is limited by inability to comply with the stringent regulatory requirements, especially for food quality and safety, such as the Halal, US and EU requisites. Thus, marketers are not able to compete with countries that have the resources and capacities to satisfy the requirements. 185 Market linkages must be strengthened to enhance access to markets. Propositions of the stakeholders include development of technologies for better fisher-market linkage and establishment of different market channels, which may consider electronic channels like e-Kadiwa. To be able to enter global markets, provision of assistance for different accreditation and adoption of the Philippine National Standards as technical regulations were raised. Limited Access to Loans/Credit Limited access to loans/credit of the marketers continues to be an observed problem in marketing of fish products (CNFIDP Survey, 2021). The inability to comply with and compete in the market is likewise a consequence of minimal access to loans/credit that can be used to pump up investments to purchase necessary equipment and tools and process pertinent documents for registration. However, the program on financial assistance appears to be inaccessible due to stringent requirements that most of the fisherfolks do not have. It is therefore suggested to simplify loan requirements to make the program more accessible to the fisherfolk. IEC campaign should also be improved by using various platforms, including capacity building activities, to promote even to the remote areas. Lack of Skills and Knowledge on Marketing/Trading It is further noted that there is lack of marketing knowledge and skills (CNFIDP Survey, 2021). Fishers are also constrained in accessing the market because they do not know how to. Marketers are similarly confined to their existing customers because of inadequate knowledge and skills to promote and distribute their products. Providing assistance to them, for instance, supplying them with information on accreditation process and requirements, would be beneficial. Conducting capacity building activities for fishers and traders on Good Manufacturing Practices, would likewise be advantageous in enhancing the marketing knowledge and skills of the fishers and traders. Multi-layer marketing systems The marketing of fish products in the Philippines typically passes through several layers of intermediaries (Fernandez, 2019; CNFIDP Stakeholders Consultation, 2021). Although this is recognized as a problem, this structure apparently surfaced because of the weak fisher-market linkages, small production volumes of fishers and limited transportation facilities. Most of the time, these intermediaries are the ones who have resources to buy and consolidate the low quantities of harvests of fishers as well as transporting and distributing the products to the market. It is however unfortunate that this set up correspondingly results in high layering of prices. This brings us to pointing out that multiple tiers of traders are not necessarily a bad situation when the intermediaries perform the tasks that fishers and even other traders cannot do. Adopting a value chain approach to look into this matter would be better to examine the entire chain and not limit analysis viewpoint merely to the marketing node of the chain. Instability of market prices Unstable market prices are recognized as another constraint in marketing of fish products (Viron, 2019; CNFIDP Stakeholders Consultation, 2021; CNFIDP Survey, 2021). While the fluctuations in the prices of fish generally seems a chicken and egg situation with unsteady fish supply, that is, fishers are discourage to produce more when the market price is low and the low 186 supply will then push prices up providing incentives again Chapter 6: TRADE for fishers AND MARKETING to produce more that will lead to higher supply that would ease prices again, the more important issue with regards to price is on the suggested retail prices or SRPs. Determining the SRPs for fish products does not only helpregards to price standardize is on prizes the suggested across retailalso locations but prices or SRPs. protects Determining both the consumersthe and SRPs for fish By producers. setting the prices not too low, roducers are assured to be furnished with commensurate the products does not only help standardize prizes across locations but also protects both profits. Consumers meanwhile are presented with the ability to purchase the quantity of fish they be consumers and producers. By setting the prices not too low, producers are assured to need. furnished with commensurate profits. Consumers meanwhile are presented with the ability to purchase On thisthe quantityitofmay account, fish they need. be favorable for the sector to revisit the Price Act and work on standardization of theit SRP On this account, mayofbefishery products. favorable for theLGUs cantoalso sector assist revisit the in adopting Price price Act and control work on in their respective jurisdictions standardization of the SRPtofease instability fishery products.ofLGUs fish can prices. also assist in adopting price control in their respective jurisdictions to ease instability of fish prices. Fish Importation Fish Importation FishFish importation, much importation, more much thanthan more those that that those are are unregistered unregistered(CNFIDP (CNFIDPStakeholders Stakeholders Consultation, 2021), appears to be an issue from two standpoints. One is on the quality of the Consultation, 2021), appears to be an issue from two standpoints. One is on the quality of the fish fish products that come in, which may impact on food safety. The other one is on the value or products price that come in, which of domestically may impact produced on food safety. fish products The other potentially to be one is on the reduced value or price in situations of of domestically oversupply due to importation. This therefore calls for creation and/or effective implementation to produced fish products potentially to be reduced in situations of oversupply due importation. on This on regulations therefore calls imported for creation fishery and/or products and effective requisite implementation of proper labelling of on regulations these imports. on imported fishery products and requisite of proper labelling of these imports. E. E. Sectoral Sectoral Strategies Strategies andand Action Action Plans Plans Considering Considering the the status status of of planned planned activities activities in thein the CNFIDP CNFIDP 2016-2020 2016-2020 and and the the continuing continuing constraints constraints andand issues issues associated associated with with fisheries fisheries trade trade and and marketing,the marketing, thegeneral generalaction actionplan plan is to pursue planned and continue on-going initiatives with focus on both the quantity and the the is to pursue planned and continue on-going initiatives with focus on both the quantity and quality quality of targets as indicated of targets as indicated in Table 6.21. in Table 6.21. Table 6.21. Table Sectoral 6.21. Strategies Sectoral andand Strategies Action Plans, Action 2021-2025 Plans, 2021-2025 Sectoral Action Plans Key Performance Implementation Strategies Indicators Team and Lead

1. Market expansion Conduct fish At least 1 BFAR, LGUs, for sustainable consumer consumer DOH, PSA, fish and fishery preference survey preference survey academe, DTI products conducted to (domestic and inform demand- export) driven expansion strategies Conduct industry At least 5 national BFAR, LGU, DTI, fora and and 90 regional DOST, traders, consultation fora, and 180 processors, meetings related regional and 810 fisherfolk, to trade and provincial academe, DA, marketing consultation NGO, media meeting conducted Facilitation of At least 20 BFAR, LGU, DTI, market access of international and DOST, traders, fishery-related 820 local trade processors, individuals/ fairs, 9 trade fisherfolk, cooperatives/ missions, 405 academe, DA, association/ market matching NGO, media 187 PAGE \* Chapter 6: TRADE AND MARKETING Sectoral Action Plans Key Performance Implementation Strategies Indicators Team and Lead organization to events conducted domestic and with at least and export market 255 fish product traders engaged in e-commerce

2. Improving trade Conduct of market At least 1 BFAR, academe, linkages and linkages & actions comprehensive DA, DTI, DOST, facilitation for study to inform market study traders, food fish initiatives and/or completed to processors, sufficiency in platforms in provide baseline fisherfolk, NGO deficient areas support of food data and analysis security of foodfish gaps Include the Investors engaged LGUs, BFAR, investors/business in at least 1 traders, es located investment priority processors, in/targeting in plan in each food fisherfolk, foodfish-deficient fish-deficient areas academe, DA, areas in the identified DTI, DOST, NGO investment priority plan

3. Increasing Conduct capacity At least 5 BFAR, LGU, DTI, capacities/ building / training new/updated DOST, traders, competitiveness (on credit, training modules processors, of fishery based entrepreneurship developed and at fisherfolk, MSMEs that can and marketing) least 136 trainings academe, DA, enter the market and participation in each on credit NGO trade access and market fairs/fora/meetings access and business and trade missions Facilitation of At least 85 BFAR, LGU, DTI, access to financial investment fora DOST, traders, support and 30 technical processors, (equipment, assistance for fisherfolk, infrastructure, credit access academe, DA, capital) facilitated NGO

4. Establishment of Implementation of A task force to NFRDI/BFAR- a comprehensive a comprehensive develop national FIDSD, BFAR market market research baseline data and Regional Offices, information program that will a comprehensive LGU, Chapter 6: TRADE ANDacademe, MARKETING system address the trade national fisheries DTI concerns of the database primary and operational Sectoral Action Plans Key Performance Implementation emerging markets Strategies Indicators Team and Lead in both domestic and foreign sectors Development of At least 1 AVP of BFAR, PSA, DTI, Information, PH seafood private sector PAGE Education and products, 5 \* Communication promotional and 188 (IEC) program for service IEC market information materials, and a Chapter 6: TRADE AND MARKETING Sectoral Action Plans Key Performance Implementation Strategies Indicators Team and Lead Sectoral Action and Plans foreign Key Performance Implementation Strategies sectors Indicators Team and Lead - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- ----- and foreign of Development At least 1 AVP of BFAR, PSA, DTI, sectors Information, PH seafood private sector Education Development of and products, At least 1 AVP of 5 BFAR, PSA, DTI, Communication Information, promotional PH seafood and private sector (IEC) program Education andfor service products, IEC5 market information Communication materials, and promotional anda and marketing (IEC) program for of marketing service IEC fisheryinformation market products webpage materials,inandBFAR a and marketing of website accessible marketing fishery products and operational webpage in BFAR Development and An website ICT in accessible fisheries BFAR, DOST- establishment of and system operational developed ICTO, DOST- ICT in fisheries Development and Anand ICTintegrated in fisheries PAGASA, BFAR, DOST- DTI, establishment of with existing system developed PSA, private ICTO, DOST- ICT in fisheries platforms and integrated sector PAGASA, (i.e. IGAT), DTI, with existing CSOs (i.e. Bayang PSA, private platforms Pinoy), NDRRMC, sector (i.e. IGAT), CCC, DILG, CSOs (i.e. Bayang SCUs

5. Strengthening Review and A TWG to review Pinoy), NDRRMC, BFAR, DTI, enforcement of analysis of existing the trade and CCC, BFAR, DILG, SCUs BAFPS, laws, policies

5. Strengthening and national Review and and marketing policies A TWG to review FDA, BOC, BFAR, DTI, private regulations enforcement of international laws, analysis of existing operational the trade and and sector, BFAR, BAFPS, DILG related to trade laws, policies and policies relevant national and to analysis on the marketing policies FDA, BOC, private and marketing regulations trade and gaps andand international laws, operational sector, DILG related to trade marketing policies relevant toto recommendations analysis on the and marketing addresstradegaps and and completed gaps and needs of marketing tothe recommendations address market gaps and completed needsofof the Forging public- Price monitoring BFAR, DTI, market private program improved BFAR, BAFPS, partnerships Forging of public- and Price implemented monitoring FDA, BOC,DTI, BFAR, private towards privatemore in partnership program improved with sector, BFAR, BAFPS, DILG effective, partnerships DTI and other and implemented FDA, BOC, private transparent, towards more industry with in partnership sector, DILG accountable effective, stakeholders DTI and other regulatory transparent, industry schemes accountable stakeholders

6. Enhancing regulatoryand Assessment At least 1 fisheries BFAR, DTI, capacity/ schemesof evaluation manpower academe, private competency

6. Enhancing of manpower Assessment and competency At least 1 fisheries sector BFAR, DTI, fishery capacity/ competency evaluation of of assessment/ manpower academe, private institutions,of competency fishery institutions manpower evaluation competency sector manpower fishery and completed competency of assessment/ professionals institutions, fishery institutions evaluation manpower and completed professionals PAGE \* PAGE \* 189 Chapter 6: TRADE AND MARKETING Sectoral Action Plans Key Performance Implementation Strategies Indicators Team and Lead specific to marketing Development of At least 5 training BFAR/DTI, training programs / programs academe, private modules to developed, 152 sector capacitate the regional trainings industry and conducted, and 2 government trainers' training personnel completed Recommendations The discussion above reveals that some of the challenges that are being faced by the trade and marketing subsector of the Philippine fisheries industry persists despite the achievements: Recommendations limited access to market, market information and market facilities; and instability in prices. It is thereby The discussion above that recommended revealsfuture that initiatives some of the continue to consider challenges these faced that are being issues.byIttheis proposed trade to and marketing prioritize subsector of interventions, suchtheasPhilippine fisheries industry market linking, capabilitypersists despite the development achievements: and improving access limitedwhich to credit, accessare to market, market recognized information to be and in advantageous market facilities; if weakening, andnot, instability to in prices. It eliminating these is thereby problems. recommended that future initiatives continue to consider these issues. It is proposed to prioritize interventions, such as market linking, capability development and improving access to credit, which are recognized to be advantageous in weakening, if not, to eliminating Market these linking efforts will not only connect the different stakeholders to each other but will problems. also provide opportunities for stakeholders to be informed about the market. It is moreover a way to encourage Market other linkingstakeholders efforts will nottoonly joinconnect the efforts of the industry. the different Similarly, stakeholders thisother to each can be butinstrumental will also provide about in learning opportunities forplatforms available stakeholders or to be channelsinformed whereabout theproducts fishery market. Itcan is be moreover a way marketed. Thus, to encourage other stakeholders to join the efforts of the industry. Similarly, is recommended to continue linking activities like fora, trade fairs and exhibitions, business this can be instrumental matching and tradein learning about missions, availablecollaboration alongside platforms or channels with other where fishery public and products can be private institutions marketed. Thus, is recommended to continue linking activities like fora, trade fairs and like DTI and LGUs. Eventually, BFAR may go into pursuing the development and maintenance of exhibitions, business matching and trade missions, alongside collaboration with other public communication and private channels institutionswhere market like DTI andinformation may be BFAR LGUs. Eventually, accessedmaybygotheinto stakeholders. pursuing the development and maintenance of communication channels where market information may be It is by accessedhowever the not enough that we link the fishers/traders to the market. Rather, it is also stakeholders. imperative that we link the right people, and the right people would mean capacitated fishers/ It is however marketers. not enough Otherwise, they will that stillwenotlink be the ablefishers/traders to penetrate the to the market. market. For Rather, it is capacity this reason, also imperative that we link the right people, and the right people would building activities will remain crucial in uplifting the condition of the trade and marketing mean capacitated fishers/marketers. Otherwise, they will still not be able to penetrate the market. For this reason, subsector. Provision of training and participation in various fairs and meetings would be helpful capacity building activities will remain crucial in uplifting the condition of the trade and in developing marketing capacities subsector. in the fishers Provision and marketers. of training Likewise, and participation enhancing in various fairsthe andcompetencies meetings would of the fishery institutions that are assisting the stakeholders of the sector is necessary. be helpful in developing capacities in the fishers and marketers. Likewise, enhancing the Capacity building activities thereforeof the competencies should be continued fishery institutionsforthat the are fishers and the marketers assisting and the of stakeholders trainers as well. the sector is necessary. Capacity building activities therefore should be continued for the fishers and marketers and the Marketers wouldtrainers as to also needwell. have the capacity in terms of funding when entering the market. It is not necessary to provide monetary assistance to them. Instead, assisting and/or facilitating Marketers would also need to have the capacity in terms of funding when entering the market. their loans would be a much better way to empower them. Dole outs in the past years have been It is not necessary to provide monetary assistance to them. Instead, assisting and/or facilitating observed to notwould their loans help improve be a much thebetter situation way to in empower general because them. Dolepeople outsdo in not the give past appreciation years have to whatbeenwas given observed to not help improve the situation in general because people do not provided to them, unlike if it was their own money that was spent. The assistance give to them will go atolong appreciation way. what wasOnce giventheyto get approved them, unlike if itofwas thetheir loan,own they can that money purchase was the equipment spent. The assistance and tools provided as well as to of avail them will go a services thatlong way. they Once need to they get their market approved of the loan, products. they canthey Accordingly, purchase will no longer the equipment rely on and wait andfortools the as well as avail of government’s services provision of that they need equipment, to is whichmarket alsotheir limited. BFAR thus needs to highlight initiatives that will promote the financial assistance rather than the provision of the facilities. It may consider working on how the credit application requirements and processing become much easier for the clients. In light of the CFLCs and equipment distribution, PAGE \* 190 efforts should also ensure its optimal utilization. It may likewise be beneficial to monitor and assess the progress and outcomes/impacts of these initiatives on trade and marketing per se. The Price monitoring program is a good start to find out the price instability of fishery products and develop initiatives to address it. Data gathered under the program would provide information in crafting new policies and other propositions to effectively enforce laws, the Price Act, in particular. 191 Chapter 7 POLICY AND INSTITUTIONS 192 POLICY AND INSTITUTIONS A. The Fisheries Sector Suh and Pomeroy (2020) note that fisheries in the Philippines make a significant contribution to the national economy in terms of income and employment. Statistics from BFAR (2016) and PSA (2017) estimate the total fisheries production at 4.65 million metric tons, and the fisheries sector contributed almost 4.33 billion dollars to the country’s economy in 2015. In 2020 (PSA), the volume of production has declined by about 1.5 million metric tons (Figure 7.1), a negative0.3 percent reduction from the 2019 level. 2018 2019 2020 2018 2019 2020 ■ Volum e of Production ■ Growth Rate (in '000 mt) (i n pe rcent ) Preli minary P - Source: Philippine StatisticsAuthority Figure 7. SEQ Figure \* ARABIC 8. Volume Figure 7.1. Volume of fisheries production of fisheries production and annual growth and annual growth rate, Philippines: rate, Philippines: January to December January to December 2018-2020 (Source: 2018-2020 (Source: PSA) PSA) The sector employed an estimated 1.6 million people nationwide, contributing 1.5% to the gross domestic product (GDP) in 2015 (BFAR, 2016; PSA, 2017). As of September 2021, the number is down to 1.2 million (PSA 2021). According to an FAO report cited by BFAR (2016), the Philippines ranks eighth globally in fish production, as of 2014, and is a key economic sector for the country. In 2018 (BFAR 2019) however, the country ranks 9th, one step lower than the 2017 rank. In 2013, mainstream media in the Philippines reported that farmers and fishermen are among the lowest paid in the Philippines (Martin, 2013). As of 2021, the latest report by the National Wages and Productivity Commission reveals that the situation still remains. The PSA (2020) shows the same (Figure 7.2) trends as seen in comparing poverty incidence among basic sectors in 2015 and in 2018. 193 Poverty Incidence Among the Basic Sectors (%): 2015r and 2018 40 .8 36.9 34.0 ■ 20 1 5 ■ 2018 33.5 31 .6 26.2 26.2 24.5 23.9 23.9 20.5 18.0 16.6 14.4 14.4 13.2 Farmers Fisheriolks lndiviaJats Ctrildren Self.employed Vlbmen Persons Yi.ta You1h lnd1vicbal:s Senior Citizens Migrant and Residng in and Ulpaid Oisatility R~iding in Formal l;\brkers Rural Areas Famij Waters UrbanAreas Figure 7.2. Poverty incidence among the basic sectors in 2015 and 2018 Source: Merged datafile of the 2015 Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES) and January 2016 Labor Force Survey (LFS) and preliminary merged datafile of the 2018 FIES and January 2019 LFS, Philippine Statistics Authority Note: r – revised; The 2015 estimates were revised/updated based on the following: a) rebasing of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) market basket of prices from 2006 to 2012; b) adoption of the 2015 Census of Population (PopCen) results for the weights in the merged FIES-LFS; and c) updated ur- ban-rural classification of barangays based on the 2015 PopCen. B. Fisheries Institutions and Policies Policies. Three laws together have a profound impact on the administration and management of agriculture and fisheries; research and development; extension service; as well as the management and delivery of rural credit and even fisheries education. These are Republic Act (RA) 7160, RA 8435 and RA 8550. The RA 7160 is the Local Government Code of 1991, RA 8435 is the Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act of 1997 (AFMA), and RA 8550 is the Philippine Fisheries Code of 1998. RA 7160 transferred regulatory and licensing functions over municipal fisheries and agricultural and fisheries extension service to the local government. The only licensing function left with BFAR is the granting of Fishpond Lease Agreements (FLAs) for aquaculture on public lands. In summary, AFMA on the other hand, aims to transform the agriculture and fisheries sectors to technology-based, advanced and competitive industry; ensure that the small farmers and fisherfolk have equal access to assets, resources and services; guarantee food security; encourage farmers and fisherfolk groups to bond together for more bargaining power; strengthen people’s organizations, cooperatives and nongovernment organizations by enhancing their participation in decision-making; pursue an aggressive market-driven approach to make products more competitive in the market; stimulate further processing of agricultural products and make it more marketable; and implement policies that will invite more investors to establish business in the country (Aquino et al. 2013). 194 Institutions. Institutions provide regularities, reduce uncertainties, and shape people’s interactions by creating an enabling or controlling environment for specific governing actions and decisions to take place (Chuenpagdee and Song 2012) . Historically, fisheries governance has relied heavily on the creation and evolution of institutions, especially those related to property rights and access rules. However, there has been a recent call for broadening the notion of institutions – those that can deal with the social, cultural and historical aspects of fisheries, including meanings and values, trust, and norms. Government Fisheries Institutions. The management and development of Philippine fishery resources is under the jurisdiction of the Department of Agriculture. Under the Philippine Fisheries Code of 1998, the position of Undersecretary for Fisheries and Aquatic Resources was created in the Department of Agriculture “solely for the purpose of attending to the needs of the fishing industry.” The Undersecretary for Fisheries shall “set policies and formulate standards for the effective, efficient and economical operations of the fishing industry” and shall “exercise overall supervision over all offices related to fisheries.” The Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) and the National Fisheries Research and Development Institute (NFRDI) are directly under the Undersecretary for Fisheries. The NFRDI was created under the 1998 Fisheries Code and serves as the primary research arm of, but is not under, BFAR. Instead it is directly attached to the DA and has its own governing board with the Undersecretary for Fisheries as Chairman and the BFAR Director as Vice Chairman. A third agency, the Philippine Fisheries Development Authority (PFDA) which is organized as a government-controlled corporation is not operationally under the DA but is under the Department’s supervision. The PFDA is tasked with the management and operation of all public fishing ports, ice plants and cold storage plants. The Fisheries Code also provided for the reconstitution of BFAR and the establishment of Fisheries and Aquatic Management Councils (FARMCs). While the BFAR is a national policy advisory and policy implementation body, the FARMCs (national down to barangay levels) shall assist in the formulation of national policies and local policies. These FARMCs are seen to play an important role especially in community-based governance of fishery resources, as well as, enforcement of fisheries laws and regulations. The NFARMC shall serve as an advisory/recommendatory body to the Department of Agriculture in policy formulation and the preparation of the National Fisheries Industry Development Plan. It shall be chaired by the Undersecretary of Agriculture (presumably the Undersecretary for Fisheries) and shall have as members the Undersecretary of Interior and Local Government, five members representing the fisherfolks and fishery workers, five members representing commercial fishing, aquaculture and processing, two from the academe, and one representative of NGOs involved in fisheries. Other Government Institutions. Under the Department of Agriculture (DA), there is the Philippine Council for Agriculture and Fishery (PCAF) formed from the consolidation of the National Agriculture and Fisheries Council (NAFC) and the Livestock Development Council (LDC). Pursuant to EO 366, Series of 2004, PCAF thus assumed strengthened functions related to coordination and monitoring of agricultural and fisheries modernization processes, and development of public-private partnerships as advisory special bodies to the DA. Under the Department of Science and Technology (DOST), is the Philippine Council for Agriculture, Aquatic and Natural Resources Research and Development (PCAARRD). Among its Industry Science and Technology Programs (ISP) are aquaculture commodities: milkfish, tilapia, shrimp, shellfish, mangrove crab, and seaweeds. Through these programs, PCAARRD funds relevant 195 R&D, along with the attendant capacity and capability building programs and support services such as communication and technology transfer. Private Institutions/Organizations. In 2009, there were an estimated 60,000 registered NGOs in the country (Mosher 2009). This included non-stock, non-profit organizations, among which are people’s organizations (POs). People’s organizations are also referred to as grassroots organizations or community-based organizations (CBOs). From the government perspective, all these are deemed to be NGOs. Many of the POs may be registered with the Cooperative Development Authority (CDA), thus giving them a juridical personality without being registered as corporations with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). However, some may also have incorporated themselves as well. It is generally thought that there is an equal number of many other similar organizations which remain unregistered (Moshman 2009). One of the more active coalitions of fisheries NGOs is the National Coalition of Fishermen’s Association for Reform (NACFAR). NACFAR is composed of the eight biggest fisherfolk federations, with a constituency of almost 600,000 people (Ombudsman 2012). Another organization is the PAMALAKAYA, a national federation of fisherfolk organizations working for the democratization of the fishing industry. PAMALAKAYA is the shortened name of the Pambansang Lakas ng Kilusang Mamamalakaya sa Pilipinas (National Force of the Fishers’ Movement in the Philippines). The Kapatiran ng Malayang Maliliit na Mangingisda ng Pilipinas (KAMMMPI, Fraternity of Free Small Fisherfolks of the Philippines) comprises eight organizations in fisheries. C. Fisheries Policy and Institutional Issues Given the significance of the fisheries sector to the economy of the country, strong policies and institutions are essential to its efficient management and sustainability. This was surfaced during the series of consultations conducted as part of the revision of the current CNFIDP. As with other aspects of the fisheries sector however, several issues beset both the policy and institutional aspects. Policy Issues. The following summarize policy issues that must be addressed:

1. Need for strong fisheries regulation and enforcement: This issue points to the perceived inefficient or ineffective implementation of the fisheries laws and regulations. Stakeholders point further to the probable causes of this inefficiency or ineffectiveness as lack of appropriate equipment, operating funds and trained manpower. Furthermore, stakeholders point to what they think as inconsistency among policies of different government agencies, or even within the DA itself. Institutional jurisdictions and mandates may overlap thus resulting in such inconsistencies.

2. Revision of the guidelines for the Fisheries Lease Agreement (FLA) and lease and licensing fees: Stakeholders mention that there is an urgent need to review and revise the guidelines for the FLAs, as well as, the license rates and related fees based on completed studies.

3. Inadequate Fisheries Information: Appropriate, useful and timely data and information is necessary to make decisions, to shape long-term fisheries management and development policy and thus to manage fisheries resources sustainably. Stakeholders also mention the need to rationalize fisheries data collection so that the database can be unified. This is especially important for PSA and NSAP data. With new technology including the mobile phone capabilities, there is a big potential for this unification and rationalization. Further, there is a need to further expand the coverage of data gathering to be more accurate and comprehensive. 196 Fisheries Institutional Issues. In order to achieve institutional relevance and ensure organizational performance, the governance roles of the public fisheries institutions may have to be redefined. In so doing, there is a concomitant need for enhancing institutional and staff capacity so that policies may be better translated into appropriate action. The following are issues relating to fisheries institutions:

1. Need for institutional strengthening: The establishment of the Department of Fisheries is seen as a strong impetus to further develop and manage the Philippine fisheries sector. This is to ensure effective promotion of fish production; judicious management of fisheries resources; and provision of extension, research, and support services to the fisheries sector. In addition, institutional strengthening efforts must be directed at preparing the local government units in assuming fisheries resource management responsibilities especially in line with the implementation of the Mandanas-Garcia Ruling.

2. Need for Human Resources Development. Continuous upgrading of the technical capabilities and skills of the fisheries staff and field personnel of concerned agencies in the implementation of fisheries programs and projects is needed. For the LGUs, building capacity in terms of management, conservation, research and extension is also necessary. Certification programs for fishers and fishery workers are a step toward the professionalization of the sector, as well as respond to the requirements of international good practice certification.

3. Access to Credit and Insurance. Fisherfolk and small fish farmers generally cannot access credit or insurance. This is due in part to the lack of conduit banks in the rural areas, as well as the reluctance of commercial banks to lend to small entrepreneurs. These established institutions cannot afford to risk resources on fisherfolk and small fish farmers because of high intermediation costs, lack of sufficient collateral, and limited potential for business growth. Moreover, there is a need to strengthen the capabilities of NGOs and community-based credit cooperatives serving as financial intermediaries in project identification and financial management to effectively assist the fisheries industry, particularly the fisherfolks to gain access to credit facilities. Fisheries Industry Issues. One of the most commonly mentioned issues is that of post-harvest. Even with existing fisheries infrastructure programs to upgrade post-harvest infrastructure and techniques nationwide, there is still a need for enhancing the programs and their implementation, especially for smallscale/artisanal/municipal fishers. Commonly mentioned along this line also is the need for cold storage and for ice production facilities. Municipal fisherfolk also report difficulties in placing their products in the higher-priced urban markets, while the commercial sector points to the challenges of conforming with the specific quality standards of importing countries/international markets. Another major industry issue is the need to improve aquaculture productivity while considering ecological limits and expanding production to inland/freshwater bodies. Stakeholders agree that aquaculture productivity can be improved through the introduction of improved aquaculture technologies and the provision of extension services and credit access to the industry. Table 7.1 furthers the identification of issues relative to the fishery sector (FISH 2000). Notably 20 years after this publication, most of the core problems remain and therefore should be considered in the CNFIDP 2021-2025. Those in the green-shaded boxes were specifically mentioned during the stakeholder consultations. 197 Table 7.1. Fisheries management problems in the Philippines (Source: FISH 2000) Table 7.1. Fisheries management problems in the Philippines (Source: FISH 2000) CORE PROBLEMS CONTRIBUTING FACTORS ● Loss of marine biodiversity ● Overfishing ● Declining fish stocks ● Illegal and ● Loss of revenues and benefits from fisheries destructive and coastal resources fishing Chapter 7: POLICY AND INSTITUTIONS ● Coastal and habitat degradation CORE PROBLEMS CONTRIBUTING ● Siltation and FACTORS pollution ● Post-harvest losses ● Inefficient PAGE marketing \* ● Inequitable distribution of benefits from ● Open access fisheries and coastal resource uses ● Inter- and intra- sectoral conflicts ● Low awareness and participation in management ● Lack of employment/po verty among municipal fishers ● Population growth ● Low awareness of the implications of overpopulation and food security ● Lack of delivery mechanisms for reproductive health programs in rural coastal communities ● Inconsistent policies and programs for ● Continued sustainable fisheries investments in production- oriented programs ● Conflicting and fragmented national policies 198 ● Weak institutional and stakeholder capacity to ● Absence of a plan and implement fisheries management vision for oriented programs ● Conflicting and Table 7.1. Fisheries management problems in the Philippines (Source: FISH 2000) fragmented CORE PROBLEMS CONTRIBUTING national FACTORS policies Loss of marine biodiversity Chapter 7: POLICY AND INSTITUTIONS ● ● Weak institutional and stakeholder capacity to ● Overfishing ● Absence of a Declining ● plan and fish stocksfisheries management implement Illegal for ● vision and ● Loss of revenues and benefits from fisheries destructive institutional and coastalCORE resources PROBLEMS CONTRIBUTING fishing change to FACTORS ● Coastal support and habitat sustainable degradation fisheries ● Siltation Inadequate and pollution technical and PAGE financial \* support to LGU fisheries PAGE management \* initiatives ● Weak and inadequate law enforcement ● Inadequate interagency coordination mechanisms for fisheries and coastal resource management ● Lack of a constituency for sustainable fisheries ● Low awareness and understanding of the implications of overfishing on food security and economic development ● Polarization of stakeholders over means to achieve sustainable fishing ANNEX 1. Major Laws, Regulations, etc. Governing the Fisheries Sector Republic Act 7160: The Local Government Code of 1991 Republic Act 8435: The Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act of 1997 "An act prescribing urgent related measures to modernize the agriculture and fisheries sectors of the country in order to enhance their profitability, and prepare said sectors for the challenges of the globalization through an adequate, focused and rational delivery of necessary support services, appropriating funds therefore and for other purposes." 199

ANNEX 1. Major Laws, Regulations, etc. Governing the Fisheries Sector Republic Act 7160: The Local Government Code of 1991 Republic Act 8435: The Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act of 1997 “An act prescribing urgent related measures to modernize the agriculture and fisheries sectors of the country in order to enhance their profitability, and prepare said sectors for the challenges of the globalization through an adequate, focused and rational delivery of necessary support services, appropriating funds therefore and for other purposes.” Republic Act 8550: The Philippine Fisheries Code of 1998, and its Amendments (RA 10654) “An act providing for the development, management and conservation of the fisheries and aquatic resources, integrating all laws pertinent thereto, and for other purposes.” BFAR Fisheries Administrative Order 197-1: Revised Rules and Regulations Governing the Lease of Public Lands for Fishpond and Mangrove-Friendly Aquaculture

ANNEX 2. Legislations Related to the Fisheries Sector Presidential Decree No. 704 “Revising and consolidating all laws and decrees affecting fishing and fisheries.” Republic Act No. 10654 “An act to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, amending Republic Act No. 8550, otherwise known as “The Philippine Fisheries Code of 1998,” and for other purposes.” Presidential Decree 442: Labor Code, s. 1974 - Department of Labor and Employment Department Order 156-16, s.2016: Rules and Regulations Governing the Working and Living Conditions of Fishers on board Fishing Vessels Engaged in Commercial Fishing Operations PD 705: Forestry Code, s. 1975 PD 1065: Water Code, 2. 1976 Republic Act 7586: The National Integrated Protected Areas System Act of 1992 EO 263: Community-based Forest Management, 19 July 1995 EO 273: Approving and Adopting the Philippine Plan for Gender-responsive Development (PPGD) 1995-2025, 8 September 1995 Republic Act 8371: The Indigenous People’s Rights Act of 1997, 29 October 1997 Republic Act 9710: Magna Carta of Women, 28 July 2008 Republic Act 9003: Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000 200 Republic Act 10121: The Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010 Republic Act 7611: An Act Adopting the Strategic Environment Plan for Palawan Republic Act 9729: The Climate Change Act of 2009 and People’s Survival Fund (RA 10174) Republic Act 9147: Wildlife Resources Conservation and Protection Act, 30 July 2001 Electronic Commerce Act of 2000 (R.A 8792) “An act providing for the recognition and use of electronic commercial and non-commercial transactions and documents, penalties for unlawful use thereof and for other purposes.” Government Procurement Reform Act (R.A 9184) “An act providing for the modernization, standardization and regulation of the procurement activities of the government and for other purposes.” Electronic Commerce Act of 2000 (R.A. 8792) Implementing Rules and Regulations REFERENCES News, Blogs Fabro, Keith Anthony. 2021. Philippines banks on new fisheries management system, but rollout is rocky. Mongabay Series. Retrieved from https://news.mongabay.com/2021/07/philippines-banks-on-new-fisheries-management- system-but-rollout-is-rocky/ Martin, Katherine A. 2013. Farmers, fishermen among lowest paid in PH. ABS CBN News. Retrieved from https://news.abs-cbn.com/business/04/12/13/farmers-fishermen-among-lowest- paid-ph Databases Official Gazette – various dates. Retrieved from https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph Republic Act 7586. 2019. National Integrated Protected Areas System Act of 1992 as amended by Republic Act No. 11038, or the Expanded National Integrated Protected Areas System (ENIPAS) Act of 2018 NWPC. 2021. Current statistics on wages. National Wages and Productivity Commission (NWPC). Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE). Retrieved from https://nwpc.dole.gov.ph/stats/current-statistics-on-wages/ PSA. 2017. Fisheries Situation Report, 2017 January-December. Quezon: PSA. PSA. 2020. Farmers, Fisherfolks, Individuals Residing in Rural Areas and Children Posted the Highest Poverty Incidences Among the Basic Sectors in 2018. Philippine Statistics Authority 201 Reference No.: 2020-092. Retrieved from https://psa.gov.ph/poverty-press-releases/nid/162541 Journal Articles Chuenpagdee, Ratana and Song, Andrew M. 2012. Institutional thinking in fisheries governance: broadening perspectives. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 4(3): 309-315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2012.05.006 Suh, David and Pomeroy, Robert. 2020. Projected Economic Impact of Climate Change on Marine Capture Fisheries in the Philippines. Frontiers in Marine Science https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2020.00232 Research and Other Reports Aquino, A.P., Tidon, A. G., Ani, P.A.B., and Festejo, M.A. 2013. The Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act of 1997: A Collective Approach to Competitiveness. FTTC Agriculture Policy Platform (FFTC-AP). https://ap.fftc.org.tw/article/514 BFAR. 2016. Philippine Fisheries Profile 2015. Quezon: Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources. BFAR. 2019. Philippine Fisheries Profile 2018. Quezon: Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources. FISH. 2000. The Philippine Fisheries Situation. The Fisheries Improved for Sustainable Harvest Project. Retrieved from http://www.oneocean.org/fish/the_philippine_fisheries_situation.html#:~:text=FISHERIES%20 MANAGEMENT%20PROBLEMS%20IN%20THE%20PHILIPPINES.%20CORE%20 PROBLEMS.,Illegal Ombudsman. 2012. Chapter III_ On the wings of the People Power Revolution: Cases of Intervention of Disadvantaged Groups in the Eighth Congress. Retrieved from https://www.ombudsman.gov.ph/UNDP4/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Chapter_III.pdf Moshman, Joanna. 2009. The Philippines’ NGO Sector. Retrieved from https://www.wango.org/ngonews/february09/philippinesngos.htm Rodriguez, Marita P. 2017. Review of Selected Philippine Policies and Laws on Fisheries and the Voluntary Guidelines for Securing Small-scale Fisheries (VGSSF). Quezon City: Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ANGOC). 202 Chapter 8 FINANCING FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE DEVELOPMENT 203 A. Background The process of updating the Comprehensive National Fisheries Integrated Development Plan for 2021 – 2025 requires the inclusion of financing strategies that will define how the projects and activities can be implemented seamlessly in an efficient manner. One of the key determinants in establishing a favorable environment is making sure that stakeholders in the sustainable finance ecosystem are undertaking a synchronized effort towards attaining local as well as international commitments. The institutional roles of the national government, banking institutions, equity markets, private sector and both local and foreign investors need to harmonize and cooperate endeavors to bring into line an effective sustainable finance agenda. The Department of Finance developed a roadmap that shows a sustainable financial ecosystem that can provide a pathway on how national programs can tap additional sources of financing apart from the traditional sources of financing. There is a wide range of measures to sponsor sustainable finance which need the involvement of various institutions both on the local and national levels. These initiatives may need cooperation between agencies and departments within the local and national government. A preferred modality may need cooperative measures among the private and public sectors, and the local and foreign donor community. Important entities from the private sector can involve firms within and outside the financial sector. The development of sustainable finance as a long -term source for the fisheries sector can be a viable proposal given the merits of its contributions to the greening of the economy. The box below describes the sustainable finance ecosystems for the Philippines4. The Philippines’ Sustainable Finance Ecosystem Financial Institutions - Financial institutions finance economic activities and projects that can contribute to sustainable development and their risk policies may also restrict their ability to finance projects with negative E&S impacts THE Government and Regulators - can help to facilitate PHILIPPINES' the deployment of sustainable finance by creating SUSTAINABLE a conducive environment, mainstreaming green FINANCE ~-.. finance and establishing a pipeline of green projects ECOSYSTEM Debt Capital Markets - Issuers use sustainable debt instruments, such as green bonds, to raise capital to finance projects that deliver environmental and social benefits Equity Capital Markets - Sustainability indices provide visibility to listed companies with leading environment, social, and governance (ESG) performance and are used by investors with ESG strategy to benchmark the performance of their investment portfolios Investors are integrating ESG* considerations into their investment strategy 4 The Philippines Sustainable Roadmap, Department of Finance (https://www.dof.gov.ph/wp-content/up- loads/2021/10/ALCEP-Roadmap.pdf) 204 Corporates - Companies raise financing for projects and activities that can contribute to sustainable development and disclosing their sustainability performance inform market participants on corporate sustainability risks International Organizations - International organizations, such as the donor community, support the development of sustainable finance through voluntary guidelines and initiatives (e.g. green bond labels, initiative on climate-related financial disclosures) B. Issues and Concerns on Financing the Fisheries Sector When the pandemic hit the local economy and the lockdowns were enforced, the country’s GDP declined by 9.5% in 2020. Agriculture production, which accounts for a 1/10 of GDP, declined by 1.2% in 2020, a downturn from the 0.3% growth in 2019. About P6.5 trillion loanable funds were generated by the local banking sector in 2020. Credit exposure of banks to the agricultural sector was at 6% of its total loan portfolio. This also reflected the Bank’s overall compliance to the Agri-Agra Reform Credit Act of 2009 which was only 10%. This fell short of the target of 25% of the mandated credit quota. Overall bank compliance continued its decline over the last decade since the law was implemented. Even with these serious constraints, the agriculture and fishery sector has shown its resiliency in the face of pressing challenges brought about by the current economic difficulties and the extremities of climate change. The One DA approach utilized an inclusive approach on transforming the agriculture and fisheries sector at the farm level. Provisional measures were made for small farmers and fishers in terms of straight cash assistance, subsidized credit, and crop insurance were all reinforced. Given the importance of increasing agricultural production, the provision of competitive financial services to small farmers and fisherfolk has become an urgent concern. The inclusion of both credit guarantees and crop insurance will ensure that credit risks are mitigated for both the farmers and fishers as beneficiaries and the credit providers. During the stakeholders’ consultations held online, the issues relating to fisheries financing became a cross-cutting issue among the different sectors in the fisheries industry. The usual access to credit, high interest rates, and stringent bank requirements on loan applications have affected the development of the local fisheries industry. The hesitance of the banking sector to fully change its lending policies has led to lesser borrowers, with fishermen opting to deal with traders in exchange for the fish catch at lower prices for ready cash advances they can readily avail of. The Agri-Agra Law that was enacted in 2009 obliges banks to provide at least 25% of their lending facilities, of which about 10% should be set aside for agrarian reform beneficiaries (ARBs) with 15% allotted for both farmers and fishers alike. Last year the banking system raised about PhP 6.5 trillion loanable funds. Under the Agri Agra law, PhP 651 billion was reserved for ARBs or agrarian credit while Php 976 billion was set aside for agricultural credit amounting to PhP 1.6 trillion. Banks have not met the legal requirements of the law since it was enacted. Table 8.1 shows the lending performance of banks under the Agri- Agra Reform Credit Act of 2009. 205 Table 8.1. Performance of Bank Lending to Agriculture and Fisheries, as per Agri- Agra Reform Credit Act of 20095 How banks comply for 2019 2020 years 2019 and 2020 OUT OF 25% OUT OF 25% Al l BANKS 11 .9% 10.0% Universal & 11 .8% 9 .9% Commercial Thrift 7.7% 7 .4 % Source: State of Agricultural Rura l & 32.2% 26.0% Finance, DA-ACPC, 2020 Cooperatives As a general practice, banks directly or indirectly comply with the law. Banks’ direct compliance is done through actual lending activities to qualified borrowers for loans supporting agriculture and agrarian reform activities. On the other hand, indirect compliance is usually done through investments in eligible debt securities such as bonds issued by Government Financial Institutions (GFIs) and debt securities deemed appropriate by the Department of Agriculture; and paid subscription of shares of stocks in accredited rural banks or shares of stocks in the Philippine Crop Insurance Corporation (PCIC). Last year, about 52% or PhP 345 billion of banks’ total Agri-Agra compliance were direct lending activities, with 48% or about PhP 318 billion were investments in qualified debt instruments and paid subscription of shares. In order to meet the required 15% Agri credit, the banks’ direct compliance mirrored that of the same proportion to their indirect compliance. How banks comply for 2019 2020 years 2019 and 2020 OUT O F 25% OUT OF 25% Al l BANKS 11 .9% 10.0% Universal & 11 .8% 9 .9% Commercial Thrift 7.7% 7 .4 % Source: State of Agricultural Rura l & Finance, DA-ACPC, 2020 32.2% 26.0% Cooperatives 5 2020 State of Agricultural Finance, DA-ACPC 206 Rural and Cooperative Banks (RCBs) recorded the highest total compliance rate of 29% lending or investing a total of Php 30 billion for both the agriculture and agrarian sectors. RCBs exceeded the 15% agri-credit requirement but it was short of 1% in complying with the agra component. Universal and Commercial Banks’ (UKBs) compliance with the Agri Agra Law amounted to PhP 612 billion. This accounted for the larger share of 92% of the banking system’s overall compliance. However, this is only 10% of the minimum required allocation. Thrift Banks (TBs) did not meet their legal requirements as they were able to achieve 8% overall compliance. Banks that failed their legal mandate paid a penalty of one-half of one percent (0.5%) of the amount they failed to meet. About 90% of the paid penalties are shared equally by the Agricultural Guarantee Fund Pool being managed by the Philippine Guarantee Corporation and the Philippine Crop Insurance Corporation (PCIC). The remaining balance of 10% goes to the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) to cover its administrative expenses. In order to promote more investments by financial institutions in the agricultural sector and at the same time stop the drop of the percentage of Agri-Agra credit in financial institutions’ loan portfolio, the Agri Agra Law was amended on February 22, 2021. The IRR amendments are as follows: (i) development of the appropriate means of compliance with the 10% agrarian reform lending requirement by covering: (a) financial loans to members of agrarian reform households, and (b) financing of activities that benefit agrarian reform beneficiaries (ARBs), (ii) removal of the accreditation requirement for debt securities to be considered as Agri-Agra eligible, (iii) permit investments in shares of stock of agricultural companies as an qualified mode of indirect compliance, and (iv) sponsorship of special lending windows that deem the holistic requirements of borrowers such as agricultural value chain financing. The economic lockdowns that occurred last year to deter the transmission of Covid-19 caused a serious challenge in the implementation of agricultural credit programs in rural and urban communities. The limited mobility, minimum safety protocols on social distancing, and safety measures enforced by the IATF through national and local government units had a great impact on the delivery of lending programs as well as the limited mobility of farmers and fisherfolk in obtaining credit for their operations. This resulted in longer loan processing periods leading to delayed loan approvals and releases. Agricultural borrowers faced loan processing hurdles and spent longer time in securing legal documents required by banks for loan applications. Prospective borrowers were also careful to avail of loans given the uncertainty of the economy. All of these factors contributed to the limited number of borrowers under these programs. For terms and conditions of lending programs, concessionary rates on loan facilities of government agencies eventually affected other programs and financing institutions lending at higher and market-based interest rates. This is also a result of too many government credit programs with almost the same objectives having distinct terms and conditions that should be rationalized. Based on the information culled from the ACPC reports, the distribution of government lending facilities releases according to the type of commodity financed are shown below. Credit support by the Government to crop production activities amounted to PhP 27.4 billion in 2020. This declined by nearly 10% from 2019 levels. There was a year on year drop in the number of borrowers involved in crop production. The drop can be due to the impact of community quarantine as a result of the economic lockdown last year as well as a series of climactic events that hit the country in the second semester of the year. 207 Amount of Loans Granted and Number of Borrowers Under the DA and GFI Lending Programs Amount of Loans Granted and Number of Borrowers 2019 2020 % Increase/ Under the DA and GFI Lending Programs (Decrease) Amount of Loans Granted (PM) Crop production 30,407 27,398 -9.9 Livestock and poultry 53,463 45,152 -28 Fisheries 3,962 2,582 -34.8 *Other agricultural 297,799 302,159 1.5 activities **Not Specified 90 28 -68.86 Total (PM) 385,721 377,318 -2.18 Number of Borrowers Crop production 174,993 98,055 -44.0 Livestock and poultry 3,538 6,694 217 Fisheries 1,281 4,584 257.8 *Other agricultural 19,275 18,232 -5.4 activities **Not Specified 46 21 -54.35 Total (No.) 199,087 127,565 -35.9 Source: ACPC 2020 It is noteworthy It is noteworthy that while that while the amount the amount of loans of loans granted granted to to selectedcommodities selected commoditiesuchsuchas as livestock/poultry andfisheries livestock/poultry and fisheries dropped dropped by 28% by 28% and and 35%,35%, respectively. respectively. Onother On the the other hand, hand, last last year, year, these commodities showed major improvements in the number of borrowers. these commodities showed major improvements in the number of borrowers. This points to more This points to more small small livestock, livestock, poultry, poultry, and and fish producers fish producers requiringassistance requiring financing financing assistance during the during COVID-19 the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the loans availed this time are of smaller amounts, either pandemic. However, the loans availed this time are of smaller amounts, either by choice (more by choice (more conservative/ cautious stance of borrowers due to uncertainty) or because the program conservative/ cautious stance of borrowers due to uncertainty) or because the program loans that loans that were availed are capped only up to a certain amount. Further, the outbreak of the African were availed are capped only up to a certain amount. Further, the outbreak of the African Swine Fever Swine Fever (ASF) brought down the demand for raw materials for processed feeds, including (ASF) brought down the demand for raw materials for processed feeds, including corn (NEDA corn (NEDA Economic Report, January 2021). Economic Report, January 2021). Local farmers are vulnerable to agricultural risks due to climate change and the attendant Local farmers are vulnerable to agricultural risks due to climate change and the attendant resurgence resurgence of the pest infestation in farm lands. Based on the report of the ACPC on Agriculture of the pest infestation in farm lands. Based on the report of the ACPC on Agriculture Insurance, the Insurance, the major concerns that the Philippine Crop Insurance Corporation (PCIC) faced during major concerns that the Philippine Crop Insurance Corporation (PCIC) faced during the year are the the year are the following: following: 1. There are no regular updates on the Registry System of Basic Sectors in Agriculture (RSBSA). The 1. There are no regular updates on the Registry System of Basic Sectors in Agriculture (RSBSA). The RSBSA list of farmers and fisherfolk that PCIC is presently utilizing has major exclusions as well as RSBSA list of farmers and fisherfolk that PCIC is presently utilizing has major exclusions as well as inclusions. The issue lies on individuals that are recognized as farmers in their local government units who are not included in the RSBSA. These farmers are disenfranchised from availing of the free PCIC insurance program provided to registered farmers with the RSBSA. PAGE \* 2. There is no guarantee of permanence in the establishment of a subsidized insurance program. Even if the insurance subsidy is provided in the General Appropriations Act (GAA) it is not premised on a program. The subsidy is not sustainable and only a project that can be ended at any given time. 208 3. PCIC needs to increase its capitalization and capacity strengthening to deal with its expanding operations. The present institutional capacity and capitalization of PCIC are not enough to cover all the farmers and fishers enrolled in the RSBSA. in 2019, PCIC was only able to give insurance coverage for only 3.1 million farmers and fishers with its present manpower and budget. There are currently 10 million farmers enrolled in the RSBSA. 4. The challenges posed by the implemented quarantine measures enforced locally by both the national and local governments owing to the COVID-19 affected the normal level of mobility of PCIC’s staff and its insurance partners as well as the client-beneficiaries themselves, hence, reducing access to insurance services resulting to declines in enrolment during last year. C. Current Available Financing At present, there are 36 government-supported lending programs focused on the agriculture and fisheries sector. The Department of Agriculture and its attached agencies manage 15 lending programs. These attached agencies are the Agricultural Credit Policy Council (ACPC), the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR), the National Tobacco Administration (NTA), and the Sugar Regulatory Administration (SRA). The other 2 programs are supervised by the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR). The two GFIs manage 19 credit programs for the agricultural and fisheries sector. The Land Bank of the Philippines has 17 credit facilities that are geared to the borrowing requirements of farmers, fishers and agri-entrepreneurs. Likewise the Development Bank of the Philippines implements two 2 credit programs for agribusinesses. Last year, 5 new credit facilities were initiated by both ACPC and LANDBANK. ACPC on its own launched 3 credit programs: a) Kapital Access for Young Agripreneurs (KAYA); b) Agri-Negosyo (ANYO); and c) Expanded SURE- Aid and Recovery (SURE COVID-19). SURE COVID-19 is designed to support loans to small farmers and fisherfolk (SFF) whose livelihoods were impacted by the enhanced community quarantine given the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. KAYA is ACPC’s initiative to encourage the youth to go into agribusiness while ANYO is geared for SFF organizations and micro and small enterprises engaged in the agricultural value supply chain activities such as food production, delivery of products, and other agricultural activities to ensure food security in its communities. 209 210 DA and DAR Agricultural Credit Programs: Loans Terms and Conditions Credit Facility Eligible Loan Loan Ceiling Loan Maturity Collateral Interest Purpose Rate DAR Credit Assistance Working capital Up to 80% of the Up to 2 years Assignment of PNs and Short-term Program for Program Agricultural (crop, total project cost but coinciding with underlying collateral; loan (STL) Beneficiaries Development livestock, & not to exceed P6M the maturity of Assignment on inventory, and Term (CAP-PBD) Window III, aquaculture) per conduit the loan of ARB receivables and proceeds of Loan (TL) – 2018 production sub-borrowers marketing contract; CM/REM 8% p.a. on object of financing; &/or Assignment of proceeds of insurance of guarantee claims DA-BFAR – LANDBANK Fish production Based on the actual Up to 1 year for Real estate mortgage Prevailing Partnership for the and related requirement of the short-term loans Assignment of sub- LANDBANK Promotion and projects/ancillary project/commodity Up to 5 years for promissory notes (PNs) and rate at the Development of industries and the term loans underlying collaterals; Other time (not Mariculture Parks Program organization’s net securities (chattel mortgage, lower than (PDMP), 2017 borrowing capacity guarantee, hold-out on 6% per deposits) annum) ACPC Survival and Farm Up to P25,000 per Not to exceed 3 Agri insurance Zero (0%) Recovery (SURE) Loan rehabilitation- borrower years interest Assistance Program, 2017 production inputs, repair of farm/fishery assets, acquisition of livestock/work animals, others DA Upland Southern Working Capital Depending on the Short-term – up Marketing agreement with Prevailing Mindanao – Credit and credit requirement of to 360 days buyers LANDBANK Institutional Building the coop but not to Term Loan – 3 rate at the exceed P3 million years time (net Credit Facility Eligible Loan Loan Ceiling Loan Maturity Collateral Interest Purpose Rate Program (USM – CIBP), lower than 2007 6% per annum) ACPC SURE COVID-19, Emergency and Up to P25,000 per Up to 10 years No collateral requirement Zero (0%) 2020 production capital SFF for SFF loan interest to requirement of Up to P10 million Five (5) years, SFF and SFFs per MSE borrower Inclusive of a MSEs Working capital one (1) year PLCs may requirement of grace period for charge a agri & fishery- loans to MSEs service fee based MSEs of up to 3% per loan transaction ACPC Agri-Negosyo Agri-fishery Small/enterprises Depends on the No collateral requirement Zero percent (ANYO) Loan Program, production, and SFF coops/ project cash flow (0% interest) 2020 processing, or associations – Up to and/or gestation PLCs may marketing 90% of the project period, but not to charge a Non-farm cost but not to exceed five (5) one-time enterprises in exceed P15 million years service fee combination of or total assets of 3.5% agri fishery-based Micro enterprises – finance income generating Up to 90% of the charges to project project cost but not cover its Acquisition of to exceed P3 million costs up to a machinery/equipm or total assets spread of at ent, construction Individual SFF – Up most 6% per of facility to P300,000 annum For start-ups – Up to P1 million and not to exceed debt-to- 211 equity ratio of 6:1 212 Credit Facility Eligible Loan Loan Ceiling Loan Maturity Collateral Interest Purpose Rate DA Agricultural Purchase of farm Production loan – Production – Assignment of promissory 8.5% per Competitive Enhancement inputs and LANDBANK loan seven years notes and underlying annum from Fund (ACEF), 2018 equipment or for ceiling per project Working capital – collaterals LANDBANK farm improvement type based on the based on the Assignment of proceeds of to ARBCs Acquisition/ cost of production project insurance and hold-out and 15% per establishment of Agri-enterprise loan cycle/cash flow deposits annum pass- machineries, – 10% of ARBO Fixed asset Chattel mortgage as object of on rate to equipment and borrowers loan acquisition – financing member facilities for agri- portfolio or up to P1 based on project ARB based production, million per ARB cash flow & borrower post-production, borrower economic useful and processing life of the asset, but not to exceed 5 years Sources: LANDBANK, DBP, ACPC, BFAR, NTA, SRA, and DAR. If STYLEREF “Heading 1” Chapter 8<> “Error*” “ STYLEREF “Heading 1” Chapter 8""Add a heading to your document""Chapter 8: FINANCING FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE DEVELOPMENT LANDBANK LANDBANK addedadded two 2 two 2 credit credit windows: windows: (a)(a) RuralAgro-Industrial Rural Agro-IndustrialPartnership Partnershipfor forInclusive Inclusive Development (RAPID Growth) Credit Facility, a collaboration with the Department Development (RAPID Growth) Credit Facility, a collaboration with the Department of Trade and of Trade and Industry (DTI); and Industry (DTI); and (b) (b) Commercial Commercial Fishing Fishing Vessel Vessel Financing Financing Program Program designed designed forfor commercial commercial fishing operators. The RAPID Growth Program of DTI is funded from a loan from fishing operators. The RAPID Growth Program of DTI is funded from a loan from the International the International Fund Fund forfor Agricultural Development(IFAD). Agricultural Development (IFAD). The The RAPID RAPID Growth Growth Program Program isis geared geared towards towards the the strengthening strengthening of ofagricultural agricultural supply supply chains chains in in different different localities. localities. This This is is to geared geared to upscale upscale agri- agri-based based micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) that are part of local micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) that are part of local agricultural value chains. The agricultural value chains. main The main credit credit features features and and delivery delivery schemes, schemes, loan terms andloan terms of conditions and conditions these credit of theseascredit facilities well facilities as well as the current operating status of these programs encountered as the current operating status of these programs encountered by these financing and government by these financing and government institutions institutions are shown below: are shown below: LANDBANK AND LANDBANK AND DBP DBP CREDIT CREDIT FACILITIES FACILITIES FOR FOR FISHERIES FISHERIES Credit Eligible Loan Loan Loan Collateral/Loan Interest Facility Purpose Ceiling Maturity Security Rate LANDBANK Agriculture crop, 80% of Up to 1 Any acceptable 15% per Empowering livestock and fishery total year collateral annum for Barangays production project the first 2 in Remote Agri-enterprise and cost not to crop/loan Areas other livelihood exceed cycles to through projects P500,000 be Credit and reduced Enterprises by 1% for (EMBRACE) every , 2016 crop/loan cycle due to prompt loan payment LANDBANK Purchase of inputs 80% of Short- Real estate LANDBAN Sustainable for aquaculture/ total term – up mortgage K Aquaculture mariculture project to one Chattel mortgage prevailing Lending production cost year Assignment of interest Program Working capital or Working receivables/POs: rate at the (SALP), trading/marketing capital – 3 guarantee, surety; time of 2013 operation years production, availment Fixed assets Fixed technical and acquisition asset marketing Installation of other acquisitio agreement; support facilities n – based applicable Pond development/ on project improvement cashflow Building construction but not to exceed the economic useful life PAGE \* 213 If STYLEREF “Heading 1” Chapter 8<> “Error*” “ STYLEREF “Heading 1” Chapter 8""Add a heading to your document""Chapter 8: FINANCING FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE DEVELOPMENT Credit Eligible Loan Loan Loan Collateral/Loan Interest Facility Purpose Ceiling Maturity Security Rate of the asset LANDBANK Fixed asset 80% of Short Real Estate LANDBAN farm acquisition/constructi total term – Mortgage K Tourism on project one year Chattel mortgage prevailing Financing Production loan cost line Assignment of interest Program, Working Capital dependin receivables, rate at the 2018 g on cash insurance, credit time of cycle guarantee, surety, availment Working others capital – 3 years Fixed asset acquisitio n – based on project cashflow but not to exceed the economic al useful life of the asset LANDBANK Agricultural and P50,000 Short- Assignment of LANDBAN Young fishery production per term – up guarantee and/or K Entrepreneu Trading, processing, borrower to 360 PCIC Insurance prevailing rs from servicing and Not more days proceeds, interest School of distribution of than 90% Term loan receivables/procee rate at the Agriculture agricultural crops of total – not ds of market time of Program and commodities project more than contract availment (YESAP), cost 10 years Post-dated checks 2017 For land inclusive Object of financing acquisition of grace Real estate , based on period on mortgage loan value principal but not and/or more than interest, 20% of the dependin total g on the project cash flow cost PAGE \* 214 If STYLEREF “Heading 1” Chapter 8<> “Error*” “ STYLEREF “Heading 1” Chapter 8""Add a heading to your document""Chapter 8: FINANCING FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE DEVELOPMENT Credit Eligible Loan Loan Loan Collateral/Loan Interest Facility Purpose Ceiling Maturity Security Rate LANDBANK Crop, livestock and 80% of Short- Assignment of LANDBAN Climate fishery production total term – up guarantee/insuran K Resilient Working capital project to 360 ce proceeds, prevailing Agriculture Fixed assets cost days receivables, or interest Financing acquisition Term portion of the rate at the Program, Building Loan – LGUs net income time of 2016 Construction based on and IRA availment projected Real estate cash flow mortgage and Chattel mortgage economic ally useful life of fixed assets LANDBANK Purchase/Acquisition 80% of Up to ten Ship mortgage 5% per Commercial of brand new, total (10) years decree annum Fishing second-hand or project but no Chattel mortgage Vessel refurbished cost longer Real estate Financing commercial fishing than the mortgage Program, boats and related remaining Assignment of 2020 equipment economic receivables, post- useful life dated check, hold- of the out on deposits, asset insurance claims, others DBP Provide loan For Term loan Real estate Interest Sustainable assistance for regular – based mortgage • Chattel rate on the Agribusiness agribusiness projects loans - up on the mortgage SAFP loan Financing engaged in to 90% of project • Assignment of shall be Program agriculture and the total cycle and Insurance/ based on 2015 fisheries production, project projected surety/guarantee the harvesting, cost cash flow • Assignment of borrower processing, and • For but shall supply risk rating/ marketing plantation not contract/receivable scoring or exceed s and livestock 15 years • Continuing aligned and • Credit suretyship (JSS) or with poultry Line – co-make ship existing projects - based on • Hold-out on pricing up to 80% the cash deposit • For policies as of the total conversio LGUs- Deed of per DBP project n cycle assignment of Circular on cost but not portion of IRA PAGE \* 215 If STYLEREF “Heading 1” Chapter 8<> “Error*” “ STYLEREF “Heading 1” Chapter 8""Add a heading to your document""Chapter 8: FINANCING FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE DEVELOPMENT Credit Eligible Loan Loan Loan Collateral/Loan Interest Facility Purpose Ceiling Maturity Security Rate • For more than Lending LGUs - up 360 days Rates to 90% of total project cost or winning bid price, whichever is lower • For credit line - based on minimum cash requireme nt Sources: LANDBANK, DBP, ACPC The Agricultural Guarantee Fund Pool (AGFP) was established in 2008 to reduce the risks involved in agriculture lending to tolerable levels and enable the setting up the credit mechanism The Agricultural Guarantee Fund Pool (AGFP) was established in 2008 to reduce the risks involved for the agriculture sector. The management and the implementation of the AGFP was transferred in agriculture lending to tolerable levels and enable the setting up the credit mechanism for the to the Philippine Guarantee Corporation (PhilGuarantee) in August, 2019 by the Department of agriculture sector. The management and the implementation of the AGFP was transferred to the Finance. Philippine Guarantee Corporation (PhilGuarantee) in August, 2019 by the Department of Finance. The AGFP gives up to 85% loan guarantee cover on unsecured lending facilities provided The by AGFP gives accredited up to institutions financial 85% loan guarantee versus allcover kindsonofunsecured lending risk that are facilities mainly provided by non-repayment by accredited financial institutions versus all kinds of risk that are mainly non-repayment farmers and fishers borrowers not including fraudulent events. The main objective is to reassure by farmers and fishers borrowers financial institutions notto including fraudulent expand their financialevents. exposureThetomain objective isand the agricultural to fisheries reassure sector financial by institutions to expand their financial exposure to the agricultural reducing financial institutions’ risks in non-collateralized lending. and fisheries sector by reducing financial institutions’ risks in non-collateralized lending. Last year, PhilGuarantee sustained its support for the agriculture and fisheries sector as Last of part year, PhilGuarantee its mandate sustained to help its support for of in the development thethe agriculture country’sand fisheries sector agricultural industry as part at aoftime its mandate to help in the development of the country's agricultural industry at a time when when it is recovering from the impact of the pandemic. Philguarantee’s Governing Board approved it is recovering from the the impact reduction of of thethe pandemic. guarantee feePhilguarantee’s from 1% to 0.5% Governing and theBoard approved increase of the the reduction guarantee of the coverage guarantee fee from 1% to 0.5% and the increase of the guarantee coverage from 85% to 90% of the loan amount as its response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The presence from 85% to 90% of the of loan amount as its response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The presence of this type of this type of facility will help assure lenders to continue its lending programs to the agricultural facility will help assure lenders to continue its lending programs to the agricultural sector. sector. PAGE \* 216 If STYLEREF “Heading 1” Chapter 8<> “Error*” “ STYLEREF “Heading 1” Chapter 8""Add a heading to your document""Chapter 8: FINANCING FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE DEVELOPMENT Key KeyFeatures of of Features AGFP Credit AGFP Guarantee Credit Guarantee Program Objective To encourage partner lending institutions (PLIs) to lend to small farmers and fishers (SFF) or their organizations by providing guarantee coverage to their unsecured loans thereby mitigating the risks involved in lending to the agri- agra sector. Eligible Types of Banks, Cooperatives, Farmers organizations (FOs), PLIs People’s organizations other than cooperatives (POs), Non-government organizations (NGOs), and Corporations that lend to SFF Eligible Borrowers Small Farmers: Small Crop Growers – tilling not more than five (5) hectares of agricultural lands Small Poultry and Livestock Raisers – those having the following maximum inventory: a. Poultry – 2,000 layers or 5,000 broilers; b. Swine – 10 sows or 50 fatteners; c. Goat/Sheep – up to 50 heads for meat and/or dairy; d. Cattle – 10 fatteners or 5 breeders; and e. Dairy – 10 milking cows/carabaos Small Fishers: Coastal Fishermen – own or operate a fishing boat, including paraphernalia with total weight of not more than three (3) gross tons and conduct fishing activities within 15 kilometers from the shoreline Fishpond Operators – owner/operator of fishpond(s) of not more than 5 hectares including those under fishpond lease agreements Fish Cage Operators – owner/operator of fish cage(s) with total area of not more than 400 square meters Those engaged in aquaculture, which covers all forms of raising and culturing fish, shellfish, seaweed production, and other fishery species in brackish and marine areas of not more than 5 hectares Eligible Loans for Unsecured loans of eligible borrowers; if secured partly by Guarantee real estate mortgage or chattel mortgage or deposit hold- Coverage out in favor of the PLI, only the unsecured portion which shall be not less than 50% of the loan shall be eligible for guarantee coverage. Eligible Loan ● Agriculture and fisheries production including Purposes/Activitie processing of fisheries and agri-based products and s farm inputs ● Acquisition of work animals, farm and fishery equipment and machinery PAGE \* 217 If STYLEREF “Heading 1” Chapter 8<> “Error*” “ STYLEREF “Heading 1” Chapter 8""Add a heading to your document""Chapter 8: FINANCING FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE DEVELOPMENT ● Acquisition of seeds, fertilizers, poultry, livestock, feeds and other similar items ● Rehabilitation of farms resulting from calamities ● Agricultural and fish production including processing of agri and aqua-based products, farm inputs and/or processes across the food commodity value chain Maximum The guarantee cover shall be up to 85% of the principal Guarantee Cover/ balance of the loan at the time of claim but not to exceed Loan Amount the amount of credit ceiling per commodity/activity type ranging, as follows: Crop production – P30,000 to P310,000 per hectare Poultry production: (a) broiler – P10,000 per 100 birds; and (b) layer – P86,000 per 100 birds, and Livestock production: (a) breeding – P20,000 to P80,000 per animal; and (b) fattening – P10,000 to P50,000 per animal fisheries production (milkfish, tilapia, seaweed) – P52,000- P310,000 per hectare multi-crop/Other short-term crop e.g., vegetables, integrated farming, etc.) – P100,000 per hectare. Guarantee Fee The guarantee fee rates range from 1% - 3.85% based on the loan amount, the guarantee cover period, and loan purpose/activity. The following discounts apply: If the loan is covered by PCIC insurance – 50% discount, If the loan is granted to an agrarian reform beneficiary (ARB) – 50% discount, and If the loan is PCIC insured and the borrower is an ARB – 75% discount. Risks and Events All risks, from losses due to non-payment of loans including Default Covered those that are caused by the following, but not limited to: a) natural calamities (such as typhoons, floods, etc.); b) pests and diseases; and c) market aberrations, except fraud or willful misrepresentation on the guarantee coverage and guarantee claims on the part of the PLI The PCIC provides agricultural insurance products and services to farmers, fishers and other The PCIC provides agricultural insurance products and services to farmers, fishers and other agricultural stakeholders. The insurance coverage is for the following crops and commodities: rice, agricultural stakeholders. corn, high-value commercial Thecrops, insurance coverage livestock, is for non-crop fisheries, the following crops and agricultural commodities: assets, rice, and credit and corn, life high-value term. commercial According crops, to the PCIC livestock, website, fisheries, non-crop the insurance cover foragricultural assets, both fisheries and and credit and aquaculture is a life term. According to the PCIC website, the insurance cover for both fisheries and aquaculture protection against losses of unharvested stocks in fish or aquatic farms due to the impact of climate is a protection against losses of unharvested stocks in fish or aquatic farms due to the impact of climate change. change. The DA The DAACPC and and ACPC initiated initiated the the Production Production Loan Easy Loan Easy Access Access (PLEA). (PLEA). PCICPCIC subsidizes subsidizes 100% 100% of of insurance premium cost under the following insurance lines: crops (rice, corn, high insurance premium cost under the following insurance lines: crops (rice, corn, high value crops), value crops), commodities (livestock, poultry commodities (livestock, poultryand andfisheries) fisheries)and andnon-crop non-cropagricultural agricultural assets. assets. Farmers Farmers and and fishers fishers who who are are registered withthe registered with theRSBSA RSBSA are eligible to are eligible to seek seek financial financialloans loansfrom fromthis thisfacility. facility.The Thelending lending outlets must be accredited with the outlets must be accredited with the ACPC. ACPC. PAGE \* 218 Chapter 8: FINANCING FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE DEVELOPMENT PCIC PCICFisheries FisheriesInsurance Program Insurance Program Objective Un-harvested crop / stock in fisheries farms specified in the of application for fisheries insurance on the farmland specified Insurance on the insurance application. Amount of Cost of production inputs, the value of the fish farmer / Cover fisherfolk/ grower’s own labor and those of the members of his own household, including the value of labor of hired workers per Fisheries Farm Plan and Budget. Premium Shall be determined by PCIC, subject to the established Rate (%) provisions. This ranges from 2% to 12% depending on the result of the pre-coverage evaluation of the risk proposed, and other factors such as agro-climatic conditions and terrain, project management factors, and production and loss records. Covered Limited Cover of crop/stock due to natural disasters. Risks Extended Cover against loss of crop/ stock and other eligible properties due to fortuitous events and force majeure. PCIC’s insurance production for other crops such as sugarcane, coconut, tobacco, and PCIC’s insurance production for other crops such as sugarcane, coconut, tobacco, and fisheries, although marginally decreased as shown below. The lesser value of insurance coverage fisheries, although marginally decreased as shown below. The lesser value of insurance for fisheries is attributed mainly to the non-dispersal of fingerlings to Special Areas for Agricultural coverage for fisheries is attributed mainly to the non-dispersal of fingerlings to Special Areas Development (SAAD) beneficiaries in Region XII and ineligible fish stocks in Region X. for Agricultural Development (SAAD) beneficiaries in Region XII and ineligible fish stocks in Region X. PCIC Coverage and Outreach, by Insurance Product/Commodity, 2019 and 2020 PAGE \* 219 Chapter 8: FINANCING FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE DEVELOPMENT Chapter 8: FINANCING FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE DEVELOPMENT Commodity % 2019 2020* PCIC /Coverage Product and Outreach, by Insurance Product/Commodity, 2019 and 2020 Increase/(Decrease) Amoun No. Amount No. Amount No. Commodity % t (PB) 2019Insured (PB) 2020*Insured Insured / Product Increase/(Decrease) Rice 28.861 1,009,75 28.504 1,189,56 (1.2) 17.8 Amoun No. Amount No. Amount No. 7 3 t (PB) Insured (PB) Insured Insured Corn 10.597 392,851 8.600 408,673 (18.8) 4.0 Rice 28.861 1,009,75 28.504 1,189,56 (1.2) 17.8 High Value crops 10.326 199,848 7.079 172,210 (31.4) (13.8) 7 3 Sugarcane 0.486 6,733 0.340 4,070 (30.0) (39.6) Corn 10.597 392,851 8.600 408,673 (18.8) 4.0 Coconut 8.343 141,713 3.981 78,048 (52.3) (44.9) High Value crops 10.326 199,848 7.079 172,210 (31.4) (13.8) Tobacco 0.021 1,449 0.004 130 (81.0) (91.0) Sugarcane 0.486 6,733 0.340 4,070 (30.0) (39.6) Livestock 11.758 473,440 8.975 354,190 (23.7) (25.2) Coconut 8.343 141,713 3.981 78,048 (52.3) (44.9) Poultry 0.054 1,732 0.054 443 0.0 (74.4) Tobacco 0.021 1,449 0.004 130 (81.0) (91.0) Fisheries 0.686 16,819 0.554 13,660 (19.2) (18.8) Livestock 11.758 473,440 8.975 354,190 (23.7) (25.2) Non-crop/ Agri 3.020 44,754 2.247 34,921 (25.6) (22.0) Poultry 0.054 1,732 0.054 443 0.0 (74.4) Assets Fisheries 0.686 16,819 0.554 13,660 (19.2) (18.8) Credit and 37.915 862,511 28.405 633,535 (25.1) (26.5) Non-crop/ Agri 3.020 44,754 2.247 34,921 (25.6) (22.0) Life Term Assets Total 112.067 3,151,60 88.743 2,889,44 (20.8) (8.3) Credit and 37.915 862,511 28.405 633,535 (25.1) (26.5) 7 3 Life Term *2020 figures are not final and data generated as of January 11, 2021 Total 112.067 3,151,60 88.743 2,889,44 (20.8) (8.3) 7 Source: Philippine Crop 3 Insurance Corporation (PCIC) *2020 figures are not final and data generated as of January 11, 2021 The local banking industry’s total loan portfolio Source:was estimated Philippine Cropat PhP 11 trillion Insurance by the end Corporation of (PCIC) the 3rd quarter of last year. This shows a marginal lending growth rate of 1% over the same timeThe lastlocal yearbanking as a result industry’s total loan of the economic portfolio slowdown was estimated mainly caused by at thePhP 11 trillion COVID-19 by the end pandemic The of the 3rdlocal banking quarter industry’s last year. ofstrict total This shows loan portfolio a marginalwas estimated lending at PhP growth rate 11 trillion by sameoftime the end the and the ensuing economic lockdowns that were implemented then.ofFinancial 1% overinstitutions’ last the year 3rd lendingas aquarter resultof activitiesoftolast year. This shows theeconomic the farming and slowdowna marginal lending mainlywere fishery sectors caused growth by rate theat estimated of 1% over COVID-19 the same pandemic Php 615 billion or 6%andof the time ensuing last year as a result of the economic slowdown mainly caused by the COVID-19 pandemic their strict economic total lending. lockdowns Financial that were institutions implemented credit exposure tothen. Financial the sectors institutions’ declined by 4%lending as and activitiesthe ensuing strict economic lockdowns that were implemented then. Financial institutions’ compared to the same period last year. Likewise, non-agricultural loans had a larger share oftotal to the farming and fishery sectors were estimated at Php 615 billion or 6% of their lending lending. activities to Financial the farming institutions creditand fishery exposure sectors to the were estimated at by Php4% 615asbillion or 6% of the financial system’s total portfolio totaling PhP 10 sectors declined trillion, or 1% marginal compared increase over theto the their sameprevioustotal period year.lending. Financial institutions credit exposure to the sectors declined ast year. Likewise, non-agricultural loans had a larger share of the financial system’s by 4% as totalcompared portfolio to the same totaling period PhP 10 last year. trillion, or 1%Likewise, non-agricultural marginal increase overloans the had previous a larger year.share of the financial system’s total portfolio totaling PhP 10 trillion, or 1% marginal increase over the Amount of Bank previous Amount year. Loans of for Agriculture Bank Loans for and Fisheries Agriculture and(in PHP (in Fisheries Billions) PHP Billions) Sector Agriculture Sector Non-agriculture Total ---- Amount of BankAmount Agriculture 3rd Quarter 2019 Loans for % 640.96 3rd Quarter 2019 9,923.27 Amount 10,564.23 640.96 Share andAmount Agriculture % Share 6.1 93.9 100.0 6.1 3rd Quarter 2020 % PHP Fisheries (in 615.40 3rd Quarter 2020 10,063.38 Amount 10,678.78 615.40 Share 5.8 94.7 % Share 100.0 5.8 % Increase/ (Decrease) Billions) (4.0) % Increase/ 1.4 (Decrease) 1.1 (4.0) Non-agriculture Source: www.bsp.gov.ph. 2021. 9,923.27 93.9 10,063.38 94.7 1.4 Total Source: BSP www.bsp.gov.ph. Data Supervisory 2021. Analytics 10,564.23 for the 100.0 Agricultural Loans. 10,678.78 [online] Available at: 100.0 1.1 BSP <http://www.bsp.gov.ph> Data Supervisory Analytics [Accessed for the Agricultural 20 February 2021]. Loans. [online] Available at: Source: www.bsp.gov.ph. 2021. <http://www.bsp.gov.ph> [Accessed 20 February 2021]. BSP TheData Supervisory decline Analytics for the in agricultural Agricultural loans Loans. [online] from financial Available at: institutions could be due to the decrease in <http://www.bsp.gov.ph> [Accessed 20 February 2021]. farming activities and agri-based businesses that were affected by the economic lockdowns The decline in agricultural loans from financial institutions could be due to the decrease in farming activities and agri-based businesses that were affected by the economic lockdowns PAGE \* PAGE 220 \* The decline in agricultural loans from financial institutions could be due to the decrease in farming activities and agri-based businesses that were affected by the economic lockdowns and strict mobility limitations enforced by the government to mitigate the outbreak of the pandemic. A careful assessment of agricultural activities supported by bank loans showed that manufacturing activities using agriculture, forestry, and fishery products, accounted for 30% of the lending activities, added a larger share of the reduction. Another key factor to the reduction and which also is substantial at 21% of total agricultural loans from financial institutions are wholesale and retail trading of agricultural and agri-based products. It is noteworthy that regardless of the pandemic, lending activities for both agricultural as well as transportation and storage sectors mirrored the same rate increase of 6% in 2020 from 2019. The increase in lending activities for the production, storage, and transport activities for agricultural products was supported by both government and private sector lending intermediation intended at procuring the food supply during the economic lockdown last year amidst the ensuing impact of the pandemic. As of the end of 3rd quarter last year, lending activities to the agricultural and fisheries sector were estimated at P182 billion, comprising 30% of the total loan portfolio of financial institutions for agriculture and fisheries. In contrast to the same period in 2019, lending activities in agriculture and fisheries accounted for 27% of total agricultural loans which was lower. The banking and financial industry’s agricultural loan portfolio expectedly dropped last year at almost the same rate as the previous year. The Universal and Commercial Banks (UKBs) remain to be the largest lenders to the agriculture sector accounting for 93% of the total agricultural lending exposure of the entire banking industry. UKB lending activities for the agriculture sector was estimated at Php 570 billion last year. This is about Php 24 billion less than their loans in 2019. Thrift Banks (TBs) and Rural and Cooperative Banks (RCBs)almost reflected the same portfolio size allocated to the agriculture sector, each contributing 4% of the total in 2020 and 2019. TBs agricultural loan portfolio nearly hit PhP 22.4 billion as of the end of 3rd quarter last year. This is about a billion less from the same period last year. RCBs’ lending exposure to agriculture and fisheries, on the other hand, amounted to PhP 23.2 billion last year. This is about one billion less than its financial exposure in 2019. Given its strategic location in rural farming communities, RCBs are pursuing their mandates to support the agriculture sector in rural farming communities. These banks are ideally situated and maintaining a comparative advantage in giving banking relationship lending to agricultural and fishery borrowers. D. Proposed Financing Framework The proposed financing framework will largely be influenced by the Mandanas Ruling of 2018 and the emergence of new financing modalities driven by green financing initiatives, which are led by multilateral credit institutions as well as local financial institutions. This can help the current financial resources that are financing fisheries development projects initiated by both BFAR and the LGUs. 221 Chapter 8: FINANCING FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE DEVELOPMENT Additional IRA from the •+ Mandanas ' Ruling Financing of .. BFAR and LGU Traditional Sources of Fisheries .nri nnof. Financing •• DevelopmentRand LGU Management . - •+ Green . Financing Opportunities Projects - '""'-"' -.......... ,..,... - . .. ement a.JI ....... Projects 0 '-nt For LGUs to avail of credit facilities from Government Financial Institutions, they would have Forendorsement to get of Finance, LGUs to avail get endorsement haveoftoFinance, the the agency agency of Bureau from from that •credit facilities thatBureau is of Local Government primarily from Government of Local is primarily Government tasked tasked Finance with monitoring with FinanceFinancial monitoring Institutions, (BLGF) under (BLGF) under its financial its they would the Department the Department performances financial and performances fiscal management. The BLGF provides assistance to LGUs who fail to meet their internal and fiscalfinancial management. targets. The BLGF provides assistance to LGUs who fail to meet their internal financial targets. The fiscal performance of LGUs can be seen from the results of the National Competitiveness Index Theon Municipalities. fiscal performance Theofoverall LGUs canrankings be seenbased fromonthethe National results Competitiveness of the Council National Competitiveness IndexIndices on indicate where the Municipalities. TheLGUs overallstand. Most ofbased rankings the LGUs on thewho have National low performances Competitivenesscan be Council seen Indices from their indicate wherehigh dependence the LGUs stand.on their Most IRA LGUs of the with very who little income have low coming from performances canother be seen sources. This also indicates a low level of economic dynamism and governance. from their high dependence on their IRA with very little income coming from other sources. Table 8.2This also shows the a low indicates financing scheme level of that BFAR economic and LGUs dynamism andcan consider in governance. the 8.2 shows Table implementation the of its financing projects for the development of agriculture and fisheries. scheme that BFAR and LGUs can consider in the implementation of its projects for the development of agriculture and fisheries. Financial Scheme Description National Funds from National Government Agencies (NGAs) allocated Fundings through the General Appropriation Act (GAA) e.g. DA-BFAR, DENR, DAR, DOST, DTI, DPWH supporting the development of agriculture and fisheries and coastal resources management (CRM) Local Funding Funds from LGUs allocated for agriculture and fisheries and CRM included in the Annual Investment Plan (AIP) from IRA or from other sources levied by LGUs as local taxes, environmental fees, tourism fees, and payments for ecosystem services among others. Credit Windows Funds that can be sourced by LGUs, private sector, cooperatives, and small farmers and fisherfolk (SFF) through loans from government financial institutions (GFIs), public and private banks. Also include microfinance services that can be accessed by SFF Chapter and other8:small FINANCING FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE DEVELOPMENT entrepreneurs Private Sector Funds or investment from the private sector for agriculture and Investment fisheries related business and enterprises such as fish processing, ice plants, cold storage, fish port, wet markets, transportation, eco- tourism and other related infrastructure and services Grants Funds sourced by LGUs, NGAs, Academe or NGO/PO in a form of PAGE \* 222 ODA or local grants dedicated for agriculture and fisheries development Bonds (both Funds that can be accessed by NGAs, LGUs and the private ice plants, cold storage, fish port, wet markets, transportation, eco- tourism and other related infrastructure and services Grants Funds sourced by LGUs, NGAs, Academe or NGO/PO in a form of ODA or local grants dedicated for agriculture and fisheries development Bonds (both Funds that can be accessed by NGAs, LGUs and the private international and sector to support agriculture and fisheries development local FromFrom a a credit credit perspective, perspective, LGULGU creditworthiness creditworthiness can mean can mean higherhigher borrowing borrowing costs costs iven given the the risks associated in debt servicing. The perceived lending risks are due to the limited risks associated in debt servicing. The perceived lending risks are due to the limited revenue revenue streams as as streams shown fromfrom shown highhigh dependency dependency on on their IRAs. their Given IRAs. thethe Given non-revenue non-revenue character characterofof some of these LGU’s some of projects, these LGU’sitprojects, would be difficult it would be for banks difficult forand other banks financial and other institutions financial to to provide institutions commercial financing due to the limited cash flows that can support regular provide commercial financing due to the limited cash flows that can support regular debt debt servicing activities such as servicing loan such activities repayments as loan repayments The appropriate financial mix for LGUs are dependent on their own fiscal condition. The appropriate financial mix for LGUs are dependent on their own fiscal condition. Based on Based on the BLGF Typology, most LGUs belong to the Type 4 Category: Poor Revenue / Poor the BLGF Typology, most LGUs belong to the Type 4 Category: Poor Revenue / Poor Expenditure thus making them least bankable unless a portion of their IRA is pledged to cover Expenditure thus making them least bankable unless a portion of their IRA is pledged to cover loan indebtedness. This situation will definitely make it difficult for LGUs as their IRA dependency loan indebtedness. This situation will definitely make it difficult for LGUs as their IRA ratio on the average is at 90%, which is considered high. This indicates less dependence on other dependency ratio on the average is at 90%, which is considered high. This indicates less sources of revenue on part of the LGU. This overdependence on their IRA reflects poor financial dependence on other sources of revenue on part of the LGU. This overdependence on their management on their part. IRA reflects poor financial management on their part. Most LGUs have not borrowed from banks given their tight financial position. Government Financial Institutions Most LGUssuchhave as Land not Bank of the borrowed Philippines from banks and given thetight their Development financial Bank position.of the Philippines Government require an assignment of their IRA for debt servicing. According to the records Financial Institutions such as Land Bank of the Philippines and the Development Bank of from thetheBLGF website only a few Philippines LGUs require anfrom the present assignment list, IRA of heir havefor availed debt of credit facilities. servicing. According to the records from the BLGF website only a few LGUs from the present list, have availed of credit facilities. The LGU has the power to impose environmental fees, payments for environmental services The LGU has the power to impose environmental fees, payments for environmental services among others. They also have the legal basis under the R.A. 7160 or the Local Government Code to among others. They also have the legal basis under the R.A. 7160 or the Local Government enforce environmental laws. The LGUs can make an outright request to NGAs and their attached Code to enforce environmental laws. The LGUs can make an outright request to NGAs and agencies for technical and financial assistance for their coastal marine resource projects. their attached agencies for technical and financial assistance for their coastal marine resource projects. A portion of the annual budgets of DENR, DOT, DA can focus on the technical and financing portion A of aspects theof the annual coastal budgets marine of DENR, resource DOT, projects. LGUsDA can mustfocus reachon outthe to NGAs forand technical financing its CRM projects to beaspects of the supported coastal by its marine public resource NGAs investment. projects. areLGUs taskedmust withreach out to helping NGAsLGUs coastal for its CRM implement CRMprojects projects toin betheir supported by its public localities investment. especially in NGAs light of the are tasked with of vulnerabilities helping thesecoastal LGUs to communities implement extreme weatherCRM projects in conditions their localities (strong especially in typhoons, storm light of surges). the marine Coastal vulnerabilities resourceof these projects, communities especially to extreme those in mangroveweather conditions rehabilitation, can(strong typhoons, serve as a storm buffer to surges). storm Coastal surges marine in particular. resource projects, especially those in mangrove rehabilitation, can serve as a buffer to storm surges in particular. The Mandanas Ruling and its Impact on the Fisheries Development Program The implementation of the Mandanas Ruling of 2018 has a significant impact on the budgetary allocations for BFAR given the lesser likelihood of obtaining higher financial allocations. The reallocation of budgets to the Local Government Units will definitely impact its own operations. PAGE \* 223 The Mandanas Ruling and its Impact on the Fisheries Development Program The implementation of the Mandanas Ruling of 2018 has a significant impact on the budgetary allocations for BFAR given the lesser likelihood of obtaining higher financial allocations. The reallocation of budgets to the Local Government Units will definitely impact its own operations. The internal revenue allocation to LGUs are programmed to increase by 55% in the 2022 national budget. This will reach PhP 1.08 trillion or 4.8% of GDP as compared to 3.5% in 2021. Certain LGUs have already expressed their concerns relative to the financial and technical capacity to assume expanded mandates previously provided by national government agencies. According to the World Bank, underspending by LGUs is likely to deteriorate given the limited capacity to absorb a major increase in revenues. At present, most LGUs, according to the classification of the BLGF, belong to the Poor Revenue / Poor Expenditure category. This is normally seen from the high dependence on IRA by LGUs. The World Bank recommendations for managing the transition on the implementation of the Mandanas ruling include the following: ● Redirecting the increase in their IRA towards the LGUs’ COVID 19 response efforts to mitigate financial budget implementation at the same time providing important support to local communities; ● Addressing disparity among LGUs by providing targeted support to poor LGUs that lack proper capacity and resources; ● Providing capacity building support to LGUs to improve their implementation capacity and overall service delivery; and ● Strengthening citizen’s capacity to demand accountability through measures like citizen participation in budgeting and expenditure processes; public hearings on budget information; civic monitoring of intergovernmental transfers; monitoring of local service provision; and social audits. E. Targets 2021 – 2025 The ACPC has defined the financial targets for the fisheries industry in terms of the extension of credit facilities and its loan application by target borrowers. The estimates were derived from historical data and used as a basis of projecting loan demand over the projected period. Figure 8.1 shows the projected loan demand from small fishers which are premised on high and low demand estimates. 6 PHILIPPINES: Mandanas Ruling Provides Opportunities for Improving Service Delivery Through Enhanced Decentralization (https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2021/06/10/philippines-mandan- as-ruling-provides-opportunities-for-improving-service-delivery-through-enhanced-decentralization) 224 LOW ESTIMATE - HIGH ESTIMATE PROJECTED LOAN DEMAND FROM SMALL FISHERS 75.000 62,539 50,482 53,259 56,188 59,279 - 47,851 ~ 50.000 - ..."' 28,163 29.712 i!:, 23,984 25,303 26,695 25.000 22733 0 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Figure 8.1: Projected Loan Demand from the Small Fishers (Source: DA-ACPC) The above chart indicates a gradual growth of the projected loan demand from small fishers over the five-year period. On the high side, loan demand is expected to increase from PhP 53.250 million in 2021 to PhP 62.539 in 2024. On the other hand, the low side of the projected loan demand is also expected to increase from PhP 25.303 million in 2021 to PhP 29.712 million in 2024. In terms of demands by commodity, Figure 8.2 shows the high estimates for the projected loan extended to the aquaculture sub sector. The projected estimates under this scenario shows that loans to tilapia / bangus fish farmers are at PhP 9.4 billion, mussels / oysters at PhP 802 million, crabs / shrimps at PhP 11.441 billion, assorted fish at PhP1.633 billion, and fish capture at Php 29.9 billion. COCOHllT - i 3.U83 CORN ---■A■.~---103826 RICE ----■ iilllil81_ _ _ _ Bl,611 ESTIMATBJ LOAN lEMAND VEGETABLE - - S.0!l5 r2 BVaJNMJDITVFOR 2021 C>ICKEN ■2;~5 '7'i5 PIO • 38.134 0 50,000 100,000 150.000 IIIP~IIIIOlfl ~ J A0UACILTURE:TII.AFWBA~S 11U l,dffi LOWESTIMA AOUActJI.TUil(: MUSSUS/OVSlERS 1802 HIGH ESTIMA ~"S ~~ AfillACU.TIJRE: CRABS/lH UMPS IU41 IN~MILLION) '5 AOOW TIJ!lE: ASSIJITE0 FISH '76 ■ '.633 Ei- ¥g ASH CAPTURE 14 214 ';)$ 298 ~ 0 10.000 20,000 30,000 Olll>IJI.UOKJ 225 F. Strategies and Action Plan The strategies and action plan to mobilize financial resources to support the programs identified in this plan are shown below: Harmonization of National and Local Development Plans and Funding for Agriculture and Fisheries Development Plans. The national government has several development plans for the agriculture and fisheries sector with funding allocations from the General Appropriation Act (GAA). However, the funding from GAA is limited to implement all the planned programs and projects. Given the expected higher allocation of LGUs as a result of the implementation of the Mandanas ruling, there is an opportunity to allocate more funds for the agriculture and fisheries sector out of the local development funds of LGUs. DA and BFAR may provide technical assistance to LGUs for the preparation of Local Agriculture and Fisheries Development Plan integrated in the LGUs. Comprehensive Development Plan (CDP) ensures that the funding allocation in the LGUs Annual Investment Plans for agriculture and fisheries shall be complementary with the national and regional development plans. Mobilize Grants to Support Fisheries and Aquaculture and livelihood activities NGOs and POs will need to prepare their project proposals that can be supported by grants. The project proposal must fit in well to the project design requirements and templates of the possible donors. The grants can come from the various government agencies, LGUs, NGOs, and development partners particularly supporting the small fisherfolk. Likewise, LGUs, NGAs and NGOs can also serve as conduits of funds to support the livelihood development of small fisherfolks and their communities. Mobilize Private Sector to Invest in Fisheries and Aquaculture Production and Processing as well as in Eco-Tourism in Coastal Communities The private sector can be an active partner that can provide funding for investments in fisheries and aquaculture production and processing. The national and local government units shall encourage the private sector to invest in the fisheries and aquaculture development to further support public investments in the agriculture and fisheries sector. Further, eco-agri-tourism development remains a potential for coastal LGUs and the private sector to consider to pump prime the local economy. Private sector investment in eco-tourism sites and its ancillary industries has been on the upswing in eco-tourism destination sites in the country. The DOT recently stated that it is seeking further development of newer tourism destinations in the country given the promising opportunities it offers to investors and tourists alike. Strengthen Credit Facilities for Fisheries and Aquaculture Development With the high demands for loans and credit services, the current credit facilities shall be strengthened and be more accessible to borrowers. Such credit windows shall cover small fisherfolks, cooperatives, private sector, and the local government units. There are existing credit windows and available funding which can be strengthened and expand coverage to serve more eligible borrowers and improve business and livelihood in the fisheries and aquaculture. 226 Chapter 9 STRATEGIC COMMUNICATION 227 Strategic Directions For Communicating the CNFIDP: Basis for Developing the CNFIDP Strategic Communication Plan A. Background The Comprehensive National Fisheries Industries Development Plan (CNFIDP) 2016-2020 has lead the fisheries sector in the past five years. Through this plan, the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) has guided the development of the sector through the implementation of appropriate programs, activities and projects (PAPs) and overseeing the governance of these PAPs in partnership with major stakeholders. However, current developments spur the revision of the CNFIDP for the program years 2021 to 2025. Primary among these developments are the policies which form the foundation of the strategies and priority actions: the Fishery Management Areas (FAO 263), the Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management, the Mandanas-Garcia Ruling (enforced by E.O. 138, dated June 1, 2021), and the OneDA Approach. The widespread engagement of stakeholders requires effective communication in all directions. Based on the discussions during the various stakeholder consultations for the revision of the CNFIDP, several communication issues arose. Primary among these is communicating the plan itself, not only to the fisherfolk and representatives of lead agencies and institutions (DA and BFAR) but also to other decision makers and policy makers. The specific initiatives identified under the revised CNFIDP should be aligned with the programs, activities and projects (PAPs) of the DA and BFAR, as well as complementary to related PAPs of other government agencies. Communication to and with these audiences will ensure alignment and complementarity. Another communication need identified by stakeholders in consultation, is for a wide scale dissemination of the relevant laws, regulations and/or policies that govern or guide the implementation of the CNFIDP, as well as those that guide, regulate or manage the fisheries sector. With such dissemination, stakeholders (especially fishers, processors and traders) will be more aware or have more knowledge of relevant policies and initiatives, and this they believe will prevent, if not reduce, the potential of conflict especially with regard to protected areas, closed fishing seasons, and the like. In relation, more information is needed to enable fishers especially to access government services and financial assistance programs. Many of the fishes say that their inability to access needed government assistance/services is because they are not aware that such exist or that they do not know the requirements necessary for availment. Either way, they believe that more IEC about these services is warranted. As communication is a valuable component of the PAPs, as well as a strategy in itself, it is necessary to lay down the guidance for the communication of the CNFIDP. Sustaining the fishery is of the utmost importance to the physical, economic, environmental, social and political well-being of the Philippines. Communication plays a key role in the management of any sector – fisheries included. Ultimately, achieving this objective lies with the Filipinos, and the communications strategy must, at every juncture, ensure that it is delivering the right message, at the right time, to the right audience via the right method. Institutional planners can come up with excellent programs/projects, but these interventions cannot succeed if they have not been properly communicated to the relevant fisheries stakeholders. Thus, these strategic directions. 228 B. Situation Analysis As mentioned earlier, the issues related to communication must be surfaced so they can be appropriately addressed. This was done during the FMA consultation workshops. Issues identified range across all the subsectors and seem to be common to most. Generally, the issues fall under issues related to (1) Lack of awareness, to (2) Lack of information/knowledge, and to (3) Lack of communication capacity. 1. Lack of Awareness Participants say that there is generally a lack of awareness regarding fisheries ordinances, issuance of permits, farm registration, biophysical and other factors affecting fisheries, and destructive fishing methods, among others. In the aquaculture subsector, lack of awareness on appropriate production technologies is a commonly cited issue. This lack of awareness negatively impacts eventual adoption of proven production technologies as well as potential improved productivity of fish farms. This lack of awareness is further aggravated by poor fisheries extension services – especially as movement by technicians has been reduced by travel restrictions due to Covid-19. Lack of awareness also extends to the municipal policy-making process. Respondents explain that this lack of awareness of part of the governance process results in misunderstanding between fishers and enforcers, as well as, misunderstanding of the law or policy itself. Further, it leads to building frustration among stakeholder groups. This situation results in nonparticipation in decision-making, thus making the stakeholders – fishers especially – as passive recipients of regulations and other management measures (Berkes and Nayak 2018). Respondents also point to a lack of awareness on insurance especially for stakeholders in aquaculture and municipal fisheries. Finally, the workshop participants state that a lack of awareness can be the reason for an increase in the number and spread of informal settlers, especially in protected areas. 2. Lack of Information Surfacing during the workshop was the recognition that there are fisheries aspects for which the respondents perceive a lack of science-based information. This is specifically true for markets and related aspects, disaster risk reduction and management, and on biophysical factors that support the industry, for instance to justify catch limits, closed season, establishment of protected areas, among others. 3. Lack of Communication Capacity The respondents agree that effective and sustainable fisheries management requires the engagement/involvement, participation and collaboration of several agencies, and stakeholder groups. This is affected and enhanced by individual and group communication skills. While person-to-person communication may be easy for most, inter-agency communication is a different situation and one in which few have the requisite skills. The prevalent barriers to good communication and therefore to collaboration include the lack of effective tools to transfer scientific information from scientists/technical personnel to fishers and fisheries managers. Simplifying complex scientific/technical information requires an understanding of how the relevant stakeholders communicate – their language, their vocabulary, 229 their lived experiences – and using these to craft messages and materials that resonate with them. As well, respondents agree that there is a level of pre-existing antagonism between commercial and municipal fisheries which must be surmounted if communication is to be effective. Conflict resolution requires communication skill and thus, requires interventions as well. Finally, there is the necessity to overcome some fishers’ suspicion of science and authority especially in efforts to implement management actions to a wider and expanded stakeholder base. Another important aspect of the industry that needs communication skill is gender. Although the sector is thought to be male-dominated, there are many facets that are female- dominated. These include marketing, especially of retail at the community level, and processing. Many small women’s groups are also increasing their participation in farming tilapia and other species. Communication is often described as a two-way process. This necessitates the establishment of effective feedback mechanisms so the cycle can be completed. An information system can provide the pathways for speedy feedback, as well as enable closer connection between fisheries stakeholders. More than the system however, there is potential for incorporating communication for development (ComDev) into the discussion about how communication may contribute to positive change in the fisheries sector. ComDev “rests on the premise that sustainable development and social change cannot happen without the conscious and active participation of stakeholders at every stage of a development process” (FAO 2014). This will be discussed with stakeholders and embedded in the communication plan that will be developed for the revised CNFIDP. C. Communication Goals Based on the feedback of participants in the consultation workshops that were conducted, there are five major communication goals (Figure 3). The lack of awareness and the need for more knowledge regarding the CNFIDP and related topics were the most frequently mentioned communication issues during the consultations. These relate specifically to awareness and knowledge regarding policies, laws, and guidelines that govern the fisheries sector. As well, these relate to details about socio-economic services such as loans and subsidies that are available to fishers, processors, and/or traders. Build understanding & support Figure 9.1. Communication goals for the CNFIDP 230 D. Target Audiences A target audience is a particular group identified as Audiences Primary Secondary Tertiary the receivers for a particular message. Specifically, they are the individuals, groups and communities that have influence and decision making power relative to the CNFIDP and its implementation. In communicating the CNFIDP, Who they are What t hey do Action takers The info allows them to do B They advise the primarey audience; experts Evaluators Evaluate the communication somethi ng or in field or have lead, team or identifying the target audiences make a decision special content knowledge is crucial in focusing the BFAR’s awareness raising, information dissemination, enhancement, and knowledge PAPs promotion efforts. Adapting from Johnson-Sheehan (2015), these B Key fisheries stakeholders Decision- & policy-makers BFAR and DA CommsTeam Technica l experts General public NGOs Media audiences can be those shown in the figure below. The target audiences can be further specified when a communication-planning workshop is conducted with relevant stakeholders. Consistent with experience in communication, a communication strategy that creates messages around a specific target audience will be more likely to succeed than just targeting “the general public”. Key Messages The key messages of the CNFIDP and by extension, BFAR, are the main points that the audiences must hear, understand, and/or remember. Specifically, they clarify meaning and provide takeaway headlines of the issues we want to communicate. As the foundation of the plan’s branding and communication efforts, they should be reflected in all written and spoken communications. By identifying key messages, the communications team will be able to prioritize and define information to be shared; ensure consistency, continuity and accuracy; measure and track success; and stay focused when speaking with media or stakeholders. The overarching message is the CNFIDP itself: what it is, how it was developed, targets, strategies and priority actions, among others. Figure 9.2 shows other aspects of the CNFIDP from which key messages can be extracted. These include the major PAPs, governance and policy, and how the targets are being achieved (M&E). 231 CNF IDP Programs, Activities and Projects (PAPs) Governance Physical FMA, M&E Production Plans & Socio-Econom ic Services EAFM, (Results & & Breeding Facilities OneDA Impacts) Tech Transfer Capacity Insurance & Infrastructure and R&D Building Subsidies 9.2. Initial identification of key messages for the CNFIDP The communications team can revise this as it sees fit, but must always ensure to keep the needs of the main audiences in mind. To do this, the communications planning workshop will be structured around a three-step process: (1) Brainstorming key message concepts with internal stakeholders (2) Refining the draft key messages (3) Testing, finalizing, and routinely updating the messages. A. Determining Strategy The communication strategy for the CNFIDP cannot exist apart from all existing communications strategies and/or plans from the government and related PAPs. The following Communications Strategies inform this communications guidance. Presidential Communications Operations Office (PCOO) National Communications Policy. The National Government shall adopt a communications process that is proactive in gathering information from the various government offices, and ensures the smooth flow of information, by utilizing both traditional and emerging communications platforms, with the end result of having a more empowered and informed citizenry. (MC-001, series of 2018 posted at https://pcoo.gov.ph/ wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Memorandum-Circular-No.-001-s.2018.pdf) OneDA Communication Strategy: The DA will pursue comprehensive and proactive communications strategies for the agri-fishery sector and to strengthen awareness among stakeholders, partners, and the public. This will involve the integration of the Department’s key information, education and communications responsibilities employing both traditional offline as well as modern online channels. (https://www.da.gov.ph/the-one-da-reform-agenda-eighteen- 18-key-strategies/strategic-communications/) BFAR EAFM Module 8 – Formalize, Communicate Engage: A part of the module stresses the 232 “sharing of the plan and results with target audiences.” This will be done by (1) Identifying target audiences, (2) developing approaches for communicating with each of the target audiences, (3) Developing key messages, and (4) Timing. (https://www.bfar.da.gov.ph/2018/PUBLICATION/ planningworkshop/Module8Formalizecommunicateandengage.pdf) B. Evaluation Strategy An evaluation strategy is necessary to determine whether the communication plan is working or whether adjustments need to be made. By knowing the effect of the communication activities, the communication team can then fine-tune the activities so that the intended outcomes can be reached. The following aspects of the CNFIDP Communication Plan can be evaluated: (1) Strategic initiatives: The evaluation can be done on the basis of the strategic initiatives such as: a. Increased awareness and/or knowledge b. Improved support, etc. (2) Tactical initiatives: The evaluation can be focused on the other hand, on the specific activities like the following: a. Media relations b. Online communications, etc. The M&E milestones will parallel those of the CNFIDP, but will also mirror communications activities (before and after), with full documentation and reporting at appropriate times. Another aspect of the plan that can be evaluated is the use of budgets, both for the CNFIDP as a whole and the communication plan. This will allow adjustment and/or recalibration of the plan. C. The Communication Team The Head of the BFAR Information and Fisherfolk Coordination Center (IFCC) leads the communication team for the CNFIDP and who will then engage all the regional fisheries information officers. Their counterparts in the wider DA system can also be engaged, especially for the awareness raising and/or information dissemination initiatives. At the national office, a CNFIDP communication committee/team can also be constituted especially to focus attention on important communication goals, as well as, assist in recording and/or documenting the status of accomplishments, and of reporting the same to appropriate audiences. An interagency communication team can also be organized, especially to ensure the sharing of information among the agencies, and thus ensuring that relevant stakeholders in these other agencies are informed, engaged and may be able to provide support where and when needed. 233 References Berkes, Fikret and Nayak, Prateep Kumar. 2018. Role of communities in fisheries management: “one would first need to imagine it”. Maritime Studies 17:241-251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40152-018-0120-x. Courtney, C. A., Jhaveri, N. J., Pomeroy, R., & Brooks, S. H. 2016. Marine tenure and small-scale fisheries: Learning from the Philippines experience, Washington, DC: USAID Tenure and Global Climate Change Program. Cuvin-Aralar, M.L.A., Ricafort, C.H., and Salvacion, A. 2016. “An Overview of Agricultural Pollution in the Philippines: The Fisheries Sector.” Prepared for the World Bank. Washington, D.C. Dar, William D. 2020. One DA. PowerPoint presentation. https://www.da.gov.ph/the-one-da-reform-agenda-eighteen-18-key-strategies/strategic- communications/ FAO. 2014. Communication for Rural Development: Guidelines for Planning and Project Formulation. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Rome, Italy. 62pp. Johnson-Sheehan, Richard. 2015. Technical Communication Today (5th ed.). Pearson. 658pp. Pollard, C. (2016, April 26). 5 tips for creating powerful key messages for your business. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/catriona-pollard/5-tips-for- creatingpower_b_9775472.html PSA. 2020. Fisheries Statistics of the Philippines 2018-2020. Philippine Statistics Authority. Quezon City, Philippines. 320pp. Santos, M.D., Barut, N.C. and Bayate, A.D. (eds.). 2017. National Stock Assessment Program: The Philippine Capture Fisheries Atlas. Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources - National Fisheries Research and Development Institute. Quezon City, Philippines. 220 pages. Statista. 2021. Export value principal fishery products Philippines Q1 2019-Q2 2021. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1018918/export-value-principal-fishery-products- philippines/ Suh, David and Pomeroy, Robert. 2020. Projected Economic Impact of Climate Change on Marine Capture Fisheries in the Philippines. Frontiers of Marine Science 7:232. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2020.00232 Wetherhead, D. (2011, December 2). Key message development: Building a foundation for effective communications. Retrieved from http://prsay.prsa.org/2011/12/02/key- messagedevelopment-building-a-foundation-for-effective-communications/ https://pcoo.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Memorandum-Circular-No.-001-s.2018.pdf h t t p s : / / w w w . b f a r. d a . g o v . p h / 2 0 1 8 / P U B L I C A T I O N / p l a n n i n g w o r k s h o p / Module8Formalizecommunicateandengage.pdf 234 Chapter 10 PERFORMANCE MONITORING AND EVALUATION 235 MONITORING AND EVALUATION (Note: A more detailed Monitoring and Evaluation shall be prepared once the targets and strategies is finalized) The CNFIDP shall adopt a Results Based Monitoring and Evaluation (RBME) based on the targets and performance indicators of CNFIDP. The following monitoring and evaluation activities shall be carried out during the implementation of CNFIDP: a. Baseline Information. The current situationer and information on the sub-sectors shall serve as the baseline of the CNFIDP. If there is a need to establish a comprehensive baseline information, BFAR may consider conducting household and/or industry surveys as there may be a different socio-economic and business condition in the fishery sector brought about by the COVID-19 Pandemic. The perception survey conducted by BFAR on CNFIDP shall also serve as baseline data. Currently, the summary baseline on volume of fish production and value of production of fishery sectors in the last five years (2016-to 2020 is presented in Figure 10.1 and Figure 10.2 for the capture fisheries and aquaculture. Volume of Production {ln,000 Metric Tons) 2500 2000 1500 1000 SOO 0 VOLUME OF PRODUCTION (IN METRIC TONS, 000) •• I • I I Commercial 1,016.90 948.3 946.4 931.5 975.2 Municipal 1,137.90 1,126.00 1,106.10 1,125.20 1,102.30 Aquacult ure 2,200.90 2,237.80 2,304.40 2,358.30 2,322.90 Figure 10.1: Trends on the Volume of Production on Fishery Sector, 2016-2020 (Source: PSA) 236 f VALUE OF PRODUCTION (In Million Pesos) 140,000.00 120,000.00 100,000.00 8Q,000..0O 6Q,000..0O 4Q,000..00 2Q,000..0O 0.00 I I I I I Y2016 Y2017 Y2018 Y2019 Y2020 ■ Commercial ■ Municipal ■ Aquacultu re Commercial SS,866.60 59,716.30 61,044.90 63,475.00 61,093.10 Municipal ?'a,915.60 U,478.70 93,974.40 100,.341.90 98,011.60 Aquaculture !U,141.90 100,706.80 110,329.30 117,834.70 114,383.80 Total 22.8,934.10 243,901 265,347.70 2816S1.6 273,488.50 Figure 10.2: Trends on the Value of Fishery Production, 2016-2020 (Source PSA) More than half of the fishery production is on aquaculture. Figure 10.3 shows the trend in volume of production for the last five years and baseline as of 2020. I Volume of Production, 2016-2020 (,000 met ri c t on) ee➔ l,"'!"4!' .!!! .GleOr--•1---!'!... 43!!'J~.'14G&--"'•ll-llt";',~J)~3!'!.~3UG•--olll-!1.,, ,.-;;f:fii.!11,, eih;.Q J l ,.i '1 0 .~0 ..._ _ 1UUO 1500 1000 u ET!t I tit: Y?Ol (, V?017 Y,Ol A Y?01 9 V?O?O -e- 11~:,hwt!h:1 I ishpt...ud lj - e -r....10:1in~ I ish1,;<1gejpen - Olhsrs Figure 10.3: Volume of Production of Aquaculture (Source: PSA) 237 Chapter 10: PERFORMANCE MONITORING AND EVALUATION sub-sector b. Annual Reviewtargets. Stakeholders of CNFIDP. BFAR infrom 12 FMAs with consultation shall the represent the subsectors, inter-agency committee namely: shall conduct an annual review of CNFIDP and prepare an annual project report with recommendations. The annual report shall be presented to stakeholders for information and possible adjustments on the strategies and action plans to achieve the set sub-sector • Municipal Fisheries targets. Stakeholders from 12 FMAs shall represent the subsectors, namely: • Commercial Fisheries ● Aquaculture • Municipal Fisheries ● Post Harvest • Commercial Fisheries ● Trade and Marketing • Aquaculture ● Post Harvest ● Trade and Marketing c. Midterm Assessment. A midterm assessment of CNFIDP shall be conducted to c. Midterm Assessment. review the over-all A progress of implementation. midterm assessment ofThe baseline CNFIDP information shall be shall be conducted toused review the over-all to progress track progressof and results implementation. The baseline of CNFIDP. information Likewise, results shall be of the reviewused to be shall track progress and presentedresults of CNFIDP. to the Likewise, stakeholders and DA results of the review management for shall be and guidance presented to the possible stakeholders and on adjustments thethe DACNFIDP. management BFAR for mayguidance consider and possible engaging adjustments a third party on the to facilitate CNFIDP. theBFAR may consider midterm assessment. engaging The a third party Mid-Term to facilitate Assessment shall the midterm include assessment. consultations of The Mid-Term Assessment stakeholders in the 12shall FMAs. include consultations The assessment shallofmonitor stakeholders in thein12 the progress FMAs.toThe relation assessment the shall monitor sub-sectoral the progress targets. Below arein the relation to the sub-sectoral proposed sub-sectoral targets targets.forBelow are the CNFIDP proposed sub-sectoral 2021-2025 targets for CNFIDP 2021-2025 Subsector Target Expected outcomes in CY 2025 Municipal • 50% decrease or better in the 5% “gain” in production relative to Fisheries Sub- projected 1.8% annual reduction the projected decline Sector in municipal capture fisheries production with considerations of proper management interventions Commercial • 50% decrease in the projected 4% “gain” in production relative to Fisheries 2.1% annual reduction in the projected decline commercial capture fisheries production conditioned on positive results of management interventions Aquaculture • Milkfish • 6% increase p.a. • Tilapia • 3% increase p.a. • Shrimp • 5% increase p.a. • Seaweed • 10% increase, 5 yrs • Shellfish • 25% increase, 5 yrs 255 238 Chapter 10: PERFORMANCE MONITORING AND EVALUATION Subsector Target Expected outcomes in CY 2025 ● Mudcrab ● 15% increase, 5 yrs Secured quality fry/seed supply through coordinated investments in propagation facilities (broodstock hatchery, nurseries, laboratories) Institutionalized GAqP for key commodities and promote sustainable aquaculture Quality and traceability of aquaculture inputs and outputs assured Investment on species with high commercial potential increased Optimized operation of mariculture parks Ensured climate/disaster resilience of the aquaculture sector Post-Harvest ● 10 % reduction in post-harvest Reduced post-harvest losses losses along the value chain of different ● 80% compliance to hygiene and fisheries commodities sanitation standards of all fish processing establishments in the Increased production of value Philippines added products from fish and fishery by-products and processing wastes Improved compliance of fishery establishments to relevant national & international regulations on seafood quality and safety Strengthened fishery-based livelihood and entrepreneurial programs in coastal communities Enhanced global competitiveness of Philippine fish and fishery products PAGE \* 239 Chapter 10: PERFORMANCE MONITORING AND EVALUATION Subsector Target Expected outcomes in CY 2025 Sustainable utilization of Philippine aquatic resources Trade and Fish consumer preference survey Expanded market for sustainable Marketing conducted fish and fishery products (domestic and export) Industry fora and consultations on trade and marketing conducted and Established comprehensive institutionalized market information system International and local trade shows Strengthened enforcement of organized laws, policies and regulations related to trade and marketing Business and trade missions conducted Enhanced capacity / competency of fishery institutions, manpower Business market matching promoted and professionals specific to marketing E-commerce institutionalized to enhance marketing of fisher products Management of infrastructure and institutional services provided Inter-agency and public-private collaboration strengthened capacity building / training (on credit, entrepreneurship and marketing) and participation in trade fairs/fora/meetings and business and trade missions conducted existing national and international laws, policies relevant to trade and marketing reviewed and analyzed to address gaps and needs of the market IEC materials developed (online and printed) d. CNFIDP 2021-2025 Accomplishment Report and Re-planning. BFAR shall prepare a Five Year Report of the towards the end of the five year period. The report shall be presented to stakeholders and DA-Management for information and further guidance on CNFIDP 2021-2025 d. preparation the Accomplishment of another Report five year CNFIDP cycle.and Re-planning. BFAR shall prepare a Five Year Report of the towards the end of the five year period. The report shall be presented Impact e. Immediate to stakeholders and DA-Management Assessment forassessment (IIA). The impact information shall and further guidance be conducted along on the preparation of another five year CNFIDP cycle. with the evaluation of CNFIDP. At the end of 2025. The immediate impact of CNFIDP will be assessed in terms of relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability taking into consideration the target sets in the CNFIDP 2021-2025 BFAR may engage a third party to PAGE facilitate the conduct of IIA. \* 240 ANNEX A: Sample Budget Proposal COMPREHENSIVE NATIONAL FISHERIES INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CNFIDP) 2021-2025 Fisheries Post-Harvest Sector Implementation Period / Budgetary Requirements Implementation Mechanism SECTORAL KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Partner Sources of 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Implementer Implemeters Funds 1. Reduction of post- Standardize the estimation, and the HEI, BFAR, harvest losses along mechanisms for reduction, of post- 2,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 NFRDI NFRDI, LGU LGU the value chain of harvest losses different fisheries commodities - Develop and standardize PHL # of assessment assessment instruments for the different instruments nodes of the fisheries supply chain standardized - Conduct comprehensive assessment of estimated % PH PHL losses - Devise mechanisms to reduce PHL in # of strategies specific nodes of the fisheries supply formulated chain - Launch massive information # of IEC materials dissemination activities and similar developed and programs for the different stakeholders disseminated Develop appropriate technologies PS, NFRDI, NFRDI, for the utilization of processing waste 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 HEI DOST, LGU, DOST, DA- and by-products NGO BAR - Conduct comprehensive assessment list of possible and characterization of processing processing waste wastes and by-products and by-products # of appropriate - Formulate strategies on appropriate technologies for utilization of processing wastes and by- waste utilization; % products in the production of food and contribution to PH non-food products via R&D activities losses 241 242 - Conduct market analyses of the newly acceptability rating developed products from processing for the new products wastes and by-products Conduct value chain analysis of PS, NFRDI, NFRDI, specific commodities to improve 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 HEI DOST, LGU, DOST, DA- industry performance NGO BAR, NGO - Stocktake available information on list of VCA studies VCA of different fisheries commodities; conducted, identify gaps in information including results - Conduct VCA of different commercially important fisheries commodities that have # of VCA not been identified in the stocktaking conducted activity - Formulate an intervention framework intervention that can be used in the finding solutions frameworks and to the identified challenges along each strategies on how to of the fisheries value chain apply it Improve fisheries post-harvest and cold chain technologies and facilities, such as ice plants and PS, Foreign refrigeration and cold storage PS, BFAR, 20,000,000 200,000,000 200,000,000 200,000,000 200,000,000 PFDA / LGU Dev’t facilities, trading facilities (e.g. CFLC, CA Projects municipal and regional fish ports), private ports, and post-harvest facilities - Conduct comprehensive inventory of list of PH and cold the status of the different fisheries post- chain facilities harvest and cold chain facilities # of PH and cold - Rehabilitate, improve, and upgrade the chain facilties existing fisheries post-harvest trading and rehabilitated, cold chain facilities improved and upgraded - Conduct fesaibility studies for the establishment of new post-harvest # of FS conducted trading and cold chain facilities - Establish (based on the results of the feasibility studies) new post-harvest # of PH and cold trading and cold-chain facilities in chain facilities strategic locations via private-public- established/provided community partnerships Provide policies/programs to ensure equitable access to post-harvest LGU, HEI, 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 BFAR, PFDA BFAR, PFDA facilities, including but not limited to NGO, CSO cold chain facilities - Review all existing policies, rules, and # of policies, rules regulations related to fisheries post- and regulations harvest reviewed - Conduct stakeholders' consultations # of stakeholders' to determine strategies on how to consultations provide equitable access to post-harvest conducted trading and cold chain facilties - Formulate and implement policies/programs that will provide # of policies/ equitable access to post-harvest trading programs formulated and cold chain facilities among the different stakeholders Conduct capability building activities on post-harvest handling PS, Foreign and cold chain management HEI, NGO, Devt systems, different quality systems 1,000,000 2,500,000 2,500,000 2,500,000 2,500,000 BFAR LGU, CA Projects, (GMP, SSOP, HACCP, TQM, etc.), BFAR and maintenance of post-harvest handling facilities - Assess the training needs of key stakeholders on post-harvest handling, # of stakeholders cold storage management, and different assessed quality systems - Develop programs for appropriate # of programs capability building activities based on the developed results of the Training Needs Assessments - Come up with various information and # of IEC materials education materials (brochures, posters, developed and manuals, training modules) that can be disseminated disseminated to the different stakeholders 243 244 # of training - Conduct training and post-training conducted and monitoring and evaluation monitored 2. Increase in the Extend technical assistance to fish production of value processing establishments / added products from stakeholders in developing & fish and fishery by- improving the quality, packaging & NFRDI, BFAR, products and presentation, nutritional value, and 1,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 BFAR DOST, DTI, DOST-IDTI processing wastes acceptability of value-added HEI, CA products using traditional species, low volume high value species, and other emerging species - Organize different pools of technical # of pools of experts/panels that can provide technical experts assistance to the different fish processing organized establishments/stakeholders - Develop a system that shall allow quick # of queries response of the technical experts/panels responded / to specific needs of the assistance extended stakeholders/clientele - Organize study tours for key stakeholders as benchmarking activities that shall # of study tours allow them to get familiar with recent conducted market trends and developments - Develop short-term training courses for # of short-term MSMEs on new fishery product trainings developed development and implemented Increase R&D efforts on the NFRDI, PS, NFRDI, development of new value added 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 HEI DOST, DAR- DOST, DA- products from fish and fishery by- BAR BAR, HEI products and processing waste - Comprehensive assess the existing technologies and initiatives related to the list of technologies development of new value added and initiatives products from fish and fishery by-products assessed and processing waste - Conduct R&D programs on appropriate # of technologies utilization of processing wastes and by- generated and products in the production of food and tested non-food products - Develop partnership between different # of partnerships key stakeholders in the conduct of R&D established activities on new product development Increase production of fishery NFRDI, PS, NFRDI, products using different 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 HEI DOST, DAR- DOST, DA- technological advances and BAR BAR, HEI innovative strategies - Organize study tours for key stakeholders as benchmarking activities that shall # of study tours allow them to get familiar with recent conducted technological advances and innovative strategies - Develop new fishery products using state-of-the-art, technologically # of new fishery advanced, and innovative strategies that products developed will position provide competitive advantage to Philippine fishery products - Extend assistance to establishments for # of technical wider exposure of their products both in assistance extended the domestic and international markets Formulate policy on zero-rated VAT for all domestically grown and produced fishery products to 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 BFAR DTI, PS, CA BFAR encourage production of value added fishery products - Review all existing policies, rules, and # of policies, rules regulations related to all domestically and regulations grwon and produced fishery products reviewed - Conduct stakeholders' consultations to # of stakeholders' determine strategies on how to provide consultations zero-VAT for all domestically grown and conducted produced fishery products 245 246 - Formulate and implement policies/programs that will provide better # of policies/ opportunities to domestic growers and programs formulated producers 3. Improvement of Provide assistance to fishery the compliance of establishments in complying with the fishery establishments requirements for DTI, HEI, to relevant national & certification/accreditation under 1,000,000 3,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 BFAR BFAR, DTI NGO, CA international different national & international regulations on recognized schemes (e.g. HACCP, seafood quality and EU-system, GMP, Halal) safety - Organize different pools of technical experts/panels that can provide # of pools of assistance for certification/accreditation technical experts of the fish processing organized establishments/trading facilities - Develop an accreditation/inspection effectiveness of the system that shall allow better accreditation / management and handling of the inspection system specific needs of the developed stakeholders/clientele - Organize study tours for key stakeholders as benchmarking activities that shall # of study tours expose them to different quality systems conducted being implemented in the food industry - Develop short-term training courses for # of short-term MSMEs on the different internationally trainings developed recognized scheme (e.g. HACCP, ISO, EU- and implemented system, GMP/cGMP, Halal) NFRDI, HEI, NFRDI, Implement relevant food safety and 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 BFAR LGU, DTI, DOST, DA- traceability programs CA BAR, HEI # of food safety & - Develop and implement programs on traceability food safety and traceability that are programs developed science-based & implemented - Implement R&D programs that shall provide science-based information for the development of food safety and # of R&D programs traceability programs (e.g. omics-based implemented researches, DNA barcoding techniques, identification of safety hazards) Capacitate stakeholders (MSMEs, traders) to increase compliance to LGU, DTI, LGU, BFAR, 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 BFAR seafood quality, safety, and HEI, CA DTI traceability requirements - Assess the training needs of key # of stakeholders stakeholders on the different quality, assessed safety, and traceability systems - Develop programs for appropriate # of programs capability building activities based on the developed results of the Training Needs Assessments - Come up with various information and # of IEC materials education materials (brochures, posters, developed and manuals, training modules) that can be disseminated disseminated to the different stakeholders # of training - Conduct training and post-training conducted and monitoring and evaluation monitored Apply the provisions in the Philippines National Standards (PNS) DA-BAFS, BFAR, DA- and Codes of Practices (COP) to 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 BFAR PFDA, DTI BAFS specific rules and regulations on seafood quality and safety - Review existing PNS and COP to identify # of PNS & COP gaps in the information reviewed # of new PNS & COP - Develop new and relevant PNS and drafted & COP implemented # of PNS & COP - Mainstream the value chain approach developed using the in the development of PNS and COP VA approach 247 248 - Adopt specific provisions of PNS and COP in the development of policies, rules # of PNS & COP used and regulations on seafood quality and in drafting policies safety Monitor and assess the levels of chemical, microbiological, and HEI, BFAR, NFRDI, physical hazards in fish & fishery 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 NFRDI DOST, DA- DOST, DA- products (e.g. histamine, etc.) in the BAR, BAR, NGO different nodes of specific supply chain - Comprehensive assess existing information on the different fish and # of commodities fishery products and the safety hazards assessed associated with each of these products - Conduct R&D programs on the characterization and establishment of # of commodities control limits (rejection levels) for the studied with different safety hazards as identified in identified safety the comprehensive assessments that hazards were conducted # of schemes - Establish a scheme that shall efficiently established in monitor the presence (or absence) and monutoring safety the levels of the identified safety hazards hazards - Develop startegies/programs to help # of strategies eliminate the identified safety hazards formulated PS, Foreign Increase the number of laboratory PS, NGO, Devt facilities for product analyses thru 500,000 5,000,000 150,000,000 100,000,000 100,000,000 BFAR LGU, CA Projects, PPC partnerships BFAR - Conduct Feasibility Studies for the establishment of new laboratory facilities # of FS conducted in strategic locations in the country - Develop a scheme that shall increase # of acceptable access of stakeholders to the different schemes developed testing laboratories - Establish a partnership between # of partnerships government and private testing established laboratories Provide support to MSMEs on PS, NGO, PS, BFAR, laboratory analysis and fish and 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 BFAR LGU, CA LGU fishery products - Develop an incentive scheme that shall # of incentive increase access of the stakeholders to schemes developed the services of testing laboratories and implemented - Link the incentive scheme provided by # of incentive the testing laboratories with other schemes linked to programs (e.g. sustanability program, other programs social compliance program) - Establish a partnership between government and private testing # of partnerships laboratories to increase support to the established different stakeholders - Develop stakeholder-oriented training # of training and information dissemination conducted and programs/activities that shall be offered monitored by the testing laboratories DTI, HEI, Organize capability building LGU, BFAR, 4. Strengthening of 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 BFAR NFRDI, CA, activities on: DTI fishery-based LGU livelihood and (a) entrepreneurship, financial entrepreneurial # of trainings management, marketing, bookkeeping, programs in coastal conducted business planning; communities (b) fisheries post-harvest technologies, # of trainings post-harvest handling, good conducted manufacturing practices; (c) disaster risk management and # of trainings mitigation and coastal resilience conducted Increase access to sustainable livelihood opportunities for the BFAR, CSO, 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 LGU different stakeholders in coastal NGO, HEI communities - Conduct of socio-economic studies of # of socio-economic the different sites studies conducted 249 250 - Identify the municipalities/coastal # of municipalities / communities that shall serve as the model coastal communities sites for the initial introduction of developed as model livelihood programs sites - Replicate successes of the identified # of sites developed model sites in other coastal communities using the model sites - Provide assistance (e.g. training, other # of technical capacity building programs) to extension assistance extended personnel at the local government units - Organize study tours for extension personnel to get them exposed to best # of study tours practices in the introduction of livelihood conducted programs BFAR, LGU, Generate policies on incentivizing 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 DTI LBP, ACPC, DTI, BFAR local processors DBP - Forge partnership between relevant enablers (DTI, LBP, ACPC, DBP, LGU) for # of partnerships the conceptualization of new and pro- established people incentive mechanisms - Advocate for the immediate implementation of the new incentive # of incentive schemes (e.g. pushing for their inclusion in schemes developed the legislative agenda of the concerned and implemented LGU; mainstreaming of the schemes in the activities of NGAs) - Link the incentive schemes to other # of incentive relevant programs (e.g. sustainability schemes linked to program, social compliance initiatives) other programs Promote the use of locally fabricated fish processing DTI, CSO, LGU, BFAR, 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 BFAR, LGU equipment to avoid dependence NGO, HEI DTI on imported spare parts - Comprehensive assess the available # of local materials local materials that can potentially be and technologies used in fabricating fish processing assessed equipment and facilities - Conduct R&D programs on the utilization of localy available materials, to # of technologies include studies on engineering design, using local materials functionality testings, and other relevant developed studies # of equipment & - Commercialize the production of locally facilities fabricated equipment and facilities commercialized # of locally - Advertise the use of the locally fabricated fabricated equipment and facilities equipment & facilities advertised PS, Foreign Provide common service facilities / DTI, PS, PO, Devt “One Negosyo” centers/ Cold Hubs 1,000,000 50,000,000 300,000,000 300,000,000 300,000,000 BFAR. LGU CSO, NGO Projects, in strategic locations in the country BFAR, LGU # of locations - Identify strategic locations for common assessed and service facilities / "One Negosyo" centers strategic sites / Cold Hubs identified - Conduct feasibility studies for the # of FS conducted identified sites # of facilities - Construct the facilities constructed - Establish a mechanism for a private- public-community partnership for each of # of partnerships the identified facilities that shall be established constructed - Operate the facilities using a more # of facilties sustainable scheme operated Formulate new mechanism to DTI, LBP, 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 BFAR BFAR increase access to credit facilities ACPC, DBP - Forge partnership between relevant enablers (POs, LBP, ACPC, DBP, LGU) for # of partnerships the conceptualization of new and better established access of the stakeholders to loans and other financial arrangements 251 252 - Link the new mechanism to increase # of lendind access to credit facilities with other schemes linked with relevant programs (e.g. sustainability other relevant program, social compliance initiatives) programs - Develop capability building programs # of training that are related to financial conducted and management and other similar skills monitored 5. Enhancement of Formulate and implement consistent DTI, LGU, 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 BFAR BFAR the global policies implemented on: PFDA, CA competitiveness of Philippine fish and - tax incentives for the construction of # of policies/ fishery products new and upgrading of existing post- programs formulated harvest facilities / businesses & implemented # of policies/ - eased importation of processing programs formulated equipment & implemented # of policies/ - utilization of public spaces by MSMEs programs formulated & implemented # of policies/ - domestic companies to enjoy the same programs formulated incentives given to international investors & implemented Develop and implement Fisheries Private HEI, BFAR, Private 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 Improvement Projects (FIP) Sector NFRDI, NGO Sector - Provide/Seek technical assistance for # of FIP conducted exporters in identifying sites for FIP - Forge partnership with the different key # of partnerships stakeholders for the conduct of FIP established Establish a comprehensive IT-based marketing system that can provide DTI, BFAR, links between trading facilities, fish PFDA, LGU, Foreign 500,000 2,000,000 50,000,000 50,000,000 50,000,000 BFAR processing establishments, NGO, CA Dev't exporters, importers, and other Projects stakeholders - Comprehensive analyze the existing marketing system in the country to # of marketing enable the establishment of a more systems analyzed efficient trading and exchange of goods and services in the fisheries sector - Develop relevant IT-based apps that # of IT-based apps can link the different trading facilities and developed fish processing establishments - Identify strategic locations/sites for the # of sites for IT-based IT-based marketing system MIS identified - Apply the IT-based apps to connect/link the different trading facilities anf fish # of sites connected processing establishments for better to the IT-based MIS exchange and marketing/distribution of goods 6. Sustainable Promote programs that mainstream PS, NGO, BFAR, NGO, utilization of Philippine fisheries sustainability and social 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 BFAR PO, CA CSO aquatic resources compliance - Set up community-based management and conservation strategies that shall # of strategies guide the stakeholders on responsible developed and and sustainable utilization of aquatic implemented resources - Mainstream programs that promote # of programs fisheries sustainability and social developed & compliance (e.g. linking them with other implemented programs on incentives, credit facilities) - Develop capability building programs # of capability and information and education materials building programs that shall encourage adherence to developed and measures to mainastream fisheries implemented sustainability and social compliance. - Engagement of supply chain actors to # of agreements enter into agreements aligned with MFOs established and management measures 253 254 - Implement self-regulation measures and # of self-regulation monitoring in post-harvest activities along mesaures developed the supply chain & implemented Develop appropriate post-harvest PS, NGO, CCC, technologies that are climate-smart 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 HEI DOST, DA- DOST, DA- and resilient BAR, NFRDI BAR - Assess the status of existing technologies and their resilience and preparedness to # of technologies challenges brought about by climate assessed change. - Retrofit existing fish post-harvest # of technologies technologies to adapt to the challenges and equipment brought about by climatechange retrofitted # of new and - Develop new and appropriate post- appropriate harvest technologies to mitigate the technologies and effects brought about by climate change equipment developed - Conduct R&D programs that shall help mitigate and adapt to climate change related challenges (e.g. monitoring and # of R&D programs characterization of nano and implemented microplastics in fish and fishery products, changes in products due to exposure to abuse temperature of storage) Generate technologies that can PS, NGO, mitigate the effects of health DOST, DA- 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 HEI DOST, DA- pandemics and other similar BAR BAR, NFRDI circumstances - Assess the status of existing technologies and their resilience and preparedness to # of technologies challenges brought about by health assessed pandemics and other similar circumstances - Retrofit existing fish post-harvest # of technologies technologies to adapt to the challenges and equipment brought about by health pandemics and retrofitted other similar circumstances - Develop new and appropriate post- # of new and harvest technologies to mitigate the appropriate effects brought about by health technologies and pandemics and other similar equipment circumstances developed - Conduct R&D programs that shall help mitigate and adapt to climate change related challenges (e.g. monitoring and # of R&D programs characterization of nano and implemented microplastics in fish and fishery products, changes in products due to exposure to abuse temperature of storage) - Develop strategies (e.g. capability building programs, technical assistance) # of programs for stakeholders who serve as first developed and responders in emergency situations (e.g. implemented floodings, drought, calamities) Improve inclusiveness for all gender PS, NGO, and circumstances along the value DOST, DA- 2,500,000 2,500,000 2,500,000 2,500,000 2,500,000 BFAR HEI, LGU, chain of the different fisheries BAR, NGO DSWD, FI commodities # of value chain - Identify the gender roles in post-harvest maps assessed in fisheries establishments and facilities and terms of gender provide equal benefits to all gender and sensitivity & circumstances responsiveness - Evaluate the different fisheries supply # of GAD issues chains to identify GAD issues and identifies develop necessary action points - Conduct massive information # of IEC materials dissemination campaigns that emphasize developed and the role of women in fisheries post-harvest disseminated 255 256 Review and streamline programs to address any Political, Economic, 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 BFAR DTI, LGU LGU, BFAR Sociological, and Technological (PEST) uncertainties - Review the existing programs on fisheries # of programs post-harvest that could be affected by reviewed the PEST uncertainties - Develop scenario settings that shall # of programs serve as guides in handling any PEST subjected to uncertainties scenario settings - Conduct massive information dissemination campaigns that emphasize the PEST uncertainties and the strategies # of IEC materials to combat them developed and disseminated BUDGETARY REQUREMENTS (Annual) 190,500,000 439,000,000 881,000,000 831,000,000 831,000,000 TOTAL BUDGETARY REQUREMENTS 3,172,500,000 COMPREHENSIVE NATIONAL FISHERIES INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CNFIDP) 2021-2025 Capture Fisheries Sector Implementation Period / Budgetary Requirements Implementation Mechanism KEY AND SPECIFIC Key Performance SECTORAL STRATEGIES ACTION PLANS Indicators Lead Partner Sources of 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Implementer Implementers Funds For both Municipal and Commercial Fisheries sub-sectors Strengthen Anti-Illegal, Improve compliance to boat/vessel and No. of innovative 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 LGU (for PCG and NTC LGU Unreported and gear licensing and fisherfolk registration systems developed municipal (for CFV) BFAR Unregulated Fishing and deployed to fisheries) (IUUF) Measures increase compliance to fisherfolk and boat & gear licensing BFAR (for commercial fisheries) No. of new registrants Within municipal waters Strict implementation of relevant laws % decrease in no. of 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 LGU PNP, BFAR, PNP, LGU, IUUF cases filed DENR, PCG BFAR, DENR, PCG 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 Proportion of cases filed with court decisions Continuous monitoring, control and Area covered by 20,000,000 20,000,000 20,000,000 20,000,000 20,000,000 MLGU, PLGU, PNP, LGUs surveillance (MCS) MCS operations by Bantay BFAR LGU Dagat Frequency of MCS operations by LGU Creation of Bantay Dagat with % of coastal LGUs 20,000,000 20,000,000 20,000,000 20,000,000 20,000,000 LGU LGUs appropriate budget with functional Bantay Dagat Training of LGUs on law enforcement % increase in no. of 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 DILG BFAR, LGU DILG, trainings conducted LGUs 257 258 Outside municipal waters and within EEZ Institutionalized timely and accurate data No. of programs 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 BFAR PFDA BFAR collection programs developed and implemented BRPs to lead during monitoring, Area covered by 100,000,000 100,000,000 100,000,000 100,000,000 100,000,000 BFAR Navy BFAR, Navy, inspection, operation and surveillance MCS operations PCG PCG Frequency of MCS BFAR Navy BFAR, Navy, conducted PCG PCG Implementation of Vessel Monitoring 75% compliance 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 BFAR LGU BFAR, Private Systems for commercial fishing vessels among commercial sector fishing vessels Beyond EEZ Compliance to Conservation and Proportion of relevant 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 BFAR RFMOs BFAR Management Measures (CMMs) CMMs implemented Timeliness of BFAR RFMOs BFAR implementation of CMMs Compliance to Vessel Monitoring System 100% compliance 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 BFAR BFAR among offshore Philippine fishing vessels Implement programs for timely and No. of programs 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 BFAR PFDA, RFMOs accurate catch documentation and implemented traceability Enhance Fishery Observer Program Proportion of Fishery 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 BFAR among Philippine distant fishing vessels Observers and registered fishing fleet Adopt Ecosystems Development and implementation of 75% of coastal LGUs 20,000,000 20,000,000 20,000,000 20,000,000 20,000,000 LGUs FMA MB, BFAR, LGUs Approach in Fisheries CRM or Fisheries Management Plans by with approved CRM NGOs, Management (EAFM) in coastal LGUs and/or Fisheries Academe all FMAs Management Plans Establishment of LGU alliances in No. of fisheries/ CRM 20,000,000 20,000,000 20,000,000 PLGUs FMA MB, DILG, LGUs managing shared aquatic resources alliances established MLGUs BFAR, POs, (especially in bays and gulfs) or revived NGOs, Academe Strengthened governance structures No. of chief local 50,000,000 10,000,000 50,000,000 BFAR FMA MB, DILG, BFAR, through continuous capacity building executives trained on DILG Academe LGUs activities fisheries governance No. of MAOs trained 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 BFAR FMA MB, BFAR, LGUs, on fisheries LGUs Academe governance No. of FARMC heads 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 BFAR FMA MB, BFAR, LGUs, and members trained LGUs Academe on fisheries governance Strengthen/facilitate/capacitate No. of proposals 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 LGU Academe LGU organizations of registered fisherfolk multi- submitted for funding NGOs Academe purpose cooperatives & associations to NGOs enhance access to financial services and livelihood opportunities and other purposes (for both municipal & commercial fisherfolk) Enhanced award systems for best No. of awardees 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 BFAR LGUs BFAR, DILG practices/ leaders/ seal of good DILG governance Inclusion of all sectors in planning and 100% of all public 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 BFAR BFAR formulation of fisheries-related policies consultations LGU LGU attended by relevant sectors Facilitate options for alternative livelihood No. of beneficiaries 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 DILG TESDA, LGUs, DILG opportunities in (1) areas affected by who complete skills BFAR, private LGU closed seasons (short-term but regular and retooling sector BFAR need), and (2) most heavily-fished areas trainings in Central Philippines in parallel with measures regulating fishing effort. Enhanced IEC of fisheries management No. of IEC materials 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 LGU BFAR LGU, BFAR plans, policies, law enforcement, results of developed and FMA MB research studies, preferably in layman’s activities conducted language and in local dialect per LGU and FMA 259 260 Identify, plan and Establish marine protected areas (MPAs) Additional 5% of 100,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 LGUs POs, NGOs, LGUs implement appropriate to protect spawners, fish larvae, municipal waters FMA MB Academe, RIs and socially acceptable endangered species, and/or habitats converted into MPAs fisheries management tools in the FMA, in Conduct of habitat restoration projects No. of restoration 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 LGUs POs, NGOs, LGUs, BFAR accordance with EAFM projects conducted BFAR Academe, RIs and supported by scientific information Establish close season for fisheries No. of close seasons 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 LGUs BFAR, NGOs, established and FMA MB Academe implemented Adoption of technological regulations No. of technological 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 LGUs BFAR, regulations adopted Academe, RIs Address pollution No. of programs, 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 LGUs DENR, BFAR, projects and activities NGOs conducted to address pollution Conduct research to support No. of research 100,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 NFRDI BFAR, LGUs, NFRDI, DOST, management decisions projects conducted Academe NGOs, DOST, CHED, DA, RIs CHED, DA Academe Set Reference Points/ Establishment of LRPs and TRPs of major At least 3 LRP/TRP for 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 NFRDI FMA MB, NFRDI Harvest Control Rules, species in each FMA top 5 species Research DOST, CHED, based on scientific established (including institutions DA information, for the shark in relevant (DOST, CHED, sustainability of top FMAs) DA, Academe, fisheries stocks RIs) Reduction of proportion of juveniles in No. of policies 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 BFAR LGU, FMA MB BFAR landed catch formulated 10% of juveniles in LGU FMA MB LGU landed catch PFDA PFDA reduced Establishment of harvest control rules for At least one harvest 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 FMA MB BFAR, BFAR major species in each FMA control rule Academe, RIs established for the top 5 species in the FMA 100% compliance to 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 LGU FMA MB BFAR, LGU harvest control rules BFAR Continuous conduct of research and Biological parameters 100,000,000 100,000,000 100,000,000 100,000,000 100,000,000 NFRDI Academe, RIs, NFRDI, DOST, monitoring of biological and ecological of top 5 species BFAR CHED, DA, parameters monitored and Academe, estimated RIs Catch and effort 200,000,000 200,000,000 200,000,000 200,000,000 200,000,000 NFRDI Academe, RIs, NFRDI, DOST, data monitored BFAR CHED, DA, (including NSAP) Academe, RIs Marine habitats 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 NFRDI Academe, NFRDI, DOST, (including MPAs) RIs, BFAR CHED, DA, monitored and Academe, assessed in each FMA RIs Capacitate LGUs and their alliances to No. of LGUs or 50,000,000 50,000,000 50,000,000 50,000,000 50,000,000 BFAR LGUs, LGU design catch and effort monitoring alliances with catch Academe & BFAR system to supplement NSAP efforts as and effort data NGOs needed by the FMAs monitoring systems Conduct policy reviews Conduct of scientific studies on marine No. of studies 100,000,000 100,000,000 NFRDI BFAR, DILG, NFRDI, DA, and recommend productivity vis-à-vis marine zonation, conducted Research DILG, DOST appropriate bathymetry, and other physical profiles institutions (DOST, CHED, amendments to relevant DA, Academe, national and local laws RIs) based on best scientific Conduct policy review on municipal and Recommendations 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 DA BFAR, DA information small commercial vessel operations in on (1) optimum scale NEDA Academe, NEDA terms of optimizing contributions to both of operations, and (2) FMA, DOST DOST food security and livelihood equity. mechanisms for financing recommended measures Compile & analyze existing and available No. of policy reviews 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 NFRDI BFAR RO, NFRDI, DA, information already required of conducted BFAR CO Commercial DILG, DOST commercial fishing operations, in support Fishing of policy review on delineation of Operators, municipal waters and fisheries DOST, DA, productivity Academe Compliance to national National Tuna Management Plan % accomplishments 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 BFAR LGUs management framework National Sardine Management Plan of management and/or commodity National Management Plan for Blue plans targets roadmaps Swimming Crabs National Management Framework for Octopus For Commercial Fisheries Sub-Sector 261 262 Strengthen security for Procurement and deployment of Number of 350,000,0 350,000,0 BFAR Navy BFAR fishing operations in the “whiteships” in strategic fishing grounds in “whiteships” procured 00 00 NSC DFA DBM West Philippine Sea Philippine waters Navy Area covered by 100,000,000 100,000,000 100,000,000 100,000,000 100,000,000 BFAR, Navy, DFA, BFAR whiteships Academe, DOST, CHED Academe RIs DA, Academe, DOST RIs CHED DA RIs Navy Frequency of BFAR, Navy, DFA, BFAR whiteship deployment Academe, DOST, CHED Academe RIs DA DOST CHED DA RIs Navy Number of diplomatic 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 DFA BFAR protests filed Conduct of scientific studies in the West Scientific 100,000,000 100,000,000 100,000,000 100,000,000 100,000,000 NFRDI, BFAR, Navy, NFRDI, DOST, Philippine Sea, Philippine Rise, the surveys/studies Academe, DOST, CHED, DA, Philippine eastern seaboard, and Sulu- conducted in the RIs DA, CHED Celebes seas WPS NARFleet Promote offshore fisheries Better fishing access to other coastal No. of fishing access 5.000,000 5.000,000 5.000,000 5.000,000 5.000,000 BFAR DA, DFA states in the western and central Pacific acquired for Ocean and Indian Ocean Philippine fishing fleet Tax breaks/incentives, subsidies to help No. of tax breaks, 100,000,000 100,000,000 100,000,000 100,000,000 100,000,000 BFAR Bureau of CFV upgrade and modernize fishing incentives and Customs vessels and gears subsidies provided Promote appropriate Enabling actions to support investments No. of programs 5.000,000 5.000,000 5.000,000 5.000,000 5.000,000 BFAR Private sector, fishing technologies towards long term financing implemented financial institutions Comprehensive review of No. of reviews 15,000,000 5,000,000 NFRDI BFAR, NFRDI, competitiveness of Filipino fishers and conducted academe, RIs Academe, strategies to address issues related to DA globalization (e.g., compliance to international standards, subsidies, technology adoption, etc) Scientific studies on gear selectivity No. of studies 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 NFRDI BFAR, NFRDI, conducted academe, RIs Academe, DA Improve well-being of Proper benefits for crew members No. of benefits and 50,000,000 50,000,000 50,000,000 50,000,000 50,000,000 BFAR Congress members of the incentives provided commercial fisheries to crew members sector and their households Appropriate alternative/ additional No. of programs 50,000,000 50,000,000 50,000,000 50,000,000 50,000,000 LGU TESDA, NGOs, LGU, TESDA livelihood for wives and other household implemented BFAR members Implement pilot sites wherein fishers are At least 3 pilot sites 50,000,000 10,000,000 BFAR NFRDI, LGUs, BFAR organized into cooperatives that shall implemented Academe, serve as “commercial fishers” NGOs Assistance to distressed Filipino fishers in No. of fishers assisted 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 BFAR DFA foreign lands Enhanced safety on board fishing vessels No. of admin orders 2,000,000 2,000,000 BFAR Congress or appropriate laws enacted BUDGETARY REQUREMENTS (Annual) 1,368,100,000 1,415,100,000 1,325,100,000 1,518,100,000 1,568,100.00 TOTAL BUDGETARY REQUREMENTS 7,194,500,000 263 ANNEX B 1. INTER-AGENCY WORKING COMMITTEE No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION INTER-AGENCY WORKING COMMITTEE 1 Eduardo B. Gongona, National Bureau of Fisheries Chairperson Director and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) 2 Acting Executive Director Lilian C. National Fisheries Co-Chairperson Garcia Research and Development Institute (NFRDI) 3 General Manager Atty. Glen A. Philippine Fisheries Co-Chairperson Pangapalan Development Authority (PFDA) 4 Assistant Director Drusila Esther E. BFAR Member Bayate 5 Assistant Director Nestor D. BFAR Member Domenden/Assistant Director Juan Albaladejo/Assistant Director Sammy Malvas 6 Assistant Director Demosthenes R. BFAR Member Escoto 7 Dr. Ma. Theresa Mutia NFRDI Member 8 Dr. Mudjekeewis Santos NFRDI Member 9 Engr. Miguel B. Lamberte, Jr. PFDA Member 10 Ms. Iris R. De Vera PFDA Member 11 Mr. Eric M. Sims PFDA Member 12 Ms. Maria Abegail A. Albaladejo, Fisheries Planning Overall Chief and Economics Coordinators/Facilitators Division (BFAR) 13 Ms. Lainie T. Baraocor, Planning Fisheries Planning Overall Officer III and Economics Coordinators/Facilitators Division (BFAR) 14 Ms. Gina J. Reyes, Division Chief II Corporate Planning Overall Division (PFDA) Coordinators/Facilitators 15 Ms. Marites Chuico Chief, NFRDI-PPID Overall Coordinators/Facilitators 16 Arnel R. Valenzuela Administrative Coordinator 17 Ana Marie J. Arenas Administrative Coordinator Aquaculture Sub-sectoral secretariat 18 Ms. Ely-mi Ar J S. Tuñacao, OIC Inland Fisheries and Head, Aquaculture Sub- Aquaculture Sector Secretariat Division, BFAR 19 Imelda R. Calixto BFAR Technical Staff 264 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION INTER-AGENCY WORKING COMMITTEE 20 Demosthenes Togonon BFAR Technical Staff 21 Eunice Figuron BFAR Administrative Staff 22 Ms. Savacion Ferrer Aquaculture OIC Research and Development Division, NFRDI Commercial Sub-sectoral secretariat 23 Mr. Rafael V. Ramiscal, Chief, Capture Fisheries Head, Commercial Capture Fisheries Division Division, BFAR Fisheries Sub-Sector Secretariat 24 Napoleon Salvador J. Lamarca BFAR Technical Staff 25 Joeren S. Yleana BFAR Technical Staff 26 Shinette Tabien BFAR Administrative Staff Municipal Sub-sectoral secretariat 27 Ms. Sandra Victoria Arcamo, Chief, Fisheries Resources Head, Municipal Management Fisheries Sub-Sector Division, BFAR Secretariat 28 Dr. Nilo Katada BFAR 29 Rene Zaldy Porlaje BFAR Technical Staff 30 Maria Bernadette Cristina Lintag BFAR Technical Staff 31 Robert Roca BFAR Administrative Staff Post-Harvest Sub-sectoral Secretariat 32 Dr. Antonio Morales, Chief Fisheries Post Head, Post Harvest Sub- Harvest Technology Sector Secretariat Division 33 Cherry E. Romero BFAR Technical Staff 34 Charmaine Buitre BFAR Technical Staff 35 Paola Enrico Paquiz BFAR Administrative Staff Trade & Marketing Sub-sectoral Secretariat 36 Ms. Amor Diaz, Chief, Fisheries Industry Head, Trade/Marketing Development Sub-Sector Secretariat Support Services Division, BFAR 37 Farramae Francisco Fisheries Industry Technical Staff Development Support Services Division, BFAR 265 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION INTER-AGENCY WORKING COMMITTEE 38 Ronalyn Francisco Fisheries Industry Administrative Staff Development Support Services Division, BFAR 39 Mr. Joselito Somga, OIC, Fisheries Inspection OIC and Quarantine Division, BFAR 40 Mr. Edwyn Alesna Fisheries Inspection and Quarantine Division, BFAR 41 Ms. Mary Grace Quintero Fisheries Inspection Technical Staff and Quarantine Division, BFAR 42 Haide Rojas Fisheries Inspection Administrative Staff and Quarantine Division, BFAR Cross-cutting/Institutional Concerns 43 Atty. Demosthenes R. Escoto, OIC Legal Division, (Head, Cross BFAR Cutting/Institutional Concerns Sub- Sector Secretariat 44 Atty. Josephine Demaisip Legal Division, Legal Staff BFAR 45 Veronica Angeles Legal Division, Administrative Staff BFAR 46 Ms. Mildred M. Buazon, Administrative Chief Division, BFAR 47 Jae Judith Mallonga Administrative Administrative Staff Division, BFAR 266 NFRDI • Ms. Savacion Ferrer, OIC, Aquaculture Research and Development Division • Ms. Elsa Furio, OIC, Capture Fisheries Research and Development Division • Dr. Ulysses Montojo , Fisheries Post-Harvest Research and Development Division PFDA • Ms. Janet T. Manalo, OIC, Regional and Municipal Port Operations Division • Mr. Aaron Amberson A. Dalisay, Planning Officer I, Corporate Planning Division • Ms. Erikah Mae D. Hesarza, Project Evaluation Officer II Overall/Sub-sector Documenters Aquaculture • Nikki Nacis • Jan Ely Sevilla Commercial Fisheries • Jay Ar Pol Mahinay • Kima Karla Cedo • Michael Jay Hadlocon Municipal Fisheries • Judy Ann Estrella • Jennelyn Vargas Post Harvest • Davis Glorioso • Venus Amadeo Trade and Marketing • Beverly Peligrino • Jere Genesis Cruz Cross Cutting/Institutional Concerns • Luis Bibal • Jermaine Lacsamana 267 2. LIST OF PARTICIPANTS BATCH 1 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 1 (FMA 1, 2 and 3) 1 Zyla Ostrea ACPC PDOIII 2 Ludevito Batilong Anderlude Seafoods CEO Corp 3 LORNA Q. CARAANG APAYAO STATE INSTRUCTOR COLLEGE 4 Victor R. Suguitan Aquaculture Representative 5 Eliazar Tinio BAMGAT PO 6 AIRANEL BISLEY TAD-O BFAR Aqua Tech I 7 Alexander Auro BFAR FRO1 8 Cliford Fernandez BFAR Aquaculturist I 9 Davis G. Glorioso BFAR Sr. Admin. Asst. III 10 Elizabeth Illavera BFAR Staff 11 EUGENE GAY B. JAMORA BFAR Biologist I/OIC-Chief, Regional Fisheries Laboratory Division XII 12 Jan Ely Sevilla BFAR Planning Officer II 13 Jeric Lagamon BFAR Science Research Specialist I 14 Jermaine Lacsamana BFAR Aquaculturist II 15 John Edgar Cadag BFAR Aquaculturist II / FRMD Staff 16 Joniel Ancorin BFAR Aqua I 17 Joseph Albert B. Uluan BFAR Sr.Aquaculturist 18 Joyce M. Ducyogen BFAR Aquaculturist II 19 LAILA L. EMPERUA BFAR Sr. Aquaculturist 20 Lainie Baraocor BFAR PO III 21 Leonardo Gabriel Lira BFAR Senior Administrative Assistant II 22 Marygrace C. Quintero BFAR Senior Aquaculturist 23 Miyong J. Biaca BFAR Aqua Tech 24 Regine G. Gutierrez BFAR Aqua Tech 25 Rene Zaldy Porlaje BFAR Aquaculturist II 26 Renely Sevilla Belarmino BFAR AQUACULTURIST II 27 Sarah Jean Biyang BFAR FRO I 28 Meynard V Domingo BFAR - CAR - Apayao Aqua II 29 Jennelyn Vargas BFAR - FPED Planning Officer 30 BFAR Provincial Fisheries BFAR - PFO Eastern Technical staff Office - Eastern Samar Samar 31 Dr. Antonio P. Morales BFAR - PHTD Chief, Aquaculturist 32 Cylet Salvacion C. Lluz BFAR 08 Chief Aqua/OIC-ARD 33 Elmer N. Suriaga BFAR 12-PFO, North Senior Aquaculturist Cotabato 268 - No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 1 (FMA 1, 2 and 3) 34 Cheyserr A. Perucho BFAR 2 PMEU Staff 35 Emma L Ballad BFAR 2 Sr. FRO 36 Evelyn Ame BFAR 2 Chief RFTFCD 37 Arlyn R. Morales-Mendoza BFAR 3 OIC-FRMS 38 Cyrus T. Saraza BFAR 4A Aquacultural Technologist 39 Gemaica C. Moloboco BFAR 4A FRMS Staff 40 Kyle Cristel Dalma BFAR 4A Staff 41 Maribeth H. Ramos BFAR 4a Training Center Superintendent II41 42 Marvin Severino P. Nasino BFAR 4A Senior Aquaculturist 43 Princess Marie Alynagen L. BFAR 4A NSAP Data Analyst Roque 44 RICHARD O ESCUDERO BFAR 4A Aquaculturist II 45 Wilfredo O. Fajardo, Jr. BFAR 4A Aquaculturist II 46 Emiliana C. Casbadillo BFAR 4A, PFO-Laguna OIC, PFO-Laguna 47 Nilda Engcoy BFAR 4A/PFO CAVITE Aquaculturist I 48 Maria Elsa Anonuevo BFAR 5 Aqua 1 Malna 49 NONIE P. ENOLVA BFAR 5 Senior Fishing Regulations Officer 50 Resel Mopal BFAR 5 Planning staff 51 Rowena Briones BFAR 5 Training Specialist II 52 Divina Bucog Ignacio BFAR 9 NSAP Project Leader 53 HIZEL B. HERMINADO BFAR 9 Planning Staff 54 Liliosa R. Paredes BFAR 9 OIC-Chief, Fin. & Admin. DIV. 55 MICHELLE ARUELO BFAR CAR Aquaculturist II PERALTA 56 Naela Bilag BFAR CAR Aquaculturist II 57 Prescila M. Maramba BFAR CAR Training Specialist II 58 Ivy C. Antoniano BFAR Caraga Aquaculturist I 59 Severino L. Escobar, Jr. BFAR Central Office Supervising Fishing Regulations Officer 60 Sandra Victoria R. Arcamo BFAR CO Chief, FRMD 61 Venus Amadeo BFAR CO planning Officer 2 62 Lovella Maghirang BFAR FPED Senior Administrative Assistant II 63 Chona I S. Levardo BFAR FRMD Biologist II 64 Jeffrey B Glemao BFAR III PFO- Aurora FLDT 65 ROSALIE L. ABREU BFAR IVA Data Analyst 66 Marco Romanes BFAR IV-A Data Analyst 67 Charmin Aira G. Serdeña BFAR IX Technical Staff 68 Kimver-Guie T. Colot BFAR IX PMES- Technical Staff 69 Veronica S. Alvarado BFAR IX Planning Staff 269 - No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 1 (FMA 1, 2 and 3) 70 Ma. Jodecel C. Danting BFAR NFFTC Center Chief 71 Ailed G. Villaruel BFAR NSAP 6 Data Encoder 72 Amelyn Mellizo BFAR NSAP 6 Data Encoder 73 Diana Dela Cruz BFAR NSAP 6 Data Analyst 74 Marimar E. Cabilogan BFAR NSAP 6 Data Encoder 75 Ralph Bonifacio BFAR NSAP 6 Data Encoder 76 Riza Barredo BFAR NSAP 6 Data Encoder 77 Tj Cajandig BFAR NSAP 6 Data Encoder 78 Elmar M. Villaflor BFAR NSAP Data Analyst MIMAROPA 79 Venus Perelonia BFAR NSTDC Planning Officer 80 Filipina Gojar BFAR PFO Supervising Aquaculturist SORSOGON 81 GEMMA N. LIBUNAO BFAR R02 OIC, MARKETING SECTION 82 Marie Daryl G. Baño BFAR Region 8 OIC-PHMD 83 rinaleen c. asuncion BFAR RO2 FiRO 1 84 ritchie a. rivera BFAR RO2 PFO- SFRO BATANES 85 Joelle Benavidez BFAR RO5 Planning Officer 86 Ana Maria L. Balanoyos BFAR Sor (Private Shipper Sector) 87 CHELLA MAE A. BFAR XI PMES Technical Staff DAYANAN 88 ELAINE VERA BELVIS BFAR XI SR FISHING REGULATIONS OFFICER 89 kihara robios abelo BFAR XI Post-harvest & Marketing Staff 90 REGION XI PMES BFAR XI PMES 91 Carmela Ella L. Corbita BFAR XII PMEU Staff 92 Czarina Malong Go BFAR XII PMEU Staff/CNFIDP Regional Focal Person 93 Josephus B. Abordo BFAR XII Training Specialist I 94 Arnel R. valenzuela BFAR/FPED Admin Assistant III 95 Ma. Bernadette Cristina BFAR/FRMD Aquaculturist II Lintag 96 Severina S. Bueno BFAR02 Fish Chief Aquaqulturist38 Production Division 97 ingrid vinleur j balquiqui BFAR3 CDO 1/Technical Staff for Milkfish Program 98 rachelle ann pacis bfar3 Aquatech 99 Ralphrandt T Atabay BFAR3 Senior Aquaculturist 100 Sarah Jane Icaro BFAR3 FRO 1 101 Rodolfo Atayde Jr. BFAR-3 Aquaculturist 1 270 - No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 1 (FMA 1, 2 and 3) 102 JOMAR L. VILLAMOR BFAR4A AQUACULTURAL TECHNICIAN I 103 SONIA G. OLAIVAR- BFAR4A Chief,FMRED ELLOSO 104 Catherine Elan BFAR5 Planning Unit Staff 105 Jorelyn V. Solares BFAR5 Planning Staff 106 Antonio T. Burac BFAR5-Palnab Technical Staff Brackishwater Demonstration Fish Farm & Nursery 107 Arnold Paleng BFAR-CAR OIC-PMES 108 Charles Ray S. Tolentino BFAR-CAR Aquacultural Technician 1 109 Dennis de Vera BFAR-CAR FRO I 110 Jane Angelica Didican BFAR-CAR Aquacultural Technician 1 111 Nelia M. Raguindin BFAR-CAR Aquacultural Technician I 112 FELIXBERTO M. BFAR-CARAGA AQUACULTURIST II TANDUYAN 113 Jay-ar Pol Mahinay BFAR-Central Office Project Development Officer II 114 Efren V. Hilario BFAR-CFD Aqua II 115 Rhose Mariel Magnaye BFAR-FIQD FRO II 116 Charmaine D. Buitre BFAR-Fisheries Post Aqua 1 Harvest Technology Division 117 Cecile de Galicia BFAR-FPED Senior Admin Asst II 118 Danica Lyn Bitel BFAR-FPED Planning Officer 119 Rameen Diaz Joe BFAR-IX LSS 120 DR.BONIFACIO M. BFAR-IX, ZC CITY FISHERY OFFICER, DUTERTE JR. Z.C. 121 Ma. Josephine Gerardine BFAR-Legal Division Attorney III N. Demaisip 122 JENNIFER C. BOLANDOS BFAR-NBFTC Aquaculturist II PAGBILAO 123 Evelyn Zafra BFAR-NFFTC Senior Aquaculturist 124 Milagros M. Apaga BFAR-NFFTC Aquaculturist II 125 Adan S. Diamante BFAR-NIFTC Aquaculturist II 126 Napoleon Salvador J. BFAR-NMFDC Supervising Aquaculturist Lamarca 127 Emmanuel Taroy BFAR-NSTDC Technical Staff 128 Joseph Funelas Escarcha BFAR-NSTDC INSPECTION OFFICER 129 Cherry Romero BFAR-PHTD Senior Aquaculturist 130 ARLENE B. TACUYCUY Bureau of Fisheries Aquaculturist II and Aquatic Resources 271 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 1 (FMA 1, 2 and 3) 131 Benjamin Felipe S. Tabios Bureau of Fisheries Attorney V Jr. and Aquatic Resources 132 Nino Carlo C. Isnit Bureau of Fisheries Aquaculturist I and Aquatic Resources 133 PRIVY JANE CADLUM Bureau of Fisheries Aquaculturist II (OIC, and Aquatic Resources SRAPC) - VIII 134 Noemi SB Lanzuela Bureau of Fisheries Chief, Regional Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Training and Fisherfolk 5 Coordination Division 135 Irish P. Bendano-Mamhot Bureau of Fisheries Aquaculturist I and Aquatic Resources IX 136 Stephen Arlo Lapid Bureau of Fisheries OIC FPHM and Aquatic Resources Region 3 137 Ana Liza C. de la Fuente Bureau of Fisheries Community Development and Aquatic Resources Officer I Regional Office No. 5 138 Sheena Mae C. Fernandez Bureau of Fisheries FPHMD Staff and Aquatic Resources XI 139 Trazarah Hanoof E. Argarin Bureau of Fisheries NSAP Data Analyst and Aquatic Resources-4A 140 Christopher M. Ignacio Bureau of Fisheries Legal Officer and Aquatic Resources-IX 141 Sharon Baidiango Bureau of Fisheries OIC FPHMD and Aquatic Resources-XI 142 Helen Grace P. Bangi Cagayan State Professor University Aparri Campus 143 QUIRINO G. PASCUA Cagayan State Associate Professor 1 University at Aparri Campus 144 MANUEL B. ALBERTO CAMARINES NORTE ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR STATE COLLEGE 5/CAMPUS DIRECTOR 145 DICKSON SIPOL AYCUD CDA - CAR Senior CDS 146 Zaldy G. Bermejo CDA R5 Sr. CDS 147 BERT C. UNDAY CDA-R2 Coop Dev Specialist II 148 Julio G. Tan Center for Managing Trustee Empowerment and Resource Development 272 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 1 (FMA 1, 2 and 3) 149 Mechael D. Mag aso Center for CBCRM Officer Empowerment and Resource Development, Inc. 150 Agnes Z. Faustino Central Bicol State Faculty Researcher University of Agriculture 151 John Philip S. Salgado CERD Lianga bay Community Development Officer 152 A. Rex F. Montebon CI Philippines Marine Program Director 153 Leopoldo B Cabiad Cooperative Sr. CDS Development Authority 154 Nelson D. Evangelista Cooperative Sr. CDS Development Authority 155 ROWAN L. DELOS COOPERATIVE Sr CDS SANTOS DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 156 Ruth Alendajao Cooperative Cooperative Development Development Authority Specialist II 157 ROMEL P. MABILANGAN COOPERATIVE SR. CDS DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (CDA) R4A 158 Myra Shyrell C. Dacwag Cooperative CDS II Development Authority- Region III Extension Office 159 Marjun Villanueva CPF Phils. Corp AVP 160 EUNICEA.LAYUGAN CSU-Aparri Dean-Coll of Fisheries 161 Enrico M. Paquiz DA-BFAR Sr. Admin. Asst. III 162 Angel Encarnacion DA-BFAR 2 ACCII 163 Imelda Kimpa-Amilbangsa DA-BFAR IX AAIII 164 Lilian Montano Rueca DA-BFAR Region 3 Chief Aquaculturist 165 RUECA, LILIAN M. DA-BFAR Region 3 Chief Aquaculturist 166 Rhemar C. Bayato DA-BFAR RO IX Aquaculturist II 167 KENN SUAN DA-BFAR XI Admin Asst. II 168 LIGAYA P. CABRERA DA-BFAR4a Sr. Aquaculturist41 years414141 169 Marivic G. Pajaro Daluhay Daloy ng Executive Director Buhay, Inc. 170 Della grace bacaltos Davao del state college Prof 171 Carlo Vic Arida DENR-EMB Engineer III 172 Raquel Smith Ortega DENR-EMB Sr. EMS 173 Leslie Escosura- Department of Foreign Principal Assistant Bustamante Affairs 273 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 1 (FMA 1, 2 and 3) 174 Romark Tabilog DFA-MOAO Desk Asst. 175 MA. RUTHEL GIGANTOCA DILG R5 LGOO VII 176 RUDELYN V. DILG XII DMO II TIMOGTIMOG 177 Alice P. Hisona DOLE Labor and Employment Officer II 178 Adelaida T. Calpe DOST-PCAARRD Supervising SRS 179 Jimely Flores EDF consultant on science, policy and governance 180 LORENZO C. BORJA FISHERIES FMA 2 MB MEMBER FOR MANAGEMENT AREA AQUACULTURE SECTOR 2 MANAGEMENT REPRESENTATIVE BODY 181 QUIRSITO C. CAJEGAS FISHERIES FMA 2 MANAGEMENT MANAGEMENT AREA BODY MEMBER- 2 MANAGEMENT MUNICIPAL FISHING BODY SECTOR REPRESENTATIVE 182 MARY JOY MONTEZA FMA 2 MANAGEMENT FMA 2 MB MEMBER BODY-PROCESSING, MARKETING AND TRADE SECTOR 183 LOPE B. SANTOS III FREEDOM Board Director 184 Cesar Bahiwag Halag fisherfolk org President 185 Gregorio de la Rosa Jr. Haribon Foundation/ Department Manager NGOs for Fisheries Reform 186 Enrile danao marfil Ifarmc /mfarmc Chairman 187 Geronimo Silvestre Independent CNFIDP Technical Consultant Advisory Panel 188 Samantha Mae M. Poblete Institute of Social Order Research Coordinator Inc 189 Aaron Bustamante Institute of Social Programs Manager Order, Inc. 190 ALVIDON ASIS League of Cities of the Program Officer for Philippines Environment 191 sannyfel nieves lgu municipal agriculturist 192 EFREN E. TEMARIO LGU - KIDAPAWAN AGRICULTURAL TECHNOLOGIST 193 GERTHRUDE U. LGU APARRI, Agricultural Technologist BANADERO CAGAYAN 194 Gertrude U. Banadero LGU Aparri, Cagayan Agricultural Technologist 195 Richard Escultura LGU BANGA Agricultural Technologies/Fishery Coordinator 274 - No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 1 (FMA 1, 2 and 3) 196 Rhodora Domingo LGU Basco M.A. 197 Joel Buendia LGU BASILISA Menro 198 Ethelinda S. Bautista LGU Camalaniugan Agricultural Technologist 199 SHIERWIN H. TAAY LGU Dingalan Municipal Mayor 200 Mary Grace B. Cepe LGU Sagñay Agricultural Technologist 201 Myrna S. Sinaon LGU Sagñay Municipal Agriculturist 202 Ma. Shalimar LGU Sanchez Mira Aquacultural Technician 1 203 Vina D. Villafuerte LGU Siruma Aquacultural Technician I 204 EVELYN ORSIT LGU Tabuk City Agriculturist II 205 MARY ROSE L. YAGUE LGU-ABULUG FISHERIES TECHNICIAN 206 Reynaldo T. Vicerra LGU-Apayao Sr. Agriculturist 207 Vena Maile B. Cordel LGU-BASCO MAO-STAFF 208 Don-Don G. Collado LGU-Gonzaga Private Secretary 2 209 Donabel V. Gulaga LGU-ITBAYAT Municipal Agriculturist 210 Glaisa Reolalas LGU-STA.ANA Farm Worker Il 211 Rho Cougee C. Garrido Mangagoy Farmers Gen, manager Fisherfolks and Community Multi- Purpose Cooperative (MAFFISCO-MPC) 212 Rolando Cabugao MAO - Uyugan, Municipal Agriculturist Batanes 213 Preachy Dino P. Gloria MLGU-Dinagat Agricultural Technologist- I 214 Emma C. Oandasan Municipal Agricultural Municipal Agriculturist Office 215 Ethelbert Cano Municipal agriculture Agricultural technologist office 216 HECTOR REUEL D. MUNICIPAL LOCAL Municipal Mayor PASCUA GOVERNMENT UNIT OF PUDTOL 217 Nicko Amor Flores National Fisheries Science Research Research and Specialist I Development Institue 218 Elsa F. Furio National Fisheries Chief Science Research Research and Specialist Development Institute 219 SHERRY ANNE B. DE NCIP 5 Camarines Administrative Aide IV VILLA Norte Provincial Office 220 Anne Marie C. Sugguiyao NCIP Region 2 DMO V 221 EUNICE BOGNOT NFRDI SSRS 222 Francisco Jr Torres NFRDI SRS II 223 Grace DV. Lopez NFRDI Sr. SRS 224 Flordeliza Melchor NVFA Member 275 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 1 (FMA 1, 2 and 3) 225 CG ENS ARTURO PCG Rep from O/DCCGS for ALAMANI JR PCG MEP 226 RAM JONES MENDOZA PCG SERVICE MAN 227 CG P/ENS DEXTER O PCG-CGDNELZN ASSISTANT D3 MARISTELA PCG 228 Bernesita P. Rojas PFARO-SDS PFAR Officer 229 Glenbert A Galo PFARO-SDS AT-Fisheries 230 Vincent P. Escosa PFARO-SDS Aqua 2 231 Engr. Albert P. Aguinaldo PFDA - Davao Fish Port Manager Port Complex 232 Felipe N. Araneta PFDA - Davao Fish Division Chief, DFPC- Port Complex HMOD 233 CUSTODIO JR. L. PFDA Lucena Fish Port Port Manager BALAOING Complex 234 Martinez, Siegfredo, O PFDA-Camaligan Fish Officer in Charge/Engineer Port (GOCC) III 235 Engr. Jun P. Superticioso PFDA-GSFPC Asst. Port Manager 236 Jose Oliver Garrido PFDA-GSFPC Harbor Operation Division, Chief 237 Jovy M. Garrido PFDA-GSFPC Market Operation Division, Chief 238 Paris Uldarico Y. Ayon PFDA-GSFPC ASD, Chief 239 Joseph Christian A. PG&JJ SEAFOODS OWNER Aninipot REPRESENTATIVE 240 IGNACIO M. YAO, CPA, PHIL. FISHERIES PORT MANAGER MAPA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY- ZAMBO.FISH PORT COMPLEX 241 ORLIE R. VILLAREAL PHIL. FISHERIES Fishery Market Ops. DEVELOPMENT Supervisor -I AUTHORITY- ZAMBO.FISH PORT COMPLEX 242 CG P/ENS MARC Philippine Coast Guard Assistant OIC, Biological YONDELL S SABA PCG Laboratory Division 243 Aaron Amberson A. Dalisay Philippine Fisheries Planning Officer II Development Authority 244 Iris R. De Vera Philippine Fisheries Acting Assistant General Development Authority Manager 245 Mary Anne Christine R. Philippine Fisheries Information Officer Baltazar Development Authority 246 Maria Corazon M. Ebarvia PIDS researcher 247 SERGIO DALAYON PRIVATE AQUACULTURE OPERATOR 276 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 1 (FMA 1, 2 and 3) 248 Beatriz M. Canonigo Provincial Fisheries & Planning Officer 1 aquatic Resources Office - SDS 249 Maximina Ligaya C. Roque Provl. Govt.of Aurora- Aquaculturist II OPA 250 JO ANN M GONZALES SAN JOSE Municipal agriculturist MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT PROVINCE OF DINAGAT ISLANDS 251 VIRGINIA ESTEVA Sultan Kudarat State Program Chairman - PUBLICO Universit (SKSU)- Fisheries Dept. Kalamansig Campus 252 Pepe Tanchuling Tambuyog Deputy Executive Director Development Center 253 Quin Ryan Sanchez Tampka Member 254 Lerwin Abad Ybanay fisherfolks assn President 255 Edmundo M. Amican, III Aquaculturist 1 BATCH 2 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 2 (FMA 4, 5 and 9) 1 Glean Mangubat Aquaculture Sector Fisherfolk 2 Balingasag Fishcage Enoch Grower Operator 3 Amor G. Diaz BFAR Division Chief 4 Charmaine D. Buitre BFAR Aqua I 5 Chona I S. Levardo BFAR Biologist II 6 Elizabeth Illavera BFAR Staff 7 Jameselle Ezra F. Ando BFAR Planning Assistant 8 Jermaine Lacsamana BFAR Aquaculturist II 9 Marygrace C. Quintero BFAR Senior Aqiaculturist 10 Napoleon Salvador J. Supervising BFAR Lamarca Aquaculturist 11 Rene Zaldy Porlaje BFAR Aqua II 12 Rizalinda L. Abing BFAR Aquaculturist 13 Teolamay G.Jungco BFAR stakeholder 14 Vhea Salcedo BFAR Planning Staff 15 Arlene B. Novo BFAR - 10 Senior Aquaculturist 16 BFAR - Capture Fisheries Jay-ar Pol Mahinay PDO II Division 17 Jennelyn Vargas BFAR - FPED Planning Officer 277 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 2 (FMA 4, 5 and 9) 18 Dr. Antonio P. Morales BFAR - FPHTD Chief Aquaculturist 19 Aquacultural Karen Dagasdas Piñero BFAR 10 Technologist 1 20 BFAR -10 PFO LANAO Julios A. Betito STAFF DEL NORTE 21 Virginia P. Valde, BFAR 10, BFAR 10, PFO-Misamis Senior Aquaculturist PFO-Mis.Occ. Occidental 22 PFO, Senior Marlou N. Fernandez BFAR 10-PFO Bukidnon Aquaculturist 23 felixberto m.tanduyan bfar 13 pfo surigao del norte 24 Aquacultural Michael Jay Hadlocon BFAR 13 Technologist 25 nsapcaraga@yahoo.com Bfar 13 Aqua 2 26 restituto b. bautista BFAR 13 FIRO II 27 sr.Aquaculturist/ OIC lorna h. angor BFAR 6 PFO Antique 28 KRISTAL KAE T. OMBROG BFAR 6 PFO AKLAN TECHNICAL STAFF 29 Aileen Necor - Garcia BFAR 6- PFO Antique Aqua 1 30 JESELITA G. RUINATA BFAR 7 SR. AQUACULTURIST 31 BFAR 7, PFO - Negros Fishery Regulations Barbara Ranada Oriental Officer I 32 Christine N. Gresola BFAR 8 Training Specialist 1 33 Mary Flor Bernalte BFAR 8 FMRED Staff 34 Al-zath K. Kunting BFAR 9 Sr. Aqua. 35 Divina Bucog Ignacio BFAR 9 NSAP Project Leader 36 Liliosa R. Paredes BFAR 9 OIC-Chief,FAD 37 Ivy Antoniano BFAR Caraga Aquaculturist I 38 Supervising Fishing Severino L. Escobar, Jr. BFAR Central Office Regulations Officer 39 Chief, Fisheries Sandra Victoria R. Arcamo BFAR CO Resource Management Division 40 Lainie T. Baraocor BFAR FPED PO III 41 HIZEL BUANO BFAR IX Planning Staff HERMINADO 42 Kimver-guie T. Colot BFAR IX PMES Technical Staff 43 Fishery Law Claress S. Jamilla BFAR MIMAROPA Enforcement Aide/FMA Secretariat 44 Sr. Aquaculturist/OIC, Rene B. Parreño BFAR MIMAROPA Planning Unit 45 BFAR MIMAROPA, PFO Mario Basaya Sr. Aqua PALAWAN 46 Elmar M. Villaflor BFAR NSAP MIMAROPA Analyst 278 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 2 (FMA 4, 5 and 9) 47 Irene Tuyac BFAR PFO Bohol Aqua. Tech. II 48 Jelly Omalsa BFAR PFO Siquijor Aqua Tech II 49 BFAR PFO Zamboanga Raffy Adeltone N. Tan Aquaculturist - II Del Sur 50 Cylet Salvacion C. Lluz BFAR Region 08 Chief Aqua/OIC-ARD 51 Allen Rose B Guilamo BFAR-10 AQUACULTURIST I 52 JOYCIE A. YAÑEZ BFAR-10 CSW 53 BFAR10/Provincial Evie D. Lumingkit Fisheries Office of Sr. Aquaculturist Camiguin 54 Maricel Maturan BFAR-13 Technical staff 55 Marian Jill S. Abeto BFAR6 Oic,PFO 56 Florencia T. Mepaña, Ph.D. BFAR7, PFO Negros OIC - Provincial Fishery P.A. Oriental Officer 57 Aquacultural Ana Liza Anib BFAR7-PFO BOHOL Technologist 58 Efren V. Hilario BFAR-CFD Aquaculturist II 59 Divina Borbon BFAR-IFAD Aquaculturist I 60 Maricar B. Sarangay BFAR-IFAD Technical Writer 61 Ma. Josephine Gerardine N. BFAR-Legal Division Attorney III Demaisip 62 JENNIFER C. BOLANDOS BFAR-NBFTC Aquaculturist II 63 Diana dela Cruz BFAR-NSAP 6 Data Analyst 64 Jessa Mae Roga BFAR-NSAP 6 Data encoder 65 Ralph Bonifacio BFAR-NSAP 6 Data analyst 66 Rhealyn Bartolome BFAR-NSAP 6 Data Analyst 67 Riza Barredo BFAR-NSAP 6 Data Analyst 68 TJ Manalo-Cajandig BFAR-NSAP 6 Data Analyst 69 Kin Teodosio BFAR-NSAP6 Data analyst 70 JOSUEH GULAYAN BIDEF PROJECT OFFICER 71 DOMINIC S. CALAPAN BISU CANDIJAY Instructor 1 72 Bulawanong kababayin Vergincita M. Herrera an sa pacita-lala Manager Producer Coop 73 Bureau of Fisheries and Aquacultural Christar Ree Merano Aquatic Resources Technologist 74 Bureau of Fisheries and Moadz T. Janjawi FIRO II Aquatic Resources 75 BUREAU OF FISHERIES JENNIFER MARIE A. VETERINARIAN II/ ES AND AQUATIC RIVERO FOCAL FMA9 RESOURCES 10 76 Bureau of Fisheries and Christopher M. Ignacio Legal Officer Aquatic Resources-IX 279 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 2 (FMA 4, 5 and 9) 77 Butuan Bay Development Cristopher Rey D. Cadiz Executive Director Alliance 78 NIZA S. CAGULADA CDA CDS II 79 Raul C. Evangelista cda mimaropa Sr. CDS 80 CDS II/Acting Senior VINCENT J. UNARCE CDA Regional Office 6 CDS 81 CDS-II/CPDAS In- EDILBERTA M. BALABA CDA-REGION-10 charge 82 Elmer C. Lopez CHED Region 10 Education Supervisor II 83 City Agriculture Office / Jay Denson N. Caytor Agriculturist I LGU Iligan City 84 City Government of Pablo Jong Rojas Jr Fisheries Division Chief Cagayan de Oro 85 Coastal Development Program of BM Eduardo Arnel C. Prete Facilitator/Coordinator Cebedo (Misamis Occidental) 86 COOPERATIVE ELVIRA C. DIOQUINO DEVELOPMENT SR, CDS AUTHORITY 87 Cooperative MARISSA B CATUBIG Development Authority Senior CDS Region 10 88 Brenda Samadan- Labiaga DA- BFAR MIMAROPA Aquaculturist I 89 Project Development Angelie Camille Anabieza DA RFO 10 Assistant I 90 Horace Nel Morales DA-ACPC Economist II 91 Imelda Kimpa-Amilbangsa DA-BFAR IX AAIII 92 Raquel Smith Ortega DENR-EMB Sr. EMS 93 Department of Agriculture- Bureau of Chief-National Fisheries Simeona E. Regidor Fisheries and Aquatic Laboratory Division Resources 94 Rebecca Mary Justine O. Department of Labor and Planning Officer III Camugao Employment - X 95 Department of Labor and Labor and Employment JOSEL-AN E DUA Employment Surigao del Officer II Sur Provincial Office 96 Department of Labor and Employment-Bureau of Labor and Employment CYRUS C. POLICARPIO Workers with Special Officer II Concerns (DOLE-BWSC) 97 Ma. Lesly I. Romero DOLE LEO III 98 Charlton James Roa Busa DOLE - X SR LEO 280 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 2 (FMA 4, 5 and 9) 99 Labor and Employment Bernido Maloloy-on Jr. DOLE-Caraga Officer III 100 DOST-Misamis Melanie O. Laude Project Assistant Occidental 101 Fisheries Division, City Senior Agricultural NEIL VIRGILLE I. SALDO Agriculture Office- LGU Technician Bayawan 102 Marcelito Zabanal Fishery President 103 Gwyn Dael Fishing Representative 104 Fishpond Operator and Marcelito President Fisher folk 105 Cherry Romero FPHTD Senior Aquaculturist 106 Davis FPHTD BFAR Sr. Admin. Asst. III 107 Nheng Cudiamat FREEDOM Staff 108 Mary Ann Delos Santos government employee Admin Officer 109 Greenpeace Southeast Regional Research Ephraim Batungbacal Asia - Philippines Coordinator 110 Iligan Bay Alliance in Misamis Occidental IBAMO Judahlyn P. Saceda (IBAMO)/Provincial Secretariat/Aquaculturist Agriculture II Office/Misamis Occidental 111 Jilna P. Hiponia Jida Aqua Resources Owner 112 JOSE RIZAL MEMORIAL STATE UNIVERSITY EXTENSION FLORES, BOBMIL C. DAPITAN CITY DIRECTOR ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE REGION 9 113 League of Cities of the Program Officer for ALVIDON F. ASIS Philippines Environment 114 Jonny A.Wagas LGU SB-Member 115 Mary Paulene C. Olayon LGU Public Service Officer I 116 LGU - Cagayan de Oro Christine Mae V. Alagon City/ City Agriculture Aquaculturist Office-Fisheries Division 117 Rose Antoniette Bongola LGU- Baclayon Fishery Technician 118 Cesar Cordova LGU Basay Fishery Technician 119 Municipal Agricultural Liezel Lnzaderas LGU Basay Officer 120 Hazel G. Ellima LGU Bayawan City Senior Aquaculturist 121 LGU Kapatagan Lanao Agricultural Jerome J. Sabillo del Norte Technologist 122 LGU ARLYN A. BANGQUIAO Kauswagan/Municipal Office aide Agriculture Office 281 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 2 (FMA 4, 5 and 9) 123 LGU Marcelino C. Tabiliran Jr. Kauswagan/Municipal Fishery Technician Agriculture Office 124 Agricultural Zenaida E. Nudalo LGU Kolambugan Technologist 125 JINNY G. INTERVENCION LGU LALA Fishery Designate 126 Mayor Mary Jean N. Te LGU Libertad, Antique Mayor 127 Jinky Joy G. Andrade LGU Sablayan Aquacultural Technician 128 Nestor Macahig LGU siaton MAO 129 LGU Villanueva (Misamis Rogelio E Sabalbaro AT Fishery Designate Oriental) 130 Maisor P. Abdullatif LGU-Bacolod AT- Fisheries 131 Elmer S. Lasquite LGU-Bacolod, LDN MAO Staff 132 Agricultural Mary Joy Causing LGU-CABANGLASAN Technologist-Aide 133 FISHERIES LGU-DON VICTORIANO KREZZIEL JOY TECHNICIAN- MISAMIS OCCIDENTAL DESIGNATE 134 LGU- Mergie Labid Kauswagan/Municipal Agriculturist II Agriculture Office 135 Agricultural Erpe John Lee. L. Cellona LGU-Laguindingan Technologist 136 LGU-Linamon. Lanao del Irenila G. Obenza Municipal Agriculturist Norte 137 LGU-PADRE BURGOS- JOEL M. LACERNA, JR. AT FISHERIES OMAS 138 Richard Dean Butalid Lgu-panaon Job order 139 LGU-San Francisco, CLARISA R. BAJALA Admin Aide 1 Southern Leyte 140 LGU-SIBUCO JOEL MOLINA VENTURA MUNICIPAL MAYOR Zamboanga del Norte 141 RUEL L. NATIVIDAD LGU-TOMAS OPPUS AT FOR FISHERIES 142 Julewie C. Pondoc LGU-TUBOD Fisheries In-Charge 143 Agricultural Paul chris jabalde Mao Technologist-Fishery 144 MAO, LGU-Jimenez, Mis. Vima M. Bolanio Municipal Agriculturist Occ. 145 Salamat M. Langitao MAO-SALVADOR, LDN Agriculturist Technology 146 CRESENTE G. MORALDE MFARMC PRESIDENT 147 Municipal Agriculture Agricultural Daryl June G. Cantones Office Technologist 148 Allan Montajes Municipal Fisheies Fisherfolk 282 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 2 (FMA 4, 5 and 9) 149 Secretary to the Municipality of San Jose Rodelio Sedantes Sanggunian/CRM Focal Joaquin, Iloilo Person 150 National Commission on Ivy Kathryn A. Aborot Midwife Indigenous People 151 JOEMER MAGBANUA National Commission on Community SAMONG Indigenous People Development Officer III 152 National Commission on Arjay F. Pante Administrative Aide 1 Indigenous Peoples 153 Aurea V. Abadilla NCIP Midwife-II 154 Dylan F. Ferrer NCIP CAOI 155 Frederick William D. NCIP DMO V Crespillo Jr. 156 Jeane O. Formilleza NCIP TAA II 157 Ma. Venrica T. Tugas NCIP AA IV 158 Vanessa T. Pape NCIP Admin Aide I 159 NCIP R4B- CSC Helen Grace Q. Bantang OIC Odiongan, Romblon 160 NCIP R4B Odiongan Alma Fe V.Balderas MDWF-II Service Center 161 NCIP Roxas CSC Brenn Cabiguen Nurse Palawan 162 Northern Mindanao Gemma Fe A. Balanay Assistant Professor II School of Fisheries 163 Northern Mindanao Marites Garces Lumasag Instructor School of Fisheries 164 OFFICE OF THE CITY AQUACULTURAL JEFFREY B. CENTENO AGRICULTURIST TECHNOLOGIST 165 Office of the Provincial Supervising Ruel S. Almoneda Agriculturist- Neg. Occ. Aquaculturist 166 P-6 Poblacion Fisherfolk Delfin B. Abing President Association 167 Deo Enric U Soria PCG CGS NE MISOR CMAA 168 RAM JONES MENDOZA PCG service man 169 Armando O. Gaviola PENRMO Southern Leyte EMS 1 170 Elma E. Tano Peoples Organization Chairman 171 Sr. Fishing Regulations Noel M. Saldajeno PFO-Lanao del Norte Officer 172 Archie G. Dumarig PFO-Occidental Mindoro PFO-staff 173 Assistant OIC, CG P/ENS MARC PHILIPPINE COAST Biological Laboratory YONDELL S SABA PCG GUARD Division 174 Florenz Earl G Gomez` Philippine Coast Guard researcher 283 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 2 (FMA 4, 5 and 9) 175 Assistant OIC, NOCOP Neil Karlo Olegario Philippine Coast Guard Operations 176 Sub-Station PO2 Raymundo S Philippine Coast Guard - Commander, CGSS Salangantin Jr PCG CGSS Plaridel Plaridel 177 PLGU- AGUSAN DEL JEFREY ESCOBIDO NAIVE NORTE/Provl.Agriculturist Aquaculturist II Office 178 Provincial Agriculture Caren Capoy Office of Misamis Aquaculturist II Occidental 179 Provincial Agriculture Rollyster J Maghanoy Office of Misamis Aquaculturist II Occidental 180 vilma cadapan R4b _Vilma cadapan Admin Assistant 181 Candeze Mongaya Rare Philippines Policy Manager 182 Juliet R. Gutierrez Samaka Sablayan Chairman 183 Southern Negros Alliance Mario Neil T Montemar Chairman of Fisherfolks (SNAF) 184 Supervising TESD Josef Rod Ilogon TESDA Specialist 185 Nerilyn L. Jala TESDA-X TESD Specialist II 186 UNIVERSITY OF ROSANMI C. LABNAO ANTIQUE HAMTIC Faculty CAMPUS 187 University of the Wilfredo L. Campos Professor Philippines Visayas 188 Mhar Jo Mondana URI MEL Assistant 189 Ailed Villaruel Data analyst 284 BATCH 3 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 3 (FMA 5 and 6) 1 Kennedy Garabiag ACPC Economist V 2 ZYLA MONICA OSTREA ACPC PDOIII 3 Herlyn Binlayan-Buanan ASIST Instructor 4 Banangan Farmer Nieves M.Saguibal Fisherfolk Fisherfolk 5 federico tacio jose BANPIKOI president 6 federico jose BANPIKOI president 7 Jermaine Lacsamana BFAR Aqua II 8 PLANNING OFFICER Venus Amadeo BFAR 2 9 Chona I S. Levardo BFAR Biologist II 10 Elizabeth Illavera BFAR Staff 11 Danica Lyn Bitel BFAR Planning Officer II 12 Ma. Josephine Gerardine N. BFAR Attorney III Demaisip 13 Jennelyn Vargas BFAR Planning Officer 14 Rene Zaldy Porlaje BFAR Aquaculturist II 15 Beverly Peligrino BFAR Staff 16 Marx Perfecto C. Garcia BFAR Senior Aquaculturist 17 Charmaine D. Buitre BFAR Aquaculture I 18 Laila Parido BFAR 3 Aquaculturist II 19 Sarah Jane Icaro BFAR 3 FRO 1 20 Joan Gay C Oreas BFAR 3 Regional Planner 21 NEIL D. ENCINARES BFAR 3 PFO ZAMBALES 22 Arlyn R. MORALES-MENDOZA BFAR 3 (FMA6) OIC, FRMS 23 WILFREDO O. FAJARDO, JR. BFAR 4A Aquaculturist II 24 Gemaica C. Moloboco BFAR 4A FRMS Staff 25 Emiliana C. Casbadillo BFAR 4A OIC-PFO, Laguna 26 RICAHARD O ESCUDERO BFAR 4A Aqua 2 27 Marvin Severino P. Nasino BFAR 4A Senior Aquaculturist 28 Princess Marie Alynagen L. BFAR 4A NSAP Data Analyst Roque 29 Edmundo M. Amican, III BFAR 4A Aquaculturist 1 30 NSAP DATA MARK JOHN B. ROSALES BFAR 4A/NSAP ANALYST 31 Aileen Necor-Garcia BFAR 6- PFO Antique Aqua 1 32 Naela Bilag BFAR CAR Aquaculturist Ii 33 REGIONAL LILIBETH L. SIGNEY BFAR CAR DIRECTOR 34 Lainie T. Baraocor BFAR CO PO III 35 Supervising Napoleon Salvador J. Lamarca BFAR CO Aquaculturist 285 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 3 (FMA 5 and 6) 36 Chief, Fisheries Sandra Victoria R. Arcamo BFAR CO Resource Management Division 37 BFAR FRMD Central Supervising Fishing Severino L. Escobar, Jr. Office Regulations Officer 38 ROSALIE L. ABREU BFAR IVA DATA ANALYST 39 SONIA O. ELLOSO BFAR IV-A/ FMRED Chief FMRED 40 BFAR IV-A/FMRED- Fishing Regulations Manuel O. Banton RLS Officer II 41 Claress S. Jamilla BFAR MIMAROPA FMA Secretariat 42 OIC, PLANNING Rene B. Parreño BFAR MIMAROPA UNIT 43 BFAR MIMAROPA Marvin B. Rañada OIC-FMRED FMRED 44 JENNIFER C. BOLANDOS BFAR NBFTC AQUACULTURIST II 45 Rocelyn Sevillo BFAR NCR Aqua I 46 Project Evaluation Jeffrey E. Reyes BFAR NCR Officer 1 47 Darna Baguinbin BFAR NSAP Data Analyst 48 BFAR NSAP Elmar M. Villaflor Data Analyst MIMAROPA 49 BFAR PFO Southern Mario C. Basaya OIC Palawan 50 Felymar C. Ragutero BFAR Region 1 Senior Aquaculturist 51 Wilfredo Cruz BFAR Region 3 Regional Director 52 Derickson Chrisandrei S. Community BFAR Regional Office 1 Mandar Development Officer II 53 Jeizel Nova Lagman BFAR RFO 1 Aquaculturist II 54 Sancho V. Bilog BFAR RFO 1 Senior Aquaculturist 55 Missael T. Maxion BFAR3 Aquaculturist I 56 ralphrandt Tesoro atabay BFAR3 Senior Aqua 57 ASSISTANT INGRID VINLEUR J BALQUIQUI BFAR3 PLANNING OFFICER/CDO 1 58 Arnold Paleng BFAR-CAR OIc-PMES 59 Riza BFAR-CAR Aqua I 60 AIRANEL B. TAD-O BFAR-CAR Aqua Tech I 61 Olive Jet Manalog BFAR-CAR Aqua I 62 AQUACULTURAL NELIA M. RAGUINDIN BFAR-CAR TECHNICIAN I 63 AQUACULTURE Charles Ray S. Tolentino BFAR-CAR TECHNICIAN 1 64 Dennis De Vera BFAR-CAR FRO I 65 Jan Ely S. Sevilla BFAR-FPED Planning Officer II 286 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 3 (FMA 5 and 6) 66 Carmi A. Cervo BFAR-NCR Aquaculturist I 67 ADAN S. DIAMANTE-NIFTC BFAR-NIFTC Aquaculturist II 68 Joseph Funelas Escarcha BFAR-NSTDC inspection officer 69 Gilbert B. Pulido BFAR-RFO 1 Aquaculturist I 70 Biosolutions Mary Ann Solis International Sales Director Corporation 71 Bulacan Provincial Diane Salazar Aquaculturist II Agriculture Office 72 Bureau of Fisheries and Trazarah Hanoof E. Argarin NSAP Data Analyst Aquatic Resources 73 Bureau of Fisheries and Joseph B. Bitara Aquaculturist II Aquatic Resources 3 74 Bureau of Fisheries and Stephen Arlo Lapid Aquatic Resources OIC FPHM Region 3 75 Bureau of Fisheries and Lilian Montano Rueca Aquatic Resources Chief Aquaculturist Region 3 76 Edilberto G. Unson CDA Senior CDS 77 Senior CDS - CPDA DICKSON S. AYCUD CDA - CAR Section 78 SR. COOPERATIVES SHIRLEY ANN T. NONAN CDA-NCREO DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST 79 CDA-Region IVA Lorelie R. Papa CDS II Extension Office 80 Cooperative Cassy S. Jimeno CDA-Regional Office VI Development Specialist II 81 Acting Dean/ Central Luzon State Ravelina Recometa Velasco Management Body, University FMA6 82 Gavina P.Tumbaga Cfarmc Chairperson 83 City Agriculture Office- Joven Aqua. Technologist Puerto Princesa 84 Yzabela Bernardina A. Nazal- City Government of Acting City Habunal Navotas Agriculturist 85 Cooperatives Cooperative Celeste M. Castro Development Development Authority Specialist II 86 COOPERATIVE ROMEL P. MABILANGAN DEVELOPMENT SR. CDS AUTHORITY (CDA) 287 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 3 (FMA 5 and 6) 87 Cooperative JACQUELINE L. DE LEON Development Authority Sr. CDS Region 1 88 COOPERATIVE MARIVIC C. LLOBRERA DEVELOPMENT CDS II AUTHORITY-NCR 89 Brenda Samadan- Labiaga DA- BFAR MIMAROPA AQUA I 90 MUNICIPAL ELMA T. VALENZUELA DA-LGU NAIC AGRICULTURIST 91 Mary Nia Santos DA-NFRDI SSRS 92 SENIOR ECOSYSTEM maria trinivic l. silang DENR-CAR MANAGEMENT SPECIALIST 93 Department of Labor Labor and Jomer C. Sicat and Employment - RO1 Employment Officer II 94 Department of Labor Charity Ubilas and Employment Ilocos Senior LEO Sur Field Office 95 Romark Tabilog DFA Desk Assistant 96 DILG Mountain Gyda Hoggang Namingit LGOO V Province 97 DILG National Capital Luigi D.C. Pilarta LGOO VI Region 98 Thyrza Shoey L. Dogui-is DILG-Kalinga LGOO V 99 Labor and Alice P. Hisona DOLE Employment Officer II 100 Lindsay Toni Ruiz DOLE RO3 LEO III 101 JOYETTE ALONZO DOLE-CAR LEO II 102 Supvg. Labor and Rey D. Sanglay DOLE-NCR Employment Officer 103 DOLE-REGIONAL JERIDEE C. ORATE Sr. LEO OFFICE 1 104 Sr. Labor and Ethell C. Galvan DOLERO3 Employment Officer 105 Consultant on Jimely Flores EDF science, policy and governance 106 Davis Glorioso FPHTD BFAR Sr. Admin. Asst. III 107 Cherry E. Romero FPHTD BFAR Senior Aquaculturist 108 Antonio Peralta FREEDOM Inc. Executive Director 109 Remely Lachica govt Chief Aquaculturist 110 ILOCOS SUR Program Head, SOLOMON L. ANAGARAN POLYTECHNIC STATE BSFisheries Dept. COLLEGE 288 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 3 (FMA 5 and 6) 111 Rizzvill Espina Institute of Social Order Project Officer 112 JM GOLDEN SEA Teofilo T. Quijano, Jr. 'jhun' Admin. Manager HARVEST, CORP. 113 Artemio donato, jr Lgu Mun. Mayor 114 LGU Alaminos City, Gelbert C. Rabadon Aquaculturist I Pangasinan 115 Ross A. Kiat-ong LGU Bontoc Admin Officer IV 116 Teodoro LGU Lian, Batangas Agricultural Aide 117 Agriculture LGU SAN VICENTE Reniel Rocaberte Development /MAO Specialist 118 LGU, San Vicente, Raymond D. Dagocano Agriculture Specialist Palawan - MAO 119 Agriculture Jessica B. Batay-an LGU-Sagada Technologist 120 Miguela Lolita B. Buan LGU-SUBIC Municipal Agriculturist 121 Municipal Agriculture Aldorace Jane J. Avira Agriculture Specialist Office - San Vicente 122 MARSAN W. BUQUING NCIP Regional Office I Engineer I 123 Francisco Torres Jr NFRDI SRS II 124 Eunice Bognot NFRDI SSRS 125 Grace DV. Lopez NFRDI Sr.SRS 126 Mirriam Cayme NFRDI PLO3 127 Nicko Amor NFRDI SRS I 128 Supervising Cordelia B. Nipales NIFTDC Aquaculturist 129 Archie A. Barlas NSAP MIMAROPA Data Analyst 130 Office of the Agricultural Agricultural Annlex Joy E. Endraca Services LGU Technologist/Fisheries Candelaria Zambales Coordinator 131 Aquaculturist Office of the Provincial Ceniza E. Feranil II/Provincial Fishery Agriculturist, Cavite Coordinator 132 Felicita T. Cabatac OMA,LGU-Bataraza A.T. 133 Josie P Lingaling OMAG BAUKO ADAS II 134 Raymond B.Basilio OMAG Besao Agri technician 135 Palawan LGU- Office of Supervising arthiel rodriguez the Provincial Aquaculturist Agriculture 136 PALAWAN SEA Harold Baylon DRAGON RESOURCES INC. 137 Palawan State Hermenegildo P Dela Pena Associate professor University 289 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 3 (FMA 5 and 6) 138 Pangasinan State ROSIE S. ABALOS Professor V Unversity 139 RAM JONES MENDOZA PCG Service Man 140 PFO CAVITE / BFAR Marinel A Punzalan Sr. Aquaculturist REG. 4A 141 Aquacultural Christine Naomi Joy S. Aloot PGLU-OPAG Technician I 142 Assistant OIC, CG P/ENS MARC YONDELL S Philippine Coast Guard Biological Laboratory SABA PCG Division 143 Philippine Fisheries Fishery Market Cerespink A. Aguila Development Authority Operations Officer III - Navotas Fish Port 144 Philippine Fisheries Development Authority Melvin A. Rabang Division Chief - Navotas Fish Port Complex 145 Philippine Rural Leonora S. Lava Reconstruction Projects Manager Movement 146 Provincial Agriculture Provincial Agricultural Pacita P. Bravo Office Coordinator 147 Provincial Agriculture Ronaldo P. Bernandino Aquaculturist II office - Bulacan 148 Provincial Agriculture Supervising Michael V. De Guzman Office - Bulacan Aquaculturist 149 Provincial Government LEONY O. GAGNI ACC II of La Union-OPAG 150 Provincial Government Romeo M Cabungcal Provincial Agriculturist of Palawan 151 Samahan ng Buong Renato C. Abad Mangingisda sa President Navotas Inc. 152 Samahan ng mga Margarito M. Dellamas Maliliit na mangigisda at President mga manglalamayo 153 Seaglory International Emilyn H Francisco Plant Officer Corporation 154 Ubagan Fisherfolk LauraBoado President Association 155 Bonifacio Tobias WWF PH Project Manager 156 Fisheries Technical David N. David WWF-Philippines Officer 290 BATCH 4 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 4 (FMA 7 and 8) 1 Agricultural Credit Bernadette Claire Balajadia Project Assistant IV Policy Council 2 Agricultural Credit Kennedy A, Garabiag Economist V Policy Council 3 Nestor L. Madronero Bantay Dagat President 4 Charmaine D. Buitre BFAR Aquaculturist I 5 Chona I S. Levardo BFAR Biologist II 6 Jermaine Lacsamana BFAR Aqua II 7 Lainie Baraocor BFAR PO III 8 Ma. Josephine Gerardine N. Bfar Attorney III Demaisip 9 Ronalyn Gulmatico BFAR Market Specialist II 10 Venus F. Amadeo BFAR Planning Officer 2 11 Vhea Salcedo BFAR Planning Staff 12 BFAR - Capture Jay-ar Pol Mahinay PDO II Fisheries Division 13 Jennelyn Vargas BFAR - FPED Planning Officer 14 Dr. Antonio P. Morales BFAR - FPHTD Chief Aquaculturist 15 OIC, PROVINCIAL BERNARD Z. BACLAYO BFAR 13 FISHERY OFFICER 16 RESTITUTO B. BAUTISTA BFAR 13 FIRO 2 17 Esmeralda M. Mendoza BFAR 4A Panning Officer 18 Gemaica C. Moloboco BFAR 4A FRMS Staff 19 NSAP DATA MARK JOHN B. ROSALES BFAR 4A ANALYST 20 MARVIN SEVERINO P. NASINO BFAR 4A Senior Aquaculturist 21 Wilfredo O. Fajardo Jr. BFAR 4A Aquaculturist II 22 Chief Fishing Ariel Pioquinto BFAR 5 Regulation Officer 23 Senior Fishing NONIE P. ENOLVA BFAR 5 Regulations Officer 24 Jerome C. Evangelista BFAR 5/PFO Cam. Sur FLDT 25 Christine N. Gresola BFAR 8 Training Specialist 1 26 NSAP/ DATA FMA8 Ryan BFAR 8 Analyst 27 LEA A. TUMABIENE BFAR 8 ACC II 28 Miriam F Amigo BFAR 8 Aquaculturist I 29 Ronnie P. Esmeña BFAR 8 TRNSP II 30 Kin Charlie C. Daganzo BFAR 8 NSAP NSAP Data Analyst 31 FMA8/BFAR 8_Leodelyn A. BFAR 8 PFO LEYTE Aquaculturist II Conejos 32 Leodelyn A. Conejos BFAR 8 PFO LEYTE Aquaculturist II 291 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 4 (FMA 7 and 8) 33 Provincial Fishery Loreginia P. Briones BFAR 8- PFO Samar Officer 34 Supervising Fishing Severino L. Escobar, Jr. BFAR Central Office Regulations Officer 35 Chief, Fisheries Resource Sandra Victoria R. Arcamo BFAR CO Management Division 36 Davis Glorioso BFAR FPHTD Sr. Admin. Asst. III 37 luzviminda h. robin BFAR R8 PFO-BILIRAN 38 Chief Aqua/OIC- Cylet Salvacion C. Lluz BFAR Region 08 ARD 39 Maribeth H. Ramos BFAR Region 4a Chief, RFTFCD 40 Jan Ely Sevilla BFAR-=FPED Planning Officer II 41 Aquacultural Michael Jay BFAR13 Technologist 42 FELIXBERTO M. TANDUYAN BFAR-13 AQUACULTURIST II 43 Joyce M. Baclayo BFAR-13 Aquaculturist 2 44 Joelle Benavidez BFAR5 Planning Officer 45 Jorelyn Solares BFAR5 Planning Staff 46 Arcelle L. Gregorio BFAR8 NSAP Data Analyst 47 Aquacultural Karren Lou L. Evano BFAR8 TEchnologist 48 Mary Flor Bernalte BFAR8 FMRED Staff 49 Efren V. Hilario BFAR-CFD Aqua II 50 Emmanuel Taroy BFAR-NSTDC Technical staff 51 BHIFA (Barangay Ronald F. Cuevas Hingatungan Fisherfolk Adviser Association) 52 Bernard R. Abitria BLGU/ FARMC Barangay Kagawad3 53 Manuel Victor Buenaflor Buenaflor Aquaventures Owner 54 Bureau of Fisheries and Trazarah Hanoof E. Argarin NSAP Data Analyst Aquatic Resources 55 Bernadette Preciosa CDA R4A ARD 56 Zaldy G. Bermejo CDA R5 Sr. CDS 57 CDA-Region IVA Lorelie R. Papa CDS II Extension Office 58 COOPERATIVE ROWAN L DELOS SANTOS DEVELOPMENT Sr CDS AUTHORITY 59 COOPERATIVE JOANNALI P. PEREZ DEVELOPMENT CDS II AUTHORITY (CDA) 292 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 4 (FMA 7 and 8) 60 COOPERATIVE ROMEL P. MABILANGAN DEVELOPMENT SR. CDS AUTHORITY (CDA) 61 Mary Nia Santos DA-NFRDI SSRS 62 Ronnie O. Romero DA-NFRDI OIC-PCMS 63 Melecia B. Sumbeling DENR DMO 111 64 Julie L. Sorima DILG LGOO VI 65 Mariza Q. Bautista DILG LGOO III 66 MERYLL SHEENA BAQUEROS DILG LEYTE LGOO II 67 JOAN AURELIA R. ROSALES DILG Samar PO LGOO VI 68 MARINIL C. BALILA DILG, LEYTE LGOO V 69 DILG-SOUTHERN MARIA CRISTINA B. TIU LGOO V- LEYTE 70 Labor and Alice P. Hisona DOLE Employment Officer II 71 Edwina Garchitorena EDF Philippines Program lead 72 Environmental Defense Lead for Community Marcial V. Bolen Fund Engagement 73 Cherry E. Romero FPHTD Senior Aquaculturist 74 Marcita Santos FREEDOM STAFF 75 Antonio Peralta FREEDOM Inc. Executive Director 76 Guiuan Development Staff/ Research Janine Villamor Foundation, Inc. Associate 77 Guiuan Development Margarita de la Cruz Executive Director Foundation, Inc. 78 Department Ditto de la Rosa Haribon Foundation Manager 79 IFARMC CELSO SUQUIB IFARMC CHAIRMAN 80 Municipal Limuel D. Antonio LGU BILIRAN Agriculturist 81 Fishery Extension Angela Baylon LGU BULA Worker 82 Melody Papa LGU LUPI AT 83 SUSANA O. MKIRANDA LGU TANAUAN AT-FISHERIES 84 Agricultural Preachy Dino Gloria LGU-Dinagat Technologist I 85 Ador P Navales LGU-HINABANGAN MAO 86 Agricultural Joseph B. Casoco Local Government Unit Technologist 87 Local Government Unit Erie B. Lorilla MAO Designate - agriculture 293 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 4 (FMA 7 and 8) 88 Local Government Unit Administrative Edena A. MORTEGA of Pasacao/MUNICIPAL Officer I Agriculture Office 89 Frederick William D. Crespillo Jr. NCIP DMO V 90 Vivian Tanamor NCIP DMO V 91 Eddielito J Sumangil NCIP 4A Planning Officer Il 92 Lyn A. Balanzq NCIP RXI TAA II 93 R5 Benito B Batan NCIP-V CDO-III 94 EUNICE BOGNOT NFRDI SSRS 95 Grace DV. Lopez NFRDI Sr. SRS 96 Mirriam F Cayme NFRDI PLO3 97 NORVIDA C. GATDULA NFRDI Training Specialist III 98 Senior Campaign Daniel Ocampo Oceana Manager 99 Campaign & Science Diovanie De Jesus Oceana Specialist 100 RAM JONES MENDOZA PCG Service Man 101 SUPPLY OFFICER ALDRIN A. HIZOLA PFDA BFPC II 102 FISHERY PORT JACQUELINE B. PAUIG PFDA BFPC SUPERVISOR 103 Assistant OIC, CG P/ENS MARC YONDELL S PHILIPPINE COAST Biological Laboratory SABA PCG GUARD Division 104 Philippine Fisheries Development Authority - Pamela M. Lasay Budget Officer I Bulan Fish Port Complex 105 Supervising Leilani O. Comadizo PLGU Biliran Aquaculturist 106 PLGU-Provincial Agricultural Alex N. De Luna Fishery Office-Samar Technologist 107 PLGU-Provincial Provincial Fishery Herminia L. Amparado Fishery Office-Samar Officer 108 PLGU-Provincial Juan P. Meniano, Jr. Senior Agriculturist Fishery Office-Samar 109 PLGU-Provincial Mark Joseph S. Almojeno Technical Staff Fishery Office-Samar 110 PLGU-Provincial Rowena R. Alcazar Agriculturist II Fishery Office-Samar 111 PLGU-Samar Provincial Agricultural Center REX HERNANDEZ DASAL Fishery Office Chief I 112 PROVINCIAL CAMILA C. SARMIENTO GOVERNMENT OF PGENRO-Head NORTHERN SAMAR- 294 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 4 (FMA 7 and 8) ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT OFFICE 113 Dennis Calvan Rare Senior Manager 114 Candeze Mongaya Rare Philippines Policy Manager 115 Gilbert A. Aviso SANRAFFa President 116 Prof. 6/Dean, College of University of Eastern Ronelie C. Salvador Agriculture, Fisheries Philippines and Natural Resources 117 Shereen A. Merro VSU Tolosa Instructor 295 BATCH 5 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 5 (FMA 10, 11 and 12) 1 Zyla Ostrea ACPC PDOIII 2 Yasmin P. Tirol Aklan State University Associate Professor V 3 Alsons Aquaculture Yvette D. Tomale Plant Manager Corporation 4 DAVID VILLAUZ Aquaculture - 5 JELLEN OSALLA Aquaculture - 6 JOVITA D.CONALES BENAPRIMCO MANAGER 7 John Edgar Cadag BFAR Aqua II / FRMD Staff 8 Korina I. Compao BFAR Technical Staff 9 Lainie Baraocor BFAR PO III 10 Ma. Josephine Gerardine N. BFAR Attorney III Demaisip 11 Venus F. Amadeo BFAR Planning Officer 2 12 Vhea Salcedo BFAR Planning Staff 13 Dr. Antonio P. Morales BFAR - PHTD Chief Aquaculturist 14 Dr. Sonia G. Olaivar-Elosso BFAR 4A Chief, FMRED 15 Edmundo M. Amican, III BFAR 4A Aquaculturist 1 16 Gemaica C. Moloboco BFAR 4A FRMS Staff 17 MARK JOHN B. ROSALES BFAR 4A NSAP Data Analyst 18 Marvin Severino P. Nasino BFAR 4A Senior Aquaculturist 19 Trysonel Minay BFAR 4B Technical Staff 20 Resel Mopal BFAR 5 Planning staff 21 Laarni A. Bayaban BFAR 5/FMA 11 Laboratory Technician II 22 FMA 11 Secretariat/ PFO Maria Aimee Sobrevega BFAR 6 Iloilo 23 MARIAN JILL S. ABETO BFAR 6 OIC, PFO 24 Rheane Joy Senangote BFAR 6 Aqua I 25 Alvin Beltran BFAR 6 PFO Capiz Aquaculturist1 26 BFAR 6-PFO Negros Paul Filip Depra Aquaculturist I (JO) Occidental 27 Chairene Grace C. Degamo BFAR 7 Aqua Tech 28 Jeselita G. Ruinata BFAR 7 FMA FOCAL 10 AND 11 29 Nathaniel BFAR 7 aqua tech 30 Jona Rhen Lafuente BFAR 7 PFO BOHOL FRO I 31 Fisheries Regulatory Officer Nimrod G. Ursora BFAR 7 -PFO Cebu I 32 FMA 10/BFAR 8 Yasmin BFAR 8-PFO Leyte Aqua. Tech. Reyn R. San Jose 33 Supervising Fishing Severino L. Escobar, Jr. BFAR Central Office Regulations Officer 34 Senior Administrative Lovella Maghirang BFAR CO Assistant II 296 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 5 (FMA 10, 11 and 12) 35 Chief, Fisheries Resource Sandra Victoria R. Arcamo BFAR CO Management Division 36 Sr. Administrative Assistant Leonardo Gabriel Lira BFAR FPED II 37 ROSALIE ABREU BFAR IVA DATA ANALYST 38 Fishing Regulations Officer Alfonso Dela Torre BFAR MIMAROPA I 39 FMA Secretariat Claress S. Jamilla BFAR MIMAROPA (FMA5,6,12) 40 Gonzales Lenie BFAR MIMAROPA Aquaculturist II 41 Marimar Cabilogan BFAR NSAP 6 Data Encoder 42 BFAR NSAP Elmar M. Villaflor Data Analyst MIMAROPA 43 Cylet Salvacion C. Lluz BFAR Region 08 Chief Aqua/OIC-ARD 44 Diomedes P. Ballebar BFAR RO5 OIC PFO Masbare 45 Joelle Benavidez BFAR RO5 Planning Officer 46 Jorelyn Solares BFAR RO5 Planning Staff 47 Ma. Bernadette Cristina BFAR/FRMD Aquaculturist II Lintag 48 Marco BFAR/NSAP Data Analyst 49 Catherine B Elan BFAR5 Planning Unit Staff 50 Edwin Candelario B. Javier BFAR6 PFO Capiz Sr. Aquaculturist / OIC PFO 51 Jennelyn Vargas BFAR-FPED Planning Officer 52 Jermaine Lacsamana BFAR-FPED Aqua II 53 Adan S. Diamante BFAR-NIFTC Tanay Aquaculturist II 54 Ailed Villaruel BFAR-NSAP6 Data Encoder 55 Amelyn Mellizo BFAR-NSAP6 Data encoder 56 Diana m. Dela Cruz BFAR-NSAP6 Data Encoder 57 Jessa Mae Roga BFAR-NSAP6 Data Encoder 58 Kin Teodosio BFAR-NSAP6 Data Encoder 59 Ralph Bonifacio BFAR-NSAP6 Data Encoder 60 Riza Barredo BFAR-NSAP6 Data Encoder 61 Emmanuel Taroy BFAR-NSTDC Technical staff 62 Bureau of Fisheries ELIZABETH ILLAVERA and Aquatic Staff Resources 63 Bureau of Fisheries Nino Carlo C. Isnit and Aquatic Aquaculturist I Resources 64 Bureau of Fisheries Trazarah Hanoof E. Argarin and Aquatic NSAP Data Analyst Resources 297 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 5 (FMA 10, 11 and 12) 65 Bureau of Fisheries Chief, Regional Fisheries Noemi SB Lanzuela and Aquatic Training and Fisherfolk Resources 5 Coordination Division 66 CALATAGAN RODRIGO A. DE JESUS CHAIRMAN BANTAY DAGAT 67 WILFREDO A. CALATAGAN PRESIDENT HERNANDEZ MFARMC 68 Capiz Provincial Esteban Nonoy Contreras Governor Government 69 NIZA S. CAGULADA CDA CDA 70 Jayson Romero CERD Inc. Area Coordinator 71 Augustus Rex Montebon CI Philippines Marine Program Director 72 CITY GOVERNMENT AQUACULTURAL IRISH GOMEZ BELMONTE OF ORMOC TECHNICIAN II 73 JACOB BORRES Commercial Fishing - 74 DA-BFAR Brenda S. Labiaga AQUA I MIMAROPA 75 Science Research Ronnie Romero DA-NFRDI Specialist 76 Department of Agriculture- Bureau of Head- National Fisheries simeona E. Regidor Fisheries and Aquatic Laboratory Division Resources 77 Department of Labor JAYSON K. MARBELLA Administrative Assistant III and Employment RO5 78 Department of Labor and CYRUS C. POLICARPIO Employment/Bureau Labor and Employment II of Workers with Special Concerns 79 Labor and Employment Alice P. Hisona DOLE Officer II 80 Ma. Lesly Romero Dole LEO III 81 Charina Olay Panugaling DOLE7 Program Coordinator 82 Mirasol T. Cadalso FMA 10 Barangay Captain 83 Melanie Catapang FMA 12 Commercial Representative 84 Cherry E. Romero FPHTD Senior Aquaculturist 85 Davis Glorioso FPHTD BFAR Sr. Admin. Asst. III 86 Antonio Peralta FREEDOM Inc. Executive Director 87 Guihulngan City Francis Jeruel I Rizon Fishery technician Agriculturist Office 88 Jescel Bito Onon ISCOF Faculty 89 Mike KAGAMATA ORG. President 298 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 5 (FMA 10, 11 and 12) 90 MUNICIPAL JORGE A.ARCAYA LGU AGRICULTURIST 91 Envi. Specialist 1 / Apple Jane T. Into LGU - City of Talisay Fisheries Technician Designate 92 ANNABEL Q. GALLOSA LGU - MAO Fishery Technician 93 Letecia J. Alayacyac LGU - Ronda Fishery Technician 94 LGU Amlan Negros Jovencio C. Felisilda Municipal Agriculturist Oriental 95 Elshiena Cabungcal LGU CARCAR CITY Fishery technician 96 D.A. Requesting Officer / Mildred R. Uy LGU Cordova Cordova Fish Technician 97 Junah F. Ansag LGU Dumanjug Fishery Technician 98 Matt S. Sombero LGU Hinigaran AEW-Fisheries 99 Cameron T. Tañara LGU Larena Agricultural Technologist 100 Godfrey D. Grefaldia LGU Sibulan - MAO Municipal Agriculturist 101 Maria Fe Rosario E. Villegas LGU Sibulan - MAO Agricultural Technologist 102 Keziah Joy C. Roa LGU Victorias Agricultural Technologist 103 Cindy L. Plando LGU-Alcoy Fisheries Coordinator 104 Roselyn S. Amarante LGU-Bais City Aquacultural Technologist 105 CRISELL P. DE LA CRUZ LGU-BALAYAN FISHERY STAFF 106 RAMELYN H. CREAG LGU-BALAYAN OIC-FMO 107 LGU-City of Naga, Senior Agriculturist/Fishery Leonila R. Camomot Cebu Coordinator 108 Kathy C. Diego LGU-Jimalalud Agricultural Technologist 109 Andro LGU-Leyte AT-Fisheries 110 LGU-Leyte, Mulho Visitacion M. Marientes Fisherfolks President Association 111 Joe Marie Francisco LGU-MOALBOAL Fishery Coordinator 112 Alvin Q. Morata LGU-San Remigio Fishery Coordinator 113 FMA 10/ LGU-TABUELAN_ LGU-TABUELAN FISHERY COORDINATOR RAMA MONTEROLA 114 LGU- AGRICULTURAL John Rome S. Carupo TAYASAN/Municipal TECHNOLOGIST Agriculture Office 115 Rosela P. Bayaborda LGU-Valladolid Agriculturist II 116 LOCAL AGRICULTURAL GOVERNMENT UNIT LANIH LEI GABIN FLORES TECHNOLOGIST/FISHERY - SIQUIJOR, TECHNICIAN SIQUIJOR 117 Program Manager for Malampaya PACIFICO II D BELDIA Marine Biodiversity Foundation Inc. Conservation 299 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 5 (FMA 10, 11 and 12) 118 MARYBETH R. MAO/ LOCAL AGRICULTURAL NACIONAL/FMA 10 GOVERNMENT UNIT TECHNOLOGIST 119 AGRICULTURAL MARYBETH R. NACIONAL MAO/LGU-CATMON TECHNOLOGIST 120 Eva Garibay Rivera MFARMC Mulanay NGO rep 121 MFARM-C UNISAN Zaldy E. Almanza vice chairman MFARM-C QUEZON 122 MFARMC/1 Basiao MFARMC Nante L. De los Reyes Oyster Farmers Chairman/President Association 123 Municipal Agriculture Office of Local FMA11 - LGU San Jose - Agricultural Technologist - Government Unit of Nibarie Nicolas Fishery Technician San Jose, Negros Oriental 124 RONEO COMENTA Municipal Fishing - 125 MUNICIPAL MA. EMELYN C. MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT OF CUSTODIO AGRICULTURIST/ MENRO CALATAGAN 126 MUNICIPAL AGRICULTURAL MARVIN M. LUMAYOR GOVERNMENT OF TECHNOLOGIST CALATAGAN 127 Rene Boy H. Custodio N/A N/A 128 Sectoral Representative, Fish Dyna V. Bonites NA Processors/Vendors/Trader - FMA 12 129 National Fisheries Chief Science Research Elsa Furio Research and Specialist Development Institute 130 National Fisheries Phillip Malicdem Research and Research Assistant Development Institute 131 Ernie Lim NFR Advocacy & Comms Officer 132 Mirriam Cayme NGRDI PLO3 133 DR. JOCELYN BANTIGUE NONESCOST Professor 134 Northern Negros State College of Jocelyn D. Bantigue R and D Director Science and Technology 135 Archie A. Barlas NSAP MIMAROPA DATA ANALYST 136 Rhealyn A Bartolome NSAP6 Data Encoder 137 Campaign & Science Diovanie De Jesus Oceana Specialist 300 No. NAME AGENCY/OFFICE POSITION Cluster 5 (FMA 10, 11 and 12) 138 Edna Lilibeth A. Office of the City Aqua Culture Technician I Duhaylongsod Agriculturist 139 Office of the Florie May Castro Aquaculturist II Provincial Agriculturist 140 Office of the Freni June B. Berano Provincial Admin. Asst. Agriculturist-Capiz 141 One Visayas Fish Chester Chua Jr Vice President Network 142 Provincial Fisheries Joey dela Cruz OPA Capiz Coordinator 143 Gerald Bano PFR-6 CHAIRMAN 144 ASSISTANT OIC, CG P/ENS MARC PHILIPPINE COAST BIOLOGICAL YONDELL S SABA GUARD LABORATORY DIVISION 145 GOV. ESTEBAN EVAN PLGU Capiz GOVERNOR CONTRERAS 146 PLGU-Negros Ruel S. Almoneda Supervising Aquaculturist Occidental 147 PROCESS lorena c. navallasca Manager Foundation Panay 148 Processors, Traders, YVETTE TOMALE and Market - Organizers 149 Provincial Grace-An Villareal Perlas Aquaculturist II Government of Aklan 150 RODRIGO JIZ SANGKAP - 151 Tagasuri ng Isda sa Rosalie G. Recaro Chairperson Quezon (TNIQue) 152 Taklong Island JULIETA GABAYERON National Marine PASU Reserve 153 Mhar Jo Mondana URI MEL Assistant 154 LORENA NAVALLASCA WEVNET Executive Director 301 302