Content uploaded by Roba’a Yusof
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Roba’a Yusof on Nov 25, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
eISSN: 2672-7226
© Penerbit UMT
Journal of Sustainability Science and Management
Volume 17 Number 2, February 2022: 255-269
BARRIERS TO PARTICIPATING IN THE COLLECTION OF TRACEABLE CATCH
LANDING DATA FOR SHARKS AND RAYS: FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS (FGD) OF
SMALL- SCALE FISHERMEN IN PAHANG, MALAYSIA
ROBA’A YUSOF1*, AHMAD SHUIB2, AHMAD ALI3, ILLISRIYANI ISMAIL4 AND SRIDAR
RAMACHANDRAN5
1Institute of Tropical Agriculture and Food Security, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400 Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia. 2School
of Business and Economics, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Malaysia. 3Southeast Asia Marine Resources Institute (ISMAT),
Taman Perikanan Chendering, 21080 Kuala Terengganu, Terengganu, Malaysia. 4International Institute of Aquaculture
and Aquatic Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Malaysia. 5School of Business and Economics, Universiti Putra Malaysia,
Malaysia
*Corresponding author: GS48497@student.upm.edu.my
Submitted nal draft: 9 May 2021 Accepted: 18 June 2021
Introduction
Sharks and rays are cartilaginous shes that have
gradually evolved for more than 400 million
years. Sharks are known as apex predators,
whose key roles are to maintain a balanced
ecosystem, prevent the spread of diseases,
improve the gene pool and help create a healthy
environment (Camhi et al., 1998; Grifn et
al., 2008; Felipe et al., 2019). Sharks have
been identied as one of the most endangered
species and a priority group for conservation
action (Booth et al., 2018). Their population has
dwindled mainly due to high demand for human
consumption and substantial commercial value
(Lehr, 2015). Approximately 100 million sharks
are killed annually and the total declared value
of shark products traded globally is US$1 billion
(Dent & Clarke, 2015). An estimated 25% of
1,038 sharks, rays and chimaera species that
have been assessed by the International Union
for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)’s Shark
Specialist Group are threatened with extinction,
making them the most threatened vertebrate
group (Bräutigam et al., 2016).
The main factor for this is their vitality,
which is hindered by slow growth, late maturity
and few offspring (Camhi et al., 1998; Susan et
al., 1998; Walker 1998; Cortes, 2000; Frisk et al.,
2001; Fowler et al., 2002; Dent & Clarke, 2015).
In addition, the rapid growth in commercial
sheries targeting high-value species, a lack of
specic management, as well as poor recording
mechanisms of mixed-species sheries make
it difcult to precisely predict shark extinction
Abstract: The objective of this study is to identify barriers in participating in the
collection of traceable catch landing data for shark and ray species among small-scale
shers in Pahang, Malaysia. As one of the major shark catchers in the world, Malaysia
has been recommended to implement a traceability system to manage its supply chain
process, starting from catch landings, to ensure sustainable shing of sharks and rays. The
participation of of small-scale shers in this effort is crucial due to the signicant impact
of shark and ray population to their livelihood, even though they have limited capability to
record catch data due to lack of resources and education. A purposive snowball sampling
was used to identify participants for focus group discussions (FGD). A semi-structured
open-ended proforma was used as a discussion guide. The ndings suggest that there
are ve barriers to participation, namely (i) shark and ray resources; (ii) governance and
management support; (iii) infrastructure and management information system; (iv) shers’
commitment and buy-ins; and, (v) collaboration effort among stakeholders. It is important
for policymakers to consider mandatory registration of shark and ray shers, besides
encouraging them to report their catch up to species level with incentives and training
programs, as well as information technology improvements, to overcome the barriers.
Future studies might expand into quantitative analysis and include other players in the
shark and ray supply chain.
Keywords: Sustainability, traceability, shark, ray, focus group discussion, small-scale sher.
http://doi.org/10.46754/jssm.2022.02.018
Roba'a Yusof et al.
256
Journal of Sustainability Science and Management Volume 17 Number 2, February 2022: 255-269
(Camhi et al., 1998; Grifn et al., 2008; Field
et al., 2009). Therefore, it is crucial to conserve
shark species to protect the ocean ecosystem,
as well as marine biodiversity at national and
international levels (Otway et al., 2004; Yokoi et
al., 2017) through the strengthening of standard
data recording systems in both sheries and
trade (Camhi et al., 1998; Dent & Clarke, 2015).
Malaysia has been identied as the second
largest importer of shark n from 2000 to 2016,
with an annual average of 2,556 metric tons
(mt). It was also the eight-largest producer
of shark products with an annual capture
production average of 21,459 mt from 2007 to
2017 (Nicola & Sant, 2019). Thus, all signatory
nations in the Convention on International Trade
in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
(CITES) need to urgently identify measures to
improve real-time collection of accurate trade
information and implement traceability systems
to prevent overexploitation of their endangered
species (Bräutigam et al., 2016; Nicola & Sant,
2019). Catch or landing data for sharks and rays
have been reported to the Food and Agriculture
Organization (FAO) of the United Nations
since 1950. However, difculties in reporting
shark products still persist in most countries,
thus affecting data quality and reliability on
the trade (Dent & Clarke, 2015). Many have
suggested a standardized traceability system
to efciently manage the overall supply chain
of shark products, beginning from the landing
of catch at shing jetties. This is to ensure that
the traded products are sustainable, transparent,
authentic and compliant with regulations (Lehr,
2015; 2016; Mundy & Sant, 2015; Bräutigam et
al., 2016; Marshall & Barone, 2016; Nicola &
Sant, 2019).
The inclusion of artisanal shers in such
effort will entail socio-economic consequences
and potential issues. Their inclusion in a
traceability system is a main challenge because
of their limited capability, resources and lack
of education (Lehr, 2015; 2016). The barriers
to their participation include lack of incentive,
current system and process integration issues,
administrative burden, technical/logistical
challenges, long-term commitment and buy-ins
from stakeholders. Training for shers is also
needed to promote capability-building, and the
appropriate infrastructure must be provided
before implementing a traceability system for
shark products (Lehr, 2015 & 2016; Mundy &
Sant, 2015; USAID, 2018).
The Malaysian Fisheries Department
(DOF) is fully committed towards sustainable
conservation of shark and ray species. Its
action plans are aimed at preventing the
overexploitation of marine species according
to guidelines of the International Plan of Action
for the Conservation and Management of Sharks
(IPOA-SHARKS) framework. Through its
latest 2014 National Plan of Action (NPOA —
Sharks), the department has taken the interest
of all stakeholders into consideration through
a series of discussions to ensure a balanced
need between ecological, social and economic
objectives (DOF, 2014). Many studies on sharks
and rays have been conducted since the 1990s,
but they were mostly focusing on biology,
taxonomy, and marketing and trading. Despite
all the studies, DOF has strongly suggested
a need to close the knowledge gap in supply
chain traceability for shark and ray products
to balance the trilogy of market, resources and
environment in a sustainable manner (Ahmad
et al., 2019b). The cooperation of small-scale
shers is needed for the long-term as they tend
to lose interest when there is a lack of clarity on
the benets or rewards of traceability programs
(USAID, 2018).
The main purpose of this study is to
determine the barriers faced by small-scale
shers in participating in the collection of catch
landing data for shark and ray species in Pahang,
Malaysia. The ndings will add to the limited
literature on shark and ray traceability studies.
It will also help policymakers to strategize
effective measures and action plans towards
sustainable conservation of shark and ray
species. Furthermore, the stakeholders involved
in the landing data collection will have greater
awareness of their role and contribute to the
relevant supply chain traceability processes.
The methods may also be used to measure
effective traceability implementation for other
BARRIERS TO PARTICIPATING IN THE COLLECTION OF TRACEABLE CATCH LANDING DATA
257
Journal of Sustainability Science and Management Volume 17 Number 2, February 2022: 255-269
species at other locations. The ndings will
also indirectly benet those who are concerned
with the environmental impact of marine life
overexploitation.
Materials and Method
This was an exploratory qualitative case study
that relied more on the views of of participants
to obtain in-depth understanding of the trade
(Creswell, 2014; Creswell & Poth, 2018).
Instrument
The possible factors of barriers in participating
in the collection of traceable catch landing data
were identied based on recommendations by
Lehr (2015 & 2016), Mundy and Sant (2015),
Khan et al. (2018), USAID (2018) and expert
elicitation from Key Informant Interviews
(KII) with DOF and Malaysian Fisheries
Development Board (LKIM) ofcials, and
NPOA-Sharks committee members in April
2019. There were government and management
support; information technology infrastructure;
communication tools; coordination and
collaboration; training, development and
awareness.
A semi-structured open-ended discussion
proforma sheet was prepared and divided
into two sections. The rst section aimed to
collect information on the status of shark and
ray resources, and their shing and landing
operations. The second section was to assess
the current phenomena and challenges faced by
small-scale shers. The questions were suitable
for discussing a specic topic, besides trying
to draw out complex individual experiences,
beliefs, perceptions and attitudes (Tobias et al.,
2018). A short and simple language that is easily
understandable by all participants is important
to encourage cooperation and involvement
throughout the study (Chan & Idris, 2017).
The questions were designed to be open-ended
and exploratory as the researchers had to rely
mostly on the participants’ views of the situation
(Creswell, 2018).
Study Area
The study was conducted at selected landing
sites in Kuantan and Pekan in the east coast state
of Pahang in Peninsular Malaysia (Figure 1).
Between 1982 and 2019, the total marine
sh landings in Malaysia had recorded an
annual average of 1,175,067 mt, with shark
landings contributing an average of 6,752 mt
(0.57%) and ray landings at 13,432 mt (1.14%)
(DOF, 1982-2019). There were at least 68 shark
species, 82 ray species, four skates and one
chimaera (including two freshwater species)
inhabiting Malaysian waters (Ahmad et al.,
2014). Alongside Perak, Pahang was one of the
major contributors of shark and ray landings in
Peninsular Malaysia from 1991 to 2019. Pahang
contributed an average of 10% (737 mt) and
had the third highest annual average of the total
shark landings, while for ray landings, it was
recorded at 10% (1,480 mt) as shown in Figure
2. This was the fourth highest ray landings in
Malaysia (DOF, 1982-2019). Pahang’s shark
and ray landings comprised 0.43% and 0.86%,
respectively, of the state’s total marine sh
landings from 1991 to 2019 (DOF, 1991-2019).
Its small-scale shers contributed only 7.7% of
the total marine ish catch in 2019. However,
their input was crucial as the implementation
of effective traceability would improve the
environment and their socio-economic income
(Lehr, 2016; USAID, 2018).
Data Collection
In order to build trust and generate referrals and
secure more interviews (Kirchherr & Charles,
2018), three meetings were conducted with
shery ofcials of Pahang (DOF, state LKIM
and the Fishermen’s Association of Pahang) to
identify participants. Based on the DOF’s 2019
annual shery statistics, there were 551 registered
small-scale shers owning berglass boats with
outboard engines (<40 GRT) who were using gill/
drift nets and hook lines as their shing gear. A
total of 22 landing sites were surveyed in Kuantan
and Pekan, where the former is the state capital,
while the latter is a coastal district (both adjacent
the South China Sea).
Roba'a Yusof et al.
258
Journal of Sustainability Science and Management Volume 17 Number 2, February 2022: 255-269
Figure 2: Total shark and ray landings in Pahang, Malaysia, from 1991 to 2019 (mt)
Source: Department of Fisheries, Annual Fisheries Statistics (1991-2019)
Figure 1: Study locations represented by districts within the state of Pahang, Malaysia
Source: Atroosh et al. (2012)
BARRIERS TO PARTICIPATING IN THE COLLECTION OF TRACEABLE CATCH LANDING DATA
259
Journal of Sustainability Science and Management Volume 17 Number 2, February 2022: 255-269
A purposive snowball sampling technique,
in which one interviewee would be asked to
provide the name of at least one or more potential
participants, was used to identify the small-scale
shers involved in shark and ray catches with
more than 10 years’experience (Kirchherr &
Charles, 2018). These strict criteria reduced the
size of qualied participants so that accurate
information on shark and ray shing over a long
period could be obtained. This technique was
appropriate when the target participants were
not easily available (Naderifar et al., 2017) with
the aim of obtaining data from selected groups,
rather than referring to a probability of a total
population (Tobias et al., 2018).
The DOF and state LKIM recommended six
study locations based on the landing data volume
for sharks and rays species. Six focus group
discussion (FGD) sessions were conducted with
six participants in each session, including a
researcher as the moderator and a representative
from the authorities, as shown in Table 1. It was
quite a challenge to gather the participantss at
each session due to the nature of their work and
locality. As such, the sessions were conducted
near their landing sites and, at the same time, the
researchers took the opportunity to observe the
nature of their operations and species of sharks
and rays that were caught.
In this setting, the researcher played the role
of a moderator to gain in-depth understanding
of the issues with the exibility to adapt to
the ow of discussion. Discussions were kept
impartial to build rapport and encourage an open
and honest dialogue among diverse individuals
(Tobias et al., 2018). It was a good way to gather
people from similar backgrounds or experiences
to get their insights on certain topics of interest
(Lokanath, 2016).
These FGD sessions were observed, notes
were taken, and discussions were tape-recorded,
transcribed and summarized to categorize the
input to relevant factors. The purpose of the
discourse analysis was to analyze the language
used to describe the subjects’ norms, preferences
and expectations (Kamalu & Osisanwo, 2015).
It channelized interest towards detecting
regularities, through which coherence of
phrases was achieved therein to understand the
interactions in society (Suciu, 2019). The steps
to conduct a discourse analysis are shown in the
Table 2.
Table 2: Discourse analysis components
Steps to Conduct Discourse Analysis
Reading Read through transcripts and listen to interview tape recordings to gain overview of the data.
Coding Select the materials for analysis using research questions as the basis of selection. Develop
coding from reading and re-reading of data.
Analysis Read through the coded data. Focus on the functional aspects of the discourse or text.
Writing Write the analysis to present results and ndings.
Source: Ussher and Perz (2014).
Table 1: Focus group discussion sessions by location
No. Date Location No. of Participants
(including moderator and authority)
1. 5 July 2019 Pantai Balok, Kuantan 6
2. 5 July 2019 Pasar Beserah, Kuantan 6
3. 8 July 2019 Pantai Sepat, Kuantan 6
4. 8 July 2019 Pantai Chempaka, Kuantan 6
5. 9 July 2019 Kuala Pahang, Pekan 6
6 10 July 2019 Nenasi, Pekan 6
Roba'a Yusof et al.
260
Journal of Sustainability Science and Management Volume 17 Number 2, February 2022: 255-269
Results and Discussion
Through the discourse analysis, the ve main
factors perceived to be barriers in participating
in the collection of traceable catch landing data
for sharks and rays have been identied. They
are (i) shark and ray resources and operations;
(ii) governance and management support;
(iii) infrastructure and information system
management; (iv) shers’ commitment and buy-
ins; and, (v) collaborative effort by stakeholders.
Shark and Ray Resources and Operations
All groups were represented by small-scale
shers with more than 10 years’ experience.
Small-scale shers were dened as having a
valid license to operate a vessel with outboard
engine (<40 GRT) using either drift nets or/
and longlines within shing Zone A (0-5nm).
Upon registration and licensing approval, they
and their vessel would be assigned a unique
identier.
Shark and ray shing and landing operations
are summarised in Table 3. Fishers would land
their catches at registered landing sites either at
a jetty, complex or beach, and they could report
their catch to the nearest declaration centers,
namely Pantai Beserah, Pantai Cempaka,
LKIM Kuantan Complex, LKIM Kuala Pahang
Complex or LKIM Nenasi Complex. These
landing and declaration sites were registered and
monitored by the state LKIM. Fishers could sell
their catch directly to consumers, wholesalers
and/or at sh markets.
Table 4 shows that all participants agreed
the demand for sharks and rays was high, and
supply was not enough. The demand for rays
would spike during Ramadan, when it would
be cooked as a popular grilled dish for breaking
fast. Although sharks and rays were by-catch
products, there were occasions when shers
specically caught rays for a season, usually
from February to June. However, this season
was not consistent every year.
Participants mentioned that sharks and
rays comprised at least 10% of their total catch
and income. For targeted ray shers in Nenasi,
Pekan, the catch could sometimes comprise
between 50% and 90% of the shers’ income,
as the sh there was larger. When participants
were asked for the average catch on a daily or
monthly basis, the information could not be
provided as they did not keep track of such data.
The most commonly caught sharks
were bamboosharks (Chiloscyllium indicum,
Chiloscyllium plagiosum, Chiloscyllium
hasseltii, Chiloscyllium punctatum), blackspot
sharks (Carchahinus sealei), common blacktip
sharks (Carcharhinus limbatus) and the
spottail shark (Carcharhinus sorrah). The price
depended on the species and size. The wholesale
shark price ranged from RM3 to RM4 per
kilogram. The most expensive and rare catch
was the Zebra shark (Stegostoma fasciatum),
which could fetch up to RM60 per kg.
The most popular ray species was the
whitespotted whipray (Maculabatis gerrardi),
with a wholesale price of between RM12
and RM16 per kg. During the FGD session
at Pantai Sepat sh market, the retail price
for this species was at RM27 per kg. Other
commonly caught species were the bottlenose
wedgesh (Rhynchobatus australiae), pale-
edged sharpnose ray (Telatrygon zugei), coach
whipray (Himantura uarnak), banded and
spotted eagle ray (Aetomylaeus nichoi and
Table 3: Shark and ray shing and landing operations in Kuantan and Pekan, Pahang
Fishing and Landing Operations
1. All : Zone A vessel (outboard engine) using drift net and longlines.
2. All : More than 10 years shing experience.
3. All : Have a valid shing license with unique ID and registered vessel with unique ID.
4. All : Land catches at LKIM registered landing sites.
5. All : Report their catches at nearest declaration center.
6. All : Sell catches to the consumers/wholesalers at nearest landing site or/and sh market
BARRIERS TO PARTICIPATING IN THE COLLECTION OF TRACEABLE CATCH LANDING DATA
261
Journal of Sustainability Science and Management Volume 17 Number 2, February 2022: 255-269
Aetomylaeus ocellatus), narrow and roughnose
cowtail ray (Pastinachus gracillicaudus and
Pastinachus solocirostris), Japanese and long-
tail buttery ray (Gymnura japonica and
Gymnura poecilura) and the Javan cownose ray
(Rhinoptera javanica). All species were caught
throughout the year.
The pricing was determined by local
wholesalers on a daily basis. Fishers had their
own preferred wholesalers based on the highest
price offered and good relationship. The
wholesalers would collect and distribute the
catch to local and external markets. Transactions
were conducted in cash and recorded in sales
receipts.
The commonly caught species mentioned
by the small-scale shers in FGDs are shown in
Table 5 and Table 6. They were identied using
a reference book by Ahmad et al. (2017).
In summary, sharks and rays were caught in
small quantities, but ray species could contribute
more to the small-scale shers’ income due
to high demand. From the list and evidence at
landing sites, no endangered species were found
among the shers’catch.
Table 4: Demand for shark and ray resources
Shark and Ray Resources
1. All: High demand and not enough supply. Rays highly in demand during Ramadan.
2. All: Sharks and rays are by-catch products, but are sometimes targeted during season.
3. All: Peak season is usually from February to June.
4. Almost all : Catch >10% and during peak season, may go up to 50% (according to ray shers in Nenasi).
5. All: Agreed the catch could provide good income (>10%) and may go up to 90% in peak season
(according to ray shers in Nenasi)
6. All: Wholesale shark (yu) price RM3 to RM4 for yu cicak and yu bodoh. Most expensive is the zebra
shark (Stegostoma fasciatum).
7. Popular species: Maculabatis gerrardi sold between RM12 and RM16; Retail is RM27 per kg. Other
common species sold as whole sh and caught throughout the year.
8. All: Price depends on the species and size, and is determined by wholesalers. Fishers have their own
preferred wholesalers (1 or 2). The wholesalers collect, distribute and record the catch. Transactions
carried out in cash.
Table 5: List of caught sharks species in Pahang, Malaysia
No. Scientic Name Common Name Local Name
1. Carcharhinus limbatus Common blacktip shark Yu sirip hitam
2. Carcharhinus sealei Blackspot shark Yu pasir
3. Carcharhinus sorrah Spottail shark Yu sorah
4. Chiloscyllium hasseltii Brownbanded bambooshark Yu cicak
5. Chiloscyllium indicum Slender bambooshark Yu bodoh
6. Chiloscyllium plagiosum Whitespotted bambooshark Yu bodoh
7. Chiloscyllium punctatum Indonesian bambooshark Yu cicak
8. Galeocerdo cuvier Tiger shark Yu tenggiri
9. Hemigaleus microstoma Weasel shark Yu bintik putih
10. Rhizoprionodon acutus Milk shark Yu pasir
11. Rhizoprionodon oligolinx Grey sharpnose Yu minyak
12. Scoliodon macrorhynchos Pacic spadenose shark Yu padi
13. Stegostoma fasciatum Zebra shark Yu bintik kuning
Roba'a Yusof et al.
262
Journal of Sustainability Science and Management Volume 17 Number 2, February 2022: 255-269
In terms of data traceability, the current
registration and licensing process for vessels
and shers were already established to support
traceable catch landing data, as they met the
basic Key Data Elements (KDE) of a unique
identication as recommended by Lehr (2015
& 2016) and USAID (2018). Currently, the
catch reporting only required shers to state the
species name, which was “shark” or “ray”. The
authorities might consider assigning a unique
code for each species in the catch landing data
system since there were only 13 commonly
caught species.
Governance and Management Support
All participating groups reported that public
awareness programs on the plight of endangered
sharks and rays were limited among the shing
community in Kuantan or Pekan, except Nenasi.
However, the shers were very much aware on
turtle conservation as awareness programs were
frequently carried out among them.
In terms of legislation, participants were
aware that the use of pukat pari or gill net with
mesh size exceeding 25.4 cm had been banned
to protect large-sized marine species like turtles
from being caught. However, they did not know
of any endangered shark or ray species that could
not be caught. When shown some examples,
the shers said they used to spot whale sharks
(Rhinchodon typus), but the species could no
longer be seen today.
The shers were worried as they were not
sure what to do if they caught an endangered
species, especially when the sh was only
identied upon landing. They feared that they
would be penalized by the authorities if they
reported their catch. They also did not agree to
ban the catching of all sharks and rays because
they could signiantly contribute to their
income.
The shers in Nenasi acknowledged the ban
on shark “nning” as mentioned in their vessel
license book. The shers were also fully aware
of LKIM’s Fish Landing Control Regulation
that required them to report their catch to claim
cash incentives and fuel subsidies; though
they stated that there was no verication done
on their reports. They perceived that rule
enforcement at landing sites was not practical
as it was quite challenging for the authorities to
deploy sufcient personnel to check all the catch
landings. The summary of the discussion on
governance and management support is shown
in Table 7.
In summary, awareness programs and the
enforcement of regulations are lacking. As
such, all participants agreed that there was an
Table 6: List of caught ray species in Pahang, Malaysia
No. Scientic Name Common Name Local Name
1. Aetomylaeus nichoi Banded eagle ray Pari helang
2. Aetomylaeus ocellatus Spotted eagle ray Pari helang
3. Gymnura japonica Japanese buttery Pari kelawar/
Pari tembaga
4. Gymnura poecilura Longtail buttery ray
5. Himantura uarnak Coach whipray Pari harimau/lalat
6. Maculabatis gerrardi Whitespotted whipray Pari pasir/bunga
7. Neotrygon orientalis Oriental blue spotted mask ray Pari bintik biru
8. Pastinachus gracillicaudus Narrow cowtail ray Pari daun
9. Pastinachus solocirostris Roughnose cowtail ray Pari daun
10. Rhinoptera javanica Javan cownose ray Pari susun
11. Rhynchobatus australiae Bottlenose wedgesh Yu kemejan
12. Taeniura lymma Bluespotted fantail ray Pari batu
13. Telatrygon zugei Pale-edge sharpnose ray Pari ketuka
BARRIERS TO PARTICIPATING IN THE COLLECTION OF TRACEABLE CATCH LANDING DATA
263
Journal of Sustainability Science and Management Volume 17 Number 2, February 2022: 255-269
urgent need to conduct awareness programs
on the importance of shark and ray species to
the marine ecosystem and biodiversity. Posters
of endangered shark and ray species could
be distributed at landing sites, sh markets
and on social media. This program should be
conducted with a long-term plan to inculcate
awareness in the younger generation at schools
and universities. This could be a starting point
to get buy-ins from small-scale shers and other
stakeholders to understand the importance of
these species in terms of social, ecological and
sustainable shery management in Pahang.
The authorities should register all shark
and ray shers since their role and input were
signicant in the sustainable management of
the species. The current cash incentives and
diesel subsidy of RM1.65 at rate could be
considered successful in encouraging the shers
to participate in the voluntary declaration of
their catch landings. These incentives could
be extended to other stakeholders to promote
accurate traceable data recording and reporting
of shark and ray landings.
Infrastructure and Management Information
System
All participants agreed that jetties managed by
LKIM were adequate in providing basic needs
for landing activities. The declaration centers
and sh markets also had adequate facilities for
shers to declare and market their catch. There
were 10 LKIM-registered landing jetties and
12 beach landing sites for small-scale shers
in Kuantan and Pekan as described in Table 8.
The landing sites were accessible to all small-
scale shers regardless of their license validity.
On top of that, there were also several jetties
managed by private companies. No landing site
was dedicated for shark and ray species.
The summary of the current infrastructure
and data information system for landing
activities are shown in Table 9. The wholesalers
would arrange transport to collect and distribute
the catch. Fishers and wholesalers used
handphones to communicate and do business.
Almost all participants owned handphones
with basic features. it was interesting to note
that some shers were using old models when
they went out to sea as they thought the battery
could last longer. Every transaction from a
shing trip would be recorded by the wholesaler
on a hardcopy receipt. The shers used these
hardcopy receipts as their declaration to claim
cash incentives and fuel subsidy from LKIM.
LKIM, in turn, used these receipts to record
the monthly catch at landing sites through its
e-pengisytiharan system. The information
included volume, price and identied species,
These information were compiled together with
other unique identications required by the
traceable catch landing data known as Key Data
Elements (KDE), such as vessel identication,
sher’s identication and trip date.
All participants said they had no issues in
declaring their catch, but some admitted that
Table 7: Discussion on governance and management support
Governance and Management Support
1. All groups except Nenasi: No awareness on programs conducted. No posters of endangered species
distributed or seen at landing sites. One awareness program was conduted by UPM in Nenasi in 2018.
Groups have high awareness on turtle conservation efforts.
2. All: Many not aware of shark and ray regulations, but are fully aware on the protection of turtles and ban
on the use of gill nets (pukat pari) with mesh size exceeding 25.4 cm (10 inches).
3. All: Do not agree on total ban as the sh are good sources of income.
4. All: Confused with the current regulations on endangered species.
5. Nenasi: Aware about nning ban
6. All: Catch declaration to state LKIM to claim cash incentives and fuel subsidy.
7. All: No verication on the accuracy of data reported to LKIM.
8. All: Enforcement of regulations at landing sites is challenging.
Roba'a Yusof et al.
264
Journal of Sustainability Science and Management Volume 17 Number 2, February 2022: 255-269
the data provided in their receipts were not
fully accurate because they were meant to claim
incentives, and there was no verication being
done. However, they believed that the LKIM
could detect discrepanies in the data provided if
they skewed too much from their normal claims.
In terms of transparency in information sharing,
all participants agreed that they had no issues for
their catch landing data to be shared with other
stakeholders.
During the FGDs, the LKIM
e-pengisytiharan system ofcer highlighted that
the number of unlicensed shers was almost
double than those with license. For example, in
Pantai Balok, approximately 70 were unlicensed
compared with 50 of their peers. The situation
was the same in Nenasi, where approximately
120 were licensed compared to almost 200
unlicensed ones. These unlicensed shers did
not report any catch information. The unreported
catch might have big impact on the landing data
Table 8: LKIM registered landing sites for berglass boats in Kuantan and Pekan, Pahang
Kuantan/Pekan Jetty/Base Jetty/Beach
Kuantan LKIM Complex Kuantan (Declaration center) LKIM Jetty
Kuantan Pantai Cempaka (Declaration center) Beach
Kuantan Ceruk Paloh/Penor, Balok, Tanjung Api LKIM Jetty
Kuantan Pantai Kempadang, Pantai Beserah, Pantai Sepat Beach
Kuantan Sungai Ular, Pantai Chendor, Tanjong Lumpur Beach
Kuantan Cherating (Declaration center) Beach
Pekan LKIM Complex Kuala Pahang (Declaration center) LKIM Jetty
Pekan Tanjung Selangor Beach
Pekan Pasir Panjang/Sekukuh (Declaration center) LKIM Jetty
Pekan Tanjong Agas LKIM Jetty
Pekan Sungai Miang, Tanjung Batu, Merchong Beach
Pekan Kampung Marhum, Pengkalan Badong LKIM Jetty
Pekan LKIM Complex Nenasi (Declaration center) LKIM Jetty
Source: LKIM Pahang (2021)
Table 9: Infrastructure and management information system
Infrastructure and Management Information System
1. All: Adequate basic infrastructure and facilities provided by LKIM. Registered landing sites, declaration
centers and sh markets.
2. Two types of jetties: LKIM and private jetties. All landing sites are accessible to all berglass boats.
3. No dedicated landing site for shark and ray species.
4. The wholesalers collect the catches at landing sites using their own transport.
5. Everybody uses handphones to do business.
6. All declared catch landing data for each trip are recorded in LKIM’s e-pengisytiharan system.
7. All: Declared using a hardcopy sales receipt provided by wholesalers. The details may include species
type i.e “ Shark” or “Ray”, volume and price.
8. Fishers have no issues in declaring their catch using the current LKIM system to claim cash incentives
and fuel subsidy.
9. All agree to share information with other stakeholders.
10. Data accuracy is affected by undeclared catch of unregistered and unlicensed shers.
BARRIERS TO PARTICIPATING IN THE COLLECTION OF TRACEABLE CATCH LANDING DATA
265
Journal of Sustainability Science and Management Volume 17 Number 2, February 2022: 255-269
as the ofcer believed what LKIM had was only
around 40% to 50% accurate.
In summary, current infrastructure and
management information system for catch
data landing provided by the authorities were
accessible and adequate, but needed a few
improvements. This nding supported the
recommendation by USAID (2018) for LKIM to
review the management of sh landing sites to
improve the efciency of its traceability system.
Most importantly, there was a need for the
state authorities to record shark and ray catch up
to the species level as being done in other states
like Perak and Sabah (Ahmad et al., 2019b).
Fishers’ Commitment and Buy-ins
The participants said they were hesitant in
reporting their catch up to the spesies level. They
said their nature of work did not permit them
to record all those details as it was tedious and
time-consuming, and they had to deliver their
sh as fast and fresh as possible. They claimed
that the wet and smelly conditions of their
working environment made it difcult to record
the data on paper or handphone. They also had
other priorities to attend to, such as maintaining
their shing gear and boats. Reporting their
catch species also required effort and time.
Furthermore, their catch were large in quantity
and did not omprise sharks and rays only.
Most participants could identify sharks
and rays only by their local names. They also
mentioned that the names might differ in other
locations. They faced difculty in matching the
local names with scientic ones when shown a
reference book by Ahmad et al. (2017). To them,
some species looked similar to each other. Most
of them were not concerned about the species
they caught and not willing to learn unless there
was an incentive.
In terms of training and awareness programs,
the shers would consider attending them if an
allowance was provided to compensate their
daily income. This attitude was also enountered
by USAID in 2018 while studying social
acceptance issues among small-scale shers in
Tok Bali, Kelantan. The Kuantan and Pekan
shers also suggested that the new system must
be user friendly, easy to use and robust enough
to cater to any new requirements in future;
they saw this new system application was only
relevant to the younger generation of shers, as
the older generation was not keen to participate.
Two groups strongly disagreed on participating
in training and awareness programs as they did
not see the importance of recording the data of
sharks and rays to their livelihood. The summary
of the discussions is shown in Table 10.
Table 10: Discussions on shers’ commitment and buy-ins
Fishers Commitment and Buy-ins
1. Fishing is tiring and landings need to be fast to maintain freshness.
2. Recording and reporting catch data not a priority and are troublesome.
3. Focus more on shing operations and maintenance of their shing gear and boats.
4. More time and effort needed for recording, especially by species on daily basis.
5. Difculty in mathing local species with their scientic names.
6. Will consider reporting up to species level if more incentives are given.
7. Fishers not willing to produce written reports and some are illiterate.
8. Training: Most willing to attend if given large allowance.
9. Training to use new technologies is only for the younger generation.
10. Do not keep any catch data except to full the e-pengisytiharan system requirement.
11. New system must be easy and user-friendly for shers to participate in.
12. Two groups strongly disagree to participate as they don’t see the importance of species traceability.
13. Mostly all groups mentioned that the older generation is not willing to learn new things.
14. Most agree that business transactions are totally based on trust.
Roba'a Yusof et al.
266
Journal of Sustainability Science and Management Volume 17 Number 2, February 2022: 255-269
Collaboration Effort by all Stakeholders
At present, small-scale shers and wholesalers
said they faced no issues in doing business even
without legal instruments such as contracts.
Fishers ould approach any wholesaler who
offered a higher price. Most transactions were
simple and arried out in cash. Wholesalers
were also very accommodating in producing
receipts required by LKIM for data landing
records. As for the relationship with government
agencies, the shers urged the authorities to be
fair when enforcing regulations between them
and trawler owners as the latter’s shark and ray
catch were much larger. They also highlighted
that the authorities should show commitment in
implementing long-term initiatives that did not
solely focus on the protection of endangered
species, but also consider their economic
interest. The summary of the discussion is
shown in Table 11.
Above all, participants agreed that
collaboration among stakeholders was the
most important factor and each party could not
work in their own silos to ensure the effective
implementation of traceable catch landing data
for shark and ray species.
Conclusion
This study found that shark and ray landings
could signicantly contribute to the income of
small-scale shers in Pahang due to their high
demand. There were 13 species each of shark and
rays that were commonly caught by small-scale
shers. The catch were usually mixed in small
quantities and not involve endangered species.
The current infrastructure and data system
were accessible and adequate to implement
traceable catch landing data collection for shark
and ray species, with a few opportunities for
improvement. In order to achieve an effective
implementation, policymakers might have to
consider mandatory registration of shers,
vessels, jetties and other industry players
involved in the shark and ray supply chain.
As such, the policymakers might consider
providing appropriate incentives, subsidy,
awareness and training programs to encourage
small-scale shers’ commitment and buy-ins
to report accurate traceable catch landing data
up to the species level. Small-scale shers’
involvement and roles were essential towards
sustainable conservation management for shark
and ray species. However, they needed support
from other industry players and government
authorities. A collaboration effort among all
stakeholders would be crucial to ensure the
effective implementation of traceable catch
landing data for shark and ray species.
Future studies on species traceability should
be extended to other locations and stakeholders,
which included government agencies,
commercial vessel shers, wholesalers, retailers,
jetty owners, processors, transporters, exporters,
importers, agents and consumers throughout the
supply chain of shark and ray products. Future
studies might use quantitative or mixed research
approach to support this nding.
Table 11: Collaboration effort by all stakeholders
Collaboration Effort by all Stakeholders
1. The business relationship among industry players is good.
2. All: Legal instruments like ontrats are not used in business.
3. Majority deals in cash and a few only will take credits.
4. Authorities must show commitment in long-term initiatives.
5. Fair enforcement among all shing categories.
6. Enforcement is very challenging. Need to focus more on trawlers.
7. Currently shers already receive subsidies and incentives. To encourage shers to record their shark and
ray landings, support is needed from all industry players.
8. The collaboration effort is important, especially during implementation and enforcement.
9. Cannot work in silos, government agenies and industry players must work together.
BARRIERS TO PARTICIPATING IN THE COLLECTION OF TRACEABLE CATCH LANDING DATA
267
Journal of Sustainability Science and Management Volume 17 Number 2, February 2022: 255-269
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank the Pahang Fisheries
Department, Pahang LKIM, Pahang Fishermen’s
Association and all FGD participants for their
kind cooperation and support.
References
Ahmad, A., & Lim, A. P. K., Fahmi, Dharmadi,
Tassapon Krajangdara. (2014). Field
Guide to Rays, Skates and Chimaeras of
the Southeast Asian Region SEAFDEC/
MFRDMD/SP/25, 289 pp.
Ahmad, A., Lim, A. P. K., Fahmi, Dharmadi &
Krajangdara, T. (2017). Identication Guide
to Sharks, Rays and Skates of the Southeast
Asian Region. SEAFDEC/MFRDMD/
SP/31, 33 pp.
Ahmad, S., Aswani, F. M. N., Ahmad, A., Tai,
S. Y., Nurhazah, M., & Lawrence, K.
Jr. (2018). A study of shers dependency
on sharks and rays in Sabah, Malaysia.
Institut Sumber Marin Asia Tenggara
(ISMAT), SEAFDEC/MFRDMD/SP/38,
59 pp.
Ahmad, S., Aswani, F. M. N., Ahmad, A.,
Illisriyani. I., Tai, S. Y., Fatimah, M. A., &
Roba’a, Y. (2019a). Domestic marketing
on sharks and rays in Perak and Pahang,
Malaysia. Final Report submitted to
Department of Fisheries, Malaysia, 36pp.
Ahmad, S., Aswani, F. M. N., Ahad, A., Tai, S.
Y., & Fatimah, M. A. (2019b). A study of
marketing channel on sharks and rays in
selected districts of Sarawak, Malaysia.
Final Report submitted for Department of
Fisheries Malaysia, Ministry of Agriculture
and Agro-based Industry Malaysia.
Putrajaya, 32 pp.
Atroosh, W., Al-Mekhla, H., Mahdy, M., &
Surin, J. (2012). The detection of pfcrt
and pfmdr1 point mutations as molecular
markers of chloroquine drug resistance,
Pahang, Malaysia. Malaria Journal, 11,
251. 10.1186/1475-2875-11-251.
Booth, H., Muttaqin, E., Simeon, B., Ichsan,
M., Siregar, U., Yulianto, I., & Kassem,
K. (2018). Shark and ray conservation
and management in Indonesia: Status
and strategic priorities 2018-2023 (129-
201 pp.). Bogor, Indonesia: Wildlife
Conservation Society.
Bräutigam, A., Callow, M., Campbell, I. R.,
Camhi, M. D., Cornish, A. S., Dulvy, N.
K., Fordham, S. V., Fowler, S. L., Hood,
A. R., McClennen, C., Reuter, E. L., Sant,
G., Simpfendorfer, C. A., & Welch, D. J.
(2016). Global priorities for conserving
sharks and rays: A 2015-2025 strategy. The
Global Sharks and Rays Initiative (GSRI),
26 pp.
Camhi, M., Fowler, S. L., Musick, J. A.,
Bräutigam, A., & Fordham, S. V. (1998).
Sharks and their relatives: Ecology and
conservation. Occasional Paper of the
IUCN Species Survival Commission No.
20, IUCN/SSC Shark Specialist Group,
IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge,
UK, 39 pp. ISBN: 2-8317-0460-X.
Chan, L. L., & Noraini Idris. (2017). Validity
and reliability of the instrument using
Exploratory Factor Analysis & Cronbach’s
alpha. International Journal of Academic
Research in Business and Social Sciences,
7(10), 400-410. ISSN: 2222-6990, DOI:
10.6007/IJARBSS/v7-i10/3387 URL:
http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v7-
i10/3387.
Cortés, Enric. (2000). Life history patterns &
correlations in sharks. Reviews in Fisheries
Science, 8(4), 299-344. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1080/10641260008951115.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Educational Research:
Planning, conducting & evaluating
Quantitative & Qualitative Research (4th
ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative
Inquiry and Research Design. Choosing
among ve approaches (4th ed.). London,
UK: SAGE Publications.
Roba'a Yusof et al.
268
Journal of Sustainability Science and Management Volume 17 Number 2, February 2022: 255-269
Dent, F., & Clarke, S. (2015). State of the global
market for shark products. FAO Fisheries
& Aquaculture Technical Paper No. 590,
Rome, FA O , 187 pp, ISBN 978-92-5-
108823-4.
Department of Fisheries Malaysia. (1982-
2019). Annual Fisheries Statistics [Volume
1]. Department of Fisheries, Ministry
of Agriculture & Agro-based Industry
Malaysia. Putrajaya. https://www.dof.gov.
my/index.php/pages/view/82.
Department of Fisheries Malaysia. (2014).
Malaysia National Plan of action for the
conservation & management of shark
(Plan 2). Department of Fisheries, Ministry
of Agriculture and Agro-based Industry
Malaysia. Putrajaya, 58 pp.
Felipe, G. M., José, L. C. G., Mauricio, H. P.,
James, K., Klimley, A. P., Sergio, R. A.,
Yassir, E. T. R., & Javier, T. Á. (2019).
Chapter Three - Shark ecology, the role of
the apex predator & current conservation
status. Advances in Marine Biology,
83, 62-113. ISSN 0065-2881, ISBN
9780081029169. https://doi.org/10.1016/
bs.amb.2019.08.005.
Fowler, S. L., Reed, T. M., & Dipper, F. A.
(Eds). (2002). Elasmobranch Biodiversity,
Conservation & Management: Proceedings
of the International Seminar & Workshop,
Sabah, Malaysia, July 1997. Occasional
Paper of the IUCN Species Survival
Commission No. 25, IUCN/SSC Shark
Specialist Group, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland
& Cambridge, UK, 258 pp, ISBN: 2-8317-
0650-5.
Field, I. C., Meekan, M. G., Buckworth, R. C.,
& Bradshaw, C. J. A. (2009). Susceptibility
of sharks, rays & chimaeras to global
extinction. Advances in Marine Biology,
56, Elsevier Ltd. ISSN 0065-2881. https://
doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2881(09)56004-X.
Frisk, M. G., Miller, T. J., & Fogarty, M. J.
(2001). Estimation & analysis of biological
parameters in Elasmobranch shes: A
comparative life history study. Canadian
Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences,
58, 969-981. https://doi.org/10.1139/
cjfas-58-5-969.
Grifn, E., Miller, K. L., Freitas, B., & Hirsheld,
M. (2008). Predators as prey: Why healthy
oceans need sharks. OCEANA, 15.
Kamalu, I., & Osisanwo, A. (2015). Chapter 8
Discourse Analysis. Retrieved 1 February
2021, from https:\\www.researchgate.net/
publication/343214812.
Khan, S., Haleem, A., Khan, M. I., Abidi, M.
H., & Al-Ahmari, A. (2018). Implementing
Traceability Systems in Specic Supply
Chain Management (SCM) through Critical
Success Factors (CSFs). Sustainability, 10,
204. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10010204.
Kirchherr, J., & Charles, K. (2018). Enhancing
the sample diversity of snowball samples:
Recommendations from a research project
on anti- dam movements in Southeast Asia.
PLoS ONE, 13(8), e0201710, 17 pp. https://
doi.org/10.1371/journal.
Lehr, H. (2015). Traceability study in shark
products. Report prepared for the CITES
Secretariat, CITES.
Lehr, H. (2016). Catch Documentation &
Traceability of Shark Products in Costa
Rica: A Case Study Report. Report prepared
for the CITES Secretariat, CITES. https://
cites.org/sites/default/les/eng/com/sc/66/
Inf/E-SC66-Inf-11.pdf.
Lokanath, M. (2016). Focus group discussion
in the Qualitative Research. Techno
LEARN, 6(1), 1-5. DOI: 10.5958/2249-
5223.2016.00001.2
Marshall, L. J., & Barone, M. (2016). Shark Fin
Guide: Identifying sharks from their ns.
Food and Agriculture Organization of The
United Nations (FAO), Rome, Italy, 130 pp,
ISBN 978-92-5-109131-9.
Mundy, V., & Sant, G. (2015). Traceability
Systems in the CITES Context: A review
of experiences, best practices & lessons
learned for the traceability of commodities
BARRIERS TO PARTICIPATING IN THE COLLECTION OF TRACEABLE CATCH LANDING DATA
269
Journal of Sustainability Science and Management Volume 17 Number 2, February 2022: 255-269
of CITES-listed shark species. TRAFFIC
report for the CITES Secretariat, 90 pp.
Naderifar, M., Goli, H., & Ghaljaei, F. (2017).
Snowball sampling: A purposeful method of
sampling in Qualitative Research. Strides in
Development of Medical Education, 14(3),
e67670, 7 pp. https://doi.org/10.5812/
sdme.67670
Nicola, O., & Sant, G. (2019). An overview of
major shark traders catchers & species.
TRAFFIC. Cambridge, UK, 33 pp, ISBN:
978-1-911646-14-3.
Otway, N. M., & Burke, A. L. (2004). Mark-
recapture population estimate & movements
of Grey Nurse Sharks. NSW Fisheries, Final
Report to Environment Australia. Project
No. 30786/87, No. 63, 53 pp, ISSN 1440-
3544.
Susan, E. S., David, W. A., & Christina, S. (1998).
Intrinsic rebound potentials of 26 species
of pacic sharks. Marine & Freshwater
Research, 49, 663-678. 10.1071/MF97135.
Suciu, L. (2019). Introductory Chapter:
Discourse and Discourse Analysis.
A Retrospective Approach. Retrieved
1 February 2020, from https://www.
researchgate.net/publication/332181814.
Tobias, O. N., Kerrie, W., Christina, J. D., &
Nibedita, M. (2018). The use of focus group
discussion methodology: Insights from two
decades of application in conservation.
Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 9, 20-
32. John Wiley & Sons Ltd (on behalf of
British Ecological Society). https://doi.
org/10.1111/2041-210X.12860.
USAID. (2018). Malaysia CDT Gap Analysis
and Partnership Appraisal, produced by the
USAID Oceans & Fisheries Partnership
for review and approval by the United
States Agency. The Oceans and Fisheries
Partnership (USAID Oceans), 38 pp.
Ussher, J. M., & Perz, J. (2014). Chapter 13
Discourse Analysis. Retrieved 1 February
2020, from https://www.researchgate.net/
publication/269575969.
Walker, T. I. (1998). Can shark resources be
harvested sustainably? A question revisited
with a review of shark sheries. Marine
Freshwater Research, 49, 553- 572. CSIRO
Publishing,
Yokoi, H., Ijima, H., Ohshimo, S., & Yokawa,
K. (2017). Impact of biology knowledge on
the conservation & management of large
pelagic sharks. Scientic Reports, 7(10619),
14. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-
09427-3.