How reliable are the coastal management models in Central Buleleng Region?

Full text

How reliable are the coastal management models in
Central Buleleng Region?
Ida Bagus Made Astawa1, I Putu Ananda Citra2, I Gede Astra Wesnawa3
{made.astawa@undiksha.ac.id1, ananda.citra@undiksha.ac.id2, astra.wesnawa@undiksha.ac.id3}
Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha, Indonesia1,2,3
Abstract. This study aims to evaluate the implementation of the coastal resource
management model in the Central Buleleng Region. Qualitative research design based on
the CIPP model (Context, Input, Process, and Product) is used to assess the model's
effectiveness that coastal community groups have implemented. Techniques and
instruments of data collection through questionnaires and in-depth interviews. Based on
the study results, it was found that the model implemented by the coastal community was
in a good category. Specifically, the context component is categorized as very good. The
input component is considered very good; only the infrastructure indicators are moderate.
Meanwhile, the process component is in the moderate category, especially in the
contribution and participation of all managers, which are considered moderate. Finally,
the product component of the coastal resource management model is in the medium
category, especially those related to the economic and environmental conditions of the
coastal area. The implications of this study's results require improving the coastal
resource management model, especially the process and product components. Available
coastal resources must be managed by actively involving all coastal community groups,
and their management needs to focus on achieving community welfare and
environmental sustainability.
Keywords: Evaluation, Coastal Management, CIPP Model
1. Introduction
Coastal and marine resources are substantial and promising assets for the future [1]. The
utilization of coastal and marine resources in each region has increased. However, its
management is still far from optimal and sustainable. One of the main coastal potentials that
must be mapped is coral reefs—the condition of coral reefs is an indicator of the condition of
fisheries on the coast. Coral reefs are important because they play important ecological, social,
and economic roles for other organisms and the lives of people near the coast [2] . Using the
potential as well as possible requires integrated management of coastal resources. The first
step is to map the potential of the coast. This provision has been explicitly stipulated in the
Law on the Management of Coastal Resources (Law No. 1 of 2014) that utilizing the existing
potential is directed to achieve prosperity while simultaneously improving coastal
communities. This should be substantial capital for equitable development.
ICLSSE 2022, October 28, Singaraja, Indonesia
Copyright © 2023 EAI
DOI 10.4108/eai.28-10-2022.2326368

There is an imbalance in development, especially in the tourism sector, which tends to
focus on the South Bali area compared to other areas, such as North Bali (Buleleng Regency),
East Bali (Bangli Regency and Karangasem Regency), and West Bali (Jembrana Regency).
People in South Bali already earn the benefits of tourism and associated sectors. However, the
opposite condition occurs in the people of North Bali, East Bali, and West Bali [3]. The result
of these conditions is that each region has different levels of wealth.
Based on these factors, it is crucial to focus on areas with regional potential. This will
help increase the number of tourist spots in the Province of Bali, which will help the local
economy. In Bali Province, especially in Buleleng Regency, which has both coastal and
marine potential as a tourist destination, regional development plans have not been made in
the best and most complete way. Mapping regional potential is required to identify not only
tourism areas but also non-physical potentials that are spread over areas in Buleleng Regency,
such as community empowerment. Furthermore, mapping is carried out as a form of integrated
regional management to determine changes in the regional tourism potential and to track the
development of tourism in the region comprehensively.
The potential of coastal and marine resources in Buleleng Regency, which is spread in
the regions of East Buleleng, Central Buleleng, and West Buleleng, has a varied distribution.
The results of previous studies indicate that the most complete and dominant variation of
coastal and marine resource potential is in the West Buleleng region [4]. This study evaluates
how the coastal resource management model, especially for coral reefs, is used in the Central
Buleleng region. Evaluating the coral reef management model is one way to improve its
implementation. It can be used as a guide for building up coastal areas, especially for coral
reef management.
2. Methods
This study uses a qualitative research approach and a type of evaluation research with
the CIPP (Context, Input, Process, Product) evaluation model. This evaluation model was
developed by Stufflebeam & Shinkfield [5], where in the implementation, the research process
is carried out by analyzing data to answer the problem formulation without testing the
hypothesis. This research's primary data are context, input, process, and product data
regarding marine management model implementation..
Data were analyzed through descriptive analysis, with the data collection process
through interviews, questionnaires, and documentation serving as additional data. The
research design evaluating the implementation of the coastal resource management model in
the Central Buleleng region using the CIPP (Context, Input, Process, Product) evaluation
model is limited to coral reef management community groups. The CIPP evaluation model is
seen as an evaluation model that can measure the overall form of evaluation activities, starting
from the content, input, and process to the results obtained when conducting research.
3. Results and Discussion
Assessment of the implementation of coastal resource management based on the
CIPP evaluation model is carried out using 20 indicators distributed to members of coastal
community groups, including fishermen groups, tourism awareness groups (POKDARWIS),

and community supervisory groups (POKMASWAS). The results of the evaluation of each
aspect are shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Evaluation of the Implementation of the Coastal Resource Management Model
Figure 1 shows the percentage of assessments in the context, input, process, and product
aspects. The majority are in the very high category. The analysis and identification of each
aspect are as follows.
3.1 Context aspect evaluation in Marine Management Model
The context variable consists of five indicators: the physical condition, the social
condition, accessibility level, cooperation level, and environmental risk. The following is an
analysis of the context aspect of the coastal resource management model. First, the results
indicate that the support from the physical environment for community activities is very high
(60%), while 30% state that the support for physical environmental conditions is relatively
high, and the rest is 10%. Most coastal communities view sloping beaches (topography) and
sandy beaches (geomorphology) as supporting their livelihoods. A sloping beach is a beach
whose topography is almost flat [6]. The support felt by coastal communities is that they are
easy to reach by public transportation and have many interesting phenomena, especially the
natural scenery. Meanwhile, the sand beach supports community activities, including a salt
pond area, a tidal agricultural area, and a coconut plantation area.
Second, the results indicate that the support of social conditions for community
activities is very high (80%), while 20% state that the support for social conditions is
relatively high. Most coastal communities view intensive social interaction and open nature as
social characteristics that strongly support their lives. Intensive social interaction makes
coastal communities have very close relationships [7] . This builds family relationships based
on sympathy and not on rational considerations oriented to profit and loss. Meanwhile, their
open nature makes them more adaptive to various social, cultural, and economic changes.
Third, the results obtained that the level of accessibility to the market is very high (80%),
while 20% stated that the level of accessibility is relatively high. Most coastal communities
view the high level of accessibility to the market as a factor that significantly benefits their

activities. Accessibility measures the ease of travel to meet needs resulting from the
interaction between land use and transportation network systems. A high level of accessibility
indicates convenience for coastal communities in obtaining the goods and services needed or
selling the goods and services produced [8] . The high level of accessibility is created due to
the availability of good infrastructure (road network) and supported by the availability of
transportation facilities or facilities.
Forth, the results show that the level of cooperation between individuals in coastal
communities is very high (70%), while 30% stated that cooperation is relatively high. Most
coastal communities view a high level of cooperation as a social capital that strongly supports
their livelihoods. Cooperation is an activity or effort by several people to achieve common
goals [9] . A high level of cooperation indicates a high level of concern and solidarity. It can
encourage the level of trust between individuals and groups of coastal communities to achieve
the goal of unified coastal resource management. A high level of cooperation is created
because coastal communities have strong social and professional networks.
Fifth, the results indicate that the environmental risk to community activities is high (60%,)
while 40% stated that the environmental risk is relatively moderate. Most coastal communities
view environmental pollution as an environmental risk that severely hampers their livelihoods.
Massive environmental pollution, primarily from household and industrial waste, worsens
environmental health [10] . This results in difficulties in maintaining coral reefs, reduces the
number of fish catches, and reduces the quality of tourism objects developed by tourism
awareness groups. Based on the indicators that make up the context aspect, it can be seen that
the five indicators are in the very high category. This shows that the context part of the model
for managing coastal resources in the Central Buleleng area is in the very high category.
3.2 Input aspect evaluation in Marine Management Model
The input variables consist of five indicators: infrastructure availability, community
education, group members, social organizations, and the government's role. The following is
an analysis of the input aspects of the coastal resource management model. First, the results
indicate that the number of available marine infrastructure is very high (90%), while 10%
stated that the number of equipment is relatively high. Most coastal communities view the
infrastructure in the form of fish auctions, hatcheries, and the empowerment of small-scale
community businesses as very supportive of their livelihoods [11] . The coastal community
views that the developed facilities have been selected to meet the community's needs. The
availability of these infrastructure facilities can be maximized to support the productivity of
the fishing community. In addition, the procurement of speedboats and garages (Steiger) is
very helpful for POKMASWAS to monitor its marine resources actively.
Second, the results indicate that the coastal community's education is high (70%),
while 30% stated that the education of the coastal community is relatively moderate.
Education for coastal communities significantly contributes to improving their living
standards [12] . Having a high level of education also affects how coral reef conservation
strategies and fishing are more sophisticated, including marketing the products and services
they produce. In other words, the higher the education level, this will then have tremendous
impact on the management of marine resources carried out by coastal communities.

Third, the results obtained show that the quantity of the number of group members in marine
resource management activities is very high (80%), while 20% stated that the number of
members of the existing group is relatively high. Most coastal communities view the number
of members in a group as determining the process of marine resource management.
Community groups, fishermen groups, tourism awareness groups, and supervisory groups are
basic forms of community organizing and mutually agreed-on rules [13] . This is due to three
things namely; first, many problems can only be solved by an institution formed together.
Second, the group can provide continuity to develop the members' efforts continuously. Third,
groups can organize communities to be able to compete with outsiders. In other words, the
larger the number of group members, the stronger the development and sustainability of the
business.
Forth, the results indicate that the benefits of the existence of social organizations are
very high (60%), while 40% state that the benefits of social organizations are relatively high,
and the rest say 20% are moderate. Social organizations are associations formed by the
community, both legal entities and non-legal entities, which function as a means of
community participation in regional development [14] . Most coastal communities view that
social organizations, both economic-oriented and other related institutions, that exist in coastal
areas play an essential role in improving the living standards of coastal communities. They
also view that without social organization, coastal communities will work and live alone
without anyone fighting for and protecting their interests.
Fifth, the results show that the government's role in coastal community activities is
very high (80%), while 20% stated that the government's role is relatively high. The role of the
government, especially in the economy, is to reduce the impact of market failures so that the
goals of welfare and justice in society can be created. Most coastal communities view that the
government has facilitated the community to jointly carry out the process of developing
coastal areas. Coastal communities consider that the government plays a vital role in
periodically monitoring the quality of the coastal environment, both in the land, brackish, and
sea/coastal areas, where people carry out economic, social, and cultural activities [15] . Thus
the government has primary data on the quality of coastal areas to determine the direction of
the development pattern of coastal areas. Based on the indicators that make up the input aspect,
it can be seen that the five indicators are in the very high category. This shows that the input
aspect of the coastal resource management model in the Central Buleleng region is included in
the very high category.
3.3 Process aspect evaluation in Marine Management Model
The process variable consists of five indicators: management planning, members
contribution, members participation, management implementation, and evaluation of
management. The following is an analysis of the input aspects of the coastal resource
management model.
First, the results indicate that the implementation of marine resource management
planning is very high (90%), while 10% stated that the planning is relatively high. Planning is
selecting or setting organizational goals and determining strategies, policies, projects,
programs, procedures, methods, systems, budgets, and standards needed to achieve goals [16].
Most coastal communities view the planning related to marine resource management as very

detailed and holistic. Each coastal community group has determined the management
objectives entirely and clearly. In addition, they have also formulated policies or guidelines
that direct and simultaneously limit each group member's actions in managing marine
resources. Finally, analysis and determination of ways to achieve goals have also been
specifically formulated.
Second, the results show that members' contribution to marine resource management
is very high (80%), while 20% stated that their contribution is relatively high. Most coastal
communities view group members' contributions to each coastal community social
organization as very large, especially in terms of commitment, dedication, and material
donations [17] . First, managers' commitment can be seen from their responsibilities towards
their respective duties in management activities. Second, the management's dedication can be
seen from the sacrifice of energy, thought, and time to manage marine resources successfully.
Third, many of the group members voluntarily and sincerely donate their facilities for the
smooth process of managing marine resources, including donations in the form of finance, fuel,
fishing equipment, and communication tools.
Third, the results indicate that members' participation level in the management of
marine resources is moderate (60%), while 40% stated that the participation of managers is
relatively high. Most coastal communities view the participation of managers as relatively
high only at the planning stage, while at the implementation and evaluation stages, it is
relatively low. In general, several factors cause coastal community members to be less
participative in marine resource management, namely managerial and technical factors [17] .
Marine resource management is still seen only as a side activity. This condition causes group
members to be less actively involved in group activities, so the managed businesses are not
oriented toward future business continuity. This is exacerbated by the lack of marketing
expertise members possess, so the processed products and services produced are less
economical. In the end, the participation of managers is correlated with the continuity of the
social organization. Social organizations with a low level of management participation result
in less active business conditions.
Forth, the results obtained show that the effectiveness of the implementation of
marine resource management is very high (80%), while 20% stated that the implementation is
relatively high. Implementation is the efforts to implement all the plans and policies that have
been formulated and determined by completing all the necessary tools needed, who will carry
it out, where the implementation is and when it starts. Most coastal communities believe that
their abundance of marine resources has been managed very well. The management of marine
resources is considered to have been able to maintain the role of coral reefs in supporting the
lives and livelihoods of coastal communities. Considering the role of coral reefs, especially
fringing coral reefs, is as a beach protector from waves and strong currents coming from the
sea. In addition, coral reefs have a significant role as a habitat, a place to find food, a place for
care and rearing, a spawning place for various biotas such as a variety of invertebrates, a
variety of fish, reptiles, and also a habitat for algae and seaweed.
Fifth, the results obtained from the analysis of data related to the fifth indicator show
that the effectiveness of the implementation of marine resource management is moderate
(60%), while 40% stated that the effectiveness of the evaluation of management is relatively
high. Activity evaluation has the objectives of providing input for planning further activities or
programs, providing input for modifying the program, and obtaining information about the
supporting and inhibiting factors of the program. Most coastal communities believe that

management implementation evaluation has not been carried out optimally. The main factor
that causes the evaluation stage to be not optimal is that the information provided by members
is sometimes invalid, especially regarding program performance. So it is unclear what needs,
values, and targets for marine resource management programs are to achieve. Based on the
indicators that make up the process aspect, it can be seen that most indicators fall into the very
high category. Only the participation and effectiveness of the evaluation of the management
implementation are included in the moderate category. This shows that the process aspect of
the coastal resource management model in the Central Buleleng region is, on average,
included in the high category.
3.4 Product aspect evaluation in Marine Management Model
The influence of management on the economy, the influence of management on food
availability, the effect of management on health, the influence of management on
environmental sustainability, and the influence of management on social conditions are the
five indicators that comprise the process variable. The following is an analysis of the input
aspects of the coastal resource management model. First, the results indicate that
management's influence on the economic conditions of coastal communities is strong (60%),
while 40% stated that the effect on the economic conditions is relatively moderate. Most
coastal communities view managing marine resources as positively influencing their
livelihoods. Products and services from managing marine resources have a relatively high
economic value [18] . The superior products produced by the fishing groups are fresh fish,
processed fish, and salt. In contrast, the tourism-conscious group offers various tourism
services in the form of diving, snorkeling, and trekking. The surplus from the sale of products
and services covers management costs and increases people's income.
Second, the results obtained from the analysis of data related to the second indicator
show that the influence of management on the food availability of coastal communities is very
high, with a percentage of 70%, while 30% stated that the effect on food availability is
relatively high. Most coastal communities view managing marine resources as a positive
influence on fulfilling their food needs. In particular, the catch of fish from fishing groups can
supply the food needs of coastal communities widely, both in quantity and in terms of
nutritional adequacy. Given that fish contains a high protein content [19].
Third, the results indicate that management's influence on health is high (80%), while 20%
stated that the effect on health is relatively moderate. Most coastal communities view
managing marine resources as a positive influence on their health. Their routine management
activities can improve the health of the community, both physical and mental health [20]. The
implementation of management activities encourages the community to work actively, and at
the same time, it becomes a routine exercise every day to maintain community fitness. In
addition, working in groups makes it easy for people to mingle and share experiences, thereby
reducing mental stress at work. In addition, there is a guarantee of work safety and standard
operating procedures that reduce the risk of accidents in marine resource management
activities.
Forth, the results indicate that management's influence on the sustainability of the
coastal environment is very high (90%), while 10% stated that the effect on the environment is
relatively high. Most coastal communities view managing marine resources as positively

influencing their environment. In order to produce products and services with high economic
value, community groups work hand in hand to maintain environmental conditions [21]. They
are starting from waste management on land to minimizing marine pollution. Community
groups have not been able to anticipate waste sent from upstream areas, so at certain times the
coastal area is filled with garbage, which reduces environmental health.
Fifth, the results obtained from data analysis related to the fifth indicator show that
the influence of management on the social conditions of coastal communities is very high
(70%), while 30% stated that the influence on social conditions is relatively high. Most coastal
communities view managing marine resources as a positive influence on their lives. Marine
resource management activities have high social values, including social interaction,
cooperation, work ethic, and implementation of customs [22] . Social interactions that are
community-based make social organizations that are formed work with high family ties.
Cooperation is also fostered through people's daily work in groups. In addition, a non-
materialistic work ethic is seen as the essential impact of management. Coastal communities,
in managing marine resources with their groups, have never prioritized personal gain, so all
work for the common good without considering the amount of profit that will be obtained.
Finally, the implementation of marine resource management is always based on prevailing
customs so that the cultural heritage of coastal communities can still be preserved. Based on
the indicators that make up the product aspect, it can be seen that the five indicators are in the
excellent category. This shows that the product aspect of the coastal resource management
model in the Central Buleleng region is included in the excellent category.
The coastal area is one of the human living spaces with various eminent products that
can support the lives and livelihoods of coastal communities. Practically the management of
coastal and marine resources that have been implemented is already in the excellent category.
It is just that some aspects still have weaknesses, especially in the process aspect. In line with
this research, Leilani & Restuwati (2016) and Arief (2008) stated that the participation of
coastal communities was only high during the planning stage but relatively low during the
implementation and evaluation stages of activities [23], [24] . Other research shows that
community participation is highly dependent on the availability of time after carrying out the
main work [7], [22] . Coastal communities generally have more than one job and are members
of social organizations, not their primary job [25].
This research implies that community groups that already exist to manage marine
resources need a guarantee for the sustainability of the management model and the certainty of
the income they receive. Uncertainty in these two matters has become the basis for
implementing the coastal resource management model to become stagnant. In addition, the
management of coastal resources into products with a competitive advantage must consider
the knowledge of coastal communities as the basis for their management. Thus, increased
knowledge will be positively correlated with the sustainability of coastal resource
management..
4. Conclusion
Based on the study results, it was found that the model implemented by the coastal
community was in a good category. Specifically, the context component is categorized as very
good. The input component is considered very good; only the infrastructure indicators are

moderate. Meanwhile, the process component is in the moderate category, especially in the
contribution and participation of all managers, which are considered moderate. Finally, the
product component of the coastal resource management model is in the medium category,
especially those related to the economic and environmental conditions of the coastal area. The
implications of this study's results require improving the coastal resource management model,
especially the process and product components. Available coastal resources must be managed
by actively involving all coastal community groups, and their management needs to focus on
achieving community welfare and environmental sustainability.
5. References
[1] H. Zhang and S. Chen, “Overview of research on marine resources and economic
development,” Marine Economics and Management, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 69–83, May 2022, doi:
10.1108/MAEM-11-2021-0012.
[2] P. D. Samuel et al., “Coral Reefs Health Status in the East Java: a Case Study in Banyuwangi,
Situbondo, Probolinggo,” Research Journal of Life Science, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 66–74, Aug.
2021, doi: 10.21776/ub.rjls.2021.008.02.1.
[3] M. V. Hariyanto and P. A. Pramitha Purwanti, “Analisis Pertumbuhan Ekonomi Dan Indeks
Pembangunan Manusia Di Kabupaten/Kota Provinsi Bali (Metode Kointegrasi),” Media Trend,
vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 52–61, Mar. 2020, doi: 10.21107/mediatrend.v15i1.6746.
[4] I. P. Sriartha et al., “What is the Most Potential Coastal and Marine Resources in the Buleleng
Region?,” in ICLSSE, 2021. doi: 10.4108/eai.10-11-2020.2303421.
[5] D. L. Stufflebeam and A. J. Shinkfield, Evaluation theory, models and applications. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2007.
[6] L. Sui, J. Wang, X. Yang, and Z. Wang, “Spatial-Temporal Characteristics of Coastline
Changes in Indonesia from 1990 to 2018,” Sustainability, vol. 12, no. 8, p. 3242, Apr. 2020,
doi: 10.3390/su12083242.
[7] M. N. Arkham, Y. Wahyudin, N. Rikardi, A. Ramli, and A. Trihandoyo, “Social Economic
Conditions Of Coastal Ommunities In Batui District, Banggai District, Central Sulawesi
Province,” Coastal and Ocean Journal (COJ), vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1–14, Jun. 2020, doi:
10.29244/COJ.4.1.1-14.
[8] T. Ismail and F. Rohman, “The Role of Attraction, Accessibility, Amenities, and Ancillary on
Visitor Satisfaction and Visitor Attitudinal Loyalty of Gili Ketapang Beach,” Jurnal
Manajemen Teori dan Terapan | Journal of Theory and Applied Management, vol. 12, no. 2,
p. 149, Sep. 2019, doi: 10.20473/jmtt.v12i2.14423.
[9] H. Haeril and E. P. Purnomo, “Management Of Small-Sustainable Coastal And Island Areas
Based On Collaborative Management (Case Study In Bima Regency, West Nusa Tenggara),”
Journal of Local Government Issues, vol. 2, no. 1, p. 18, Mar. 2019, doi:
10.22219/LOGOS.Vol2.No1.18-37.
[10] L. A. Tampubolon, “Community Empowerment in Coastal Community: A Case Study of
Social Forestry in North Sumatra, Indonesia,” Jurnal Ilmiah Administrasi Publik, vol. 006, no.
01, pp. 58–70, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.21776/ub.jiap.2020.006.01.8.
[11] B. Gordon and L. Klotz, “Community involvement in coastal infrastructure adaptation should
balance necessary complexity and perceived effort,” iScience, vol. 25, no. 8, p. 104852, Aug.
2022, doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2022.104852.
[12] W. Wasehudin, I. Anshori, M. T. Rahman, I. Syafe’i, And G. C. Kesuma, “A Creativity
Education Model for Coastal Communities Amid the Covid-19 Pandemic,” Journal of

Environmental Management and Tourism, vol. 12, no. 3, p. 729, Jun. 2021, doi:
10.14505//jemt.12.3(51).12.
[13] J. E. Cohen, C. Small, A. Mellinger, J. Gallup, and J. Sachs, “Estimates of Coastal
Populations,” Science (1979), vol. 278, no. 5341, pp. 1209–1213, Nov. 1997, doi:
10.1126/science.278.5341.1209c.
[14] R. A Kinseng, “Socio-cultural Change and Conflict in the Coastal and Small Island
Community in Indonesia,” Sodality: Jurnal Sosiologi Pedesaan, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 1–17, Jun.
2021, doi: 10.22500/9202134928.
[15] J. M. Fisk, “Sandbagged: Exploring the Political Challenges of Coastal Infrastructure,” Public
Works Management & Policy, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 33–49, Jan. 2019, doi:
10.1177/1087724X18794618.
[16] M. R. M. M. Elsharouny, “Planning Coastal Areas and Waterfronts for Adaptation to Climate
Change in Developing Countries,” Procedia Environ Sci, vol. 34, pp. 348–359, 2016, doi:
10.1016/j.proenv.2016.04.031.
[17] A. Butt, J. Saleem, I. Zaheer, and A. Jabeen, “Importance of community involvement in
coastal area management: A review of International and Pakistani scenario,” International
Journal of Biosciences (IJB), vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 239–247, Mar. 2018, doi:
10.12692/ijb/12.3.239-247.
[18] D. J. McGlashan, “Coastal Management and Economic Development in Developed Nations:
The Forth Estuary Forum,” Coastal Management, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 221–236, Jul. 2002, doi:
10.1080/08920750290042174.
[19] S. F. W. Taylor, M. J. Roberts, B. Milligan, and R. Ncwadi, “Measurement and implications
of marine food security in the Western Indian Ocean: an impending crisis?,” Food Secur, vol.
11, no. 6, pp. 1395–1415, Dec. 2019, doi: 10.1007/s12571-019-00971-6.
[20] C. Peng and K. Yamashita, “Effects of the Coastal Environment on Well-being,” Journal of
Coastal Zone Management, vol. 19, no. 2, 2016, doi: 10.4172/2473-3350.1000421.
[21] W. K. Hidajat, S. Anggoro, and N. Najib, “Management of Coastal Areas with Sustainable
Marine Ecotourism Development in Purworejo Regency, Central Java, Indonesia,” Advance
Sustainable Science, Engineering and Technology, vol. 2, no. 1, May 2020, doi:
10.26877/asset.v2i1.6020.
[22] A. Nobre, “Scientific approaches to address challenges in coastal management,” Mar Ecol
Prog Ser, vol. 434, pp. 279–289, Jul. 2011, doi: 10.3354/meps09250.
[23] A. Leilani and I. Restuwati, “Partisipasi Nelayan dalam Kelompok Usaha Bersama Bidang
Penangkapan Ikan,” Jurnal Penyuluhan Perikanan dan Kelautan, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 60–70,
2016.
[24] A. A. Arief, “Partisipasi masyarakat nelayan di Kabupaten Takalar (studi kasus Desa
Tamasaju, Kecamatan Galesong Utara),” Jurnal Hutan dan Masyarakat, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 11–
19, 2008.
[25] A. Rakhmanda, Suadi, and S. S. Djasmani, “Peran Kelompok Nelayan dalam Perkembangan
Perikanan di Pantai Sadeng Kabupaten Gunungkidul,” Sodality: Jurnal Sosiologi Pedesaan,
vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 94–104, 2018.