Mobility of Fish Cage Farmers in the Ping River Basin As an Adaptation to Climate-Related and Socio-Economic Risks
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
MOBILITY OF FISH CAGE FARMERS IN THE PING RIVER BASIN AS AN ADAPTATION TO CLIMATE-RELATED AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC RISKS PHAOTHAI SIN-AMPOL MASTER OF ARTS IN SOCIAL SCIENCE GRADUATE SCHOOL CHIANG MAI UNIVERSITY SEPTEMBER 2014 MOBILITY OF FISH CAGE FARMERS IN THE PING RIVER BASIN AS AN ADAPTATION TO CLIMATE-RELATED AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC RISKS PHAOTHAI SIN-AMPOL MASTER OF ARTS IN SOCIAL SCIENCE GRADUATE SCHOOL CHIANG MAI UNIVERSITY SEPTEMBER 2014 MOBILITY OF FISH CAGE FARMERS IN THE PING RIVER BASIN AS AN ADAPTATION TO CLIMATE-RELATED AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC RISKS PHAOTHAI SIN-AMPOL A THESIS SUBMITTED TO CHIANG MAI UNIVERSITY IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN SOCIAL SCIENCE GRADUATE SCHOOL, CHIANG MAI UNIVERSITY SEPTEMBER 2014 i MOBILITY OF FISH CAGE FARMERS IN THE PING RIVER BASIN AS AN ADAPTATION TO CLIMATE-RELATED AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC RISKS PHAOTHAI SIN-AMPOL THIS THESIS HAS BEEN APPROVED TO BE A PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN SOCIAL SCIENCE Examination Committee: Advisory Committee: .......................................... Chairman ................................................. Advisor (Asst. Prof. Dr. Chanagun Chitmanat) (Lect. Dr. Santita Ganjanapan) .......................................... Member ................................................. Co -advisor (Lect. Dr. Santita Ganjanapan) (Asst. Prof. Dr. Chusak Wittayapak) .......................................... Member (Asst. Prof. Dr. Chusak Wittayapak) 30 September 2014 Copyright © by Chiang Mai University ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis could not be accomplished if it had not been supported by various assistances from academics, lecturers, private and official units. I, first of all, express absolute appreciation to Lecturer Dr. Santita Ganjanapan, my thesis supervisor and general advisor, for her suggestions in academic and other relevant issues, as well as her sacrifice in developing my thesis and other works for the last two-and-half years. I, further, have to express my special thanks to Assistant Professor Dr. Chanagun Chitmanat, Faculty of Fisheries Technology and Aquatic Resources, Maejo University, in charge of being the chairman of thesis examination. I, besides, would like to acknowledge Assistant Professor Dr. Chusak Wittayapak in charge of the co-advisor of my thesis who provided good guidance for my works. I am also very grateful to all lecturers in the RCSD program for giving valuable knowledge and laying out an effective foundation for me to search for further academic comprehension in the future. This research could not have been accomplished if I had not attained a lot of helpful support for several years under the AQUADAPT project granted by the International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Ottawa, Canada. My research under the AQUADAPT project has also been officially advocated by Dr. Louis Lebel, the director, and Mrs. Phimphakan Lebel, office manager of Unit for Social and Environmental Research (USER), as well as all AQUADAPT academics and members in giving suggestions to improve the thesis. In my research team, especially, I have to express a million thanks to all my colleagues in the AQUADAPT A3.1 team including Lecturer Dr. Santita Ganjanapan, Miss Weerakan Kengkaj, my RCSD friend and researcher, as well as Miss Paweena Tapa, research assistant, for all their kind encouragement as friends, collecting the data in field sites many times, and brainstorming various great ideas for producing the thesis. Much of the important evidence in my research comes from the community headman, the headman of the fish cage farming group, and all of the fish cage farmers in Ban Koh, Hua Kuang, Pradang, and Ban Mai villages. I am grateful to them for sacrificing their valuable iii time in responding to all interviews and working with us during this two-year period. For the information and statistics in this research, there are many official units that I have to express my thankfulness. In the hydrological side, I want to commend Miss Kunlaya Charoenkitkaset, Hydrologist, Office of Water Management and Hydrology, as well as all officers in Irrigation Office I, Chiang Mai Province, Irrigation Office IV, Kamphaeng Phet Irrigation Project, and Wang Bua Irrigation Project, Kamphaeng Phet Province for all of the useful information and statistics for the analysis. In the demographic side, I received very qualified population statistics from four district offices in three provinces – Hang Dong and Doi Lor District Office, as well as Nong Tong Pattana Municipality, Chiang Mai Province, Wang Chao District Office, Tak Province, and Muang Kamphaeng Phet District Office, Kamphaeng Phet Province. In the fishery side, various information and knowledge had been provided by Mr. Wilat Klomsoontorn, the representative of Department of Fisheries in Chom Thong District, and Fisheries Office in Kamphaeng Phet Province. In agricultural perspective, farmers’ information by Hang Dong Agricultural District Office is also applicable. I also acknowledge Mr. Kenneth Dolen in editing the language of my thesis. Moreover, those important people who were very considerate in supporting my decisions and devoting great assistance are all officers at RCSD, particularly Miss Muttika Thungsuphuti, and my RCSD friends including Autsadawut, Thanh, Molika, Ka Ji Jia, Pyae, Khun, Flora, Vilaykone, Sengvilayvanh, and Fay. Most importantly, I am always grateful for everything that my father, mother, sister, grandmother, and all my relatives have done for me. I also deeply appreciate all of my teachers and lecturers since kindergarten, primary school, secondary school, and the university in giving useful knowledge and living skills. My friends, finally, are also essential as valuable friendships that encouraged my life to be what is until now. Phaothai Sin-ampol iv CONTENTS Page Acknowledgement iii English Abstract v Thai Abstract vii List of Tables xii List of Figures xiv Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Rationale 1 1.2 Research Questions 6 1.3 Research Objectives 6 1.4 Operational Definitions 7 1.5 Review of Theories, Concepts, and Related Studies 8 1.6 Conceptual Framework 32 1.7 Research Methodology 34 1.8 Thesis Organization 42 Chapter 2 Research Sites in Changing Contexts 44 2.1 Development of Hybrid Red Tilapia 44 2.2 Suitable Requirements for Tilapia Fish Cage Farming 47 2.3 Contractual Relations in Fish Cage Farming 51 2.4 General Roles of State Authorities Related to Fish Cage Farming 53 2.5 River-Based Livelihood and Fish Cage Farming in Research Sites 60 2.6 Climate Characteristics in Sub-Basin Areas 73 2.7 Demographic Structure 85 2.8 Conclusion 88 ix CONTENTS (continued) Page Chapter 3 Multiple Risks in Fish Cage Farming 90 3.1 External Hazards of Climate Related-Risks 92 3.2 Internal Exposures to Climate-Related Risks 114 3.3 External Hazards of Socio-Economic Risks 119 3.4 Internal Exposures of Socio-Economic Risks 135 3.5 Multiple Risks 137 3.6 Conclusion 139 Chapter 4 Multiple Household Vulnerability 140 4.1 Production Sizes and Multiple Risks in Fish Cage Farming 141 4.2 Current Household Demographic Structure 142 4.3 Occupational Diversification 147 4.4 Risk Perception in Fish Cage Farming 150 4.5 Access to Capitals in Occupational Diversification and Techniques in Fish Cage Farming 152 4.6 Multiple Household Vulnerability and Levels of Mobility 163 4.7 Conclusion 167 Chapter 5 Mobility as an Adaptation to Multiple Risks 169 5.1 Mobility in Pre and Post-Fish Farming Period 169 5.2 Periodic Mobility 171 5.3 Episodic Mobility 180 5.4 Immobile Actions 184 5.5 Purposes of Mobility and Remittances 185 5.6 Effects of Mobility in Reducing Multiple Risks and Vulnerability 193 5.7 Conclusion 197 x CONTENTS (continued) Page Chapter 6 Conclusion 199 6.1 Major Findings 200 6.2 Theoretical Discussion 206 6.3 Obstacles and Solutions in Field Research 209 6.4 Recommendations 210 6.5 Policy Suggestions 211 Bibliography 213 Curriculum Vitae 230 xi LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1.1 Research Sites 38 Table 2.1 Population in research sites by sex 86 Table 3.1 Factors of the analysis in climate-related and socio-economic risks 91 Table 3.2 Differences of mean temperature (degree Celsius) in December 2013 and January 2014 compared to 30-year period mean temperature 95 Table 3.3 Natural-induced actions and climate-related characteristics by seasons following the perception of farmers 99 Table 3.4 Water drainage schedule of Chollakhan Phinit Weir in 2013 103 Table 3.5 Anthropogenic actions and level of climate-related risks in each village 113 Table 3.6 Internal exposures to climate-related risks by exposed areas of each village 115 Table 3.7 Numbers of farmers by cage location as internal exposure 120 Table 3.8 Public Aquaculture Criteria 2011 131 Table 3.9 External socio-economic risks in the village 134 Table 3.10 The amount of contractual company selected by fish cage farmers in each village 135 Table 3.11 Financial system in contractual relations by types 135 Table 3.12 Level of multiple risks in fish cage farmers’ households 138 Table 3.13 Numbers of fish cage farming households by level of multiple risks 138 Table 4.1 Farmers by production sizes and average cage areas per household at the beginning time of studying 141 Table 4.2 Multiple risks of fish cage farmers by production sizes 142 Table 4.3 General demographic structures by household characteristics 144 Table 4.4 Age of a household member who is responsible as fish cage farmer 145 xii LIST OF TABLES (continued) Page Table 4.5 Average numbers of household members,