Environmental and Social Vulnerabilities and Livelihoods Of

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL VULNERABILITIES AND LIVELIHOODS OF

FISHING COMMUNITIES OF KUTUBDIA ISLAND, BANGLADESH

A dissertation submitted

to Kent State University in partial

fulfillment of the requirements for the

degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Munshi Khaledur Rahman

August, 2015

Except for previously published materials

Dissertation written by

Munshi Khaledur Rahman

B.Sc., University of Dhaka, 2006 (exam of 2004)

M.S., University of Dhaka, 2008 (exam of 2005)

M.A., University of Northern Iowa, 2010

Ph.D., Kent State University, 2015

Approved by

______Dr. Thomas Schmidlin, Professor, Ph.D., Department of Geography, Doctoral Advisor

______Dr. James Tyner, Professor, Ph.D., Department of Geography, Committee Member

______Dr. Scott Sheridan, Professor, Ph.D., Department of Geography, Committee Member

______Dr. Javed Khan, Professor, Ph.D., Department of Computer Science, Committee Member

______Dr. Landon Hancock, Associate Professor, Ph.D., Department of Political Science, Graduate Faculty Representative

Accepted by

______Dr. Mandy Munro-Stasiuk, Professor, Ph.D., Chair, Department of Geography

______Dr. James L. Blank, Professor, Ph.D., Dean, College of Arts and Sciences

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Table of Contents …………………………………………………………... iii

Appendices…………………………………………………………………... vii

List of Figures…………………………………………………………...... viii

List of Tables………………………………………………………………... x

Acknowledgements …………………………………..……………………. xii

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION...……………………………………….... 1

1.1 Statement of Specific Problems.………...…………………………...... 4

1.2 Rational for Conducting Land Cover Change and Landuse pattern-

Analysis………………………………………………………………………. 5

1.3 Objectives………………………………………………………………… 6

1.4 Chapter Outline...………...………………………………………………. 8

CHPATER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE…………………….………... 9

2.1 Natural Hazards in Coastal Bangladesh……….………...……………….. 9

2.1.1Tropical Cyclones…………………………………….…………….. 9

2.1.2 Flood……………………………………………………………..… 11

2.1.3 Coastal Erosion……………………………………………....…...... 12

2.1.4 Sea Level Rise…………………………………………………….... 12

2.1.5 Salinity Intrusion………………………………………………..….. 13

2.2 Vulnerability and Livelihoods Contexts……………………..…………... 15

iii

2.2.1 Vulnerability…….…………………..……………………………... 15

2.2.2 Social Vulnerability…………………………………………..……. 15

2.2.3 Environmental Vulnerability….…………………...... 16

2.2.4 Vulnerability of Fishers……………………...... …...... 17

2.2.5 Livelihoods of Fishers…………..…………………...... 18

2.3 Perception of Natural Hazards………………………………………...... 19

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY………………...…………….…………. 22

3.1 Study Area Details……………………………………………………..… 22

3.2 Data Collection and Analysis………………………………………...... 23

3.3 Application of GIS and GPS in Data Collection………...………………. 26

3.4 Ethical Consideration………………………………………...………...... 28

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION …………………….…...... 29

4.1 Demographics……………………………………………………..……... 29

4.2 Environmental Factors and Livelihoods of Fishing communities……….. 33

4.2.1 Perception of Natural Hazards……....…………………………..…. 34

4.2.2 Impacts on Fishing Activities…………………….……………...... 36

4.2.3 Impacts on Fish Availability………………………...... 41

4.2.4 Impacts on Housing…...…………………………...………...... 44

4.3 Social Vulnerabilities and Livelihoods………………………….……….. 47

4.3.1 Income and Housing Conditions………………………....……..….. 47

4.3.2 Debts of Fishers…………………..……………………..……...... 49

4.3.3 Health Issues………………………..…………………………….... 50

4.3.4 Medical Emergency…………………………..…………..………... 52

4.4 Reasons Behind Death/Disappearance of Fishers….………………...... 55

4.4.1 Death or Disappearing of Fishers………………..……………...….. 55

4.4.2 Safety Equipment…………………………….…………………….. 58

4.4.3 Following Weather Forecasts………………..………………...... 60

4.4.4 Leadership Issue and Difficulties During Fishing Activities………. 62

4.4.5 Priority Consideration During Fishing Activities…….……………. 64

4.4.6 Training for Fishing Activities………………………….……..…… 66

4.5 Consequences to Families that Lost Fishers……………………………... 67

4.5.1 Quit Fishing as a Profession………………………..……..…..…… 68

4.6 Focus Group Discussion……………………………………..………...... 71

4.6.1 Response by Ordinary Fishers……………………….………..…… 71

4.6.2 Responses by Lessors………………………………….………...... 75

4.7 Land cover Change (1972 to 2013) and the 2012 Landuse Patterns of-

Kutubdia Island………………………………………………………………. 78

4.7.1 Data and Methodology for Remote Sensing and GIS Analysis……. 78

4.7.2 Estimation of Land Loss and Accretion…………..…………..….… 79

4.7.3 Remote Sensing Analysis for Land Cover Change……...... 79

4.7.4 Ground Truth Data Collection………………………………….….. 80

4.7.5 Accuracy Assessment for Land Cover Change Analysis…………... 82

4.7.6 GIS Analysis for the 2012 Landuse Patterns……………..…...…… 85

4.7.7 Land Loss From 1972 to 2013...……………………………..……. 87

4.7.8 Land Erosion and Accretion From 1972 to 2013...... ……….. 87

4.7.9 Change Detection of Land Cover……….………………………...... 89

4.7.10 Discussion…………………………………..………………...... 99

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUDING REMARKS……………….……………..... 100

5.1 Specific Recommendations………………………………….…….……... 102

5.1.2 Proposed Model for Reduction of Vulnerability of Fishing-

Communities of Kutubdia Island…………...... 105

5.1.3 Future Considerations………………………....………………………….. 105

5.1.4 Contribution to Literature……...………………………………….... 106

BIBLIOGRAPHY …………………………….…………....………………. 108

APPENDICES

Appendix A. Questionnaire……………………………………………………….… 119

Appendix B. IRB Approval ………………………………………………………… 125

vii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figures Page

Figure 1 Study area ………………………………………………..…..…... 3

Figure 2 Vulnerability of fishing communities……………………………. 7

Figure 3 Location of household surveys ….….….….….….………………. 27

Figure 4 Fishing boats for deep sea fishing ………………………………... 32

Figure 5 Fishing boats for near shore fishing …………………………….... 33

Figure 6 Displaced families due to natural disasters……...………………... 37

Figure 7 Coastal erosion…………………………………………...……….. 38

Figure 8 Change of living place of the respondents and distance moved...... 45

Figure 9 Access to new land after displacement…………………………… 45

Figure 10 Roadside settlements……………………………………………… 46

Figure 11 Typical housing of fishing communities ………………….……... 48

Figure 12 Building materials of housing …………………….……………… 49

Figure 13 Reasons behind death/disappearing of fishers……………………. 56

Figure 14 Death or disappearing and seasonality of fishers ……….………... 56

Figure 15 Families that lost fishers…………………….……………………. 58

Figure 16 Lessor’s family that lost boats………………………………….. 77

Figure 17 Spatial video data processing using contour story teller and-

Google Earth …………………………………………...…...……. 86

Figure 18 Area of Kutubdia Island from 1972 to 2013…………...…...…….. 87

Figure 19 Land erosion and accretion……………………………………...... 88

Figure 20 Land cover classes of 1972 and 1978…………………………...... 90

viii

Figure 21 Land cover classes of 1989, 2009, and 2013…………………...... 91

Figure 22 Change detection of land cover (1972-1978 and 1978-1989)…..... 93

Figure 23 Change detection of land cover (1989-2009 and 2009-2013)…..... 94

Figure 24 The 2012 landuse patterns …………………………...…………... 96

Figure 25 Vulnerability Reeducation Model for Fishing Communities…….. 105

LIST OF TABLES

Tables Page

Table 1 Events of focus group discussions with ordinary fishers and boat -

owners/lessors …………………………………………….……... 25

Table 2 Respondents selected characteristics…………………………...… 30

Table 3 Perception of natural hazards reported by the respondents...…….. 35

Table 4 Noticing of environmental changes by education ……………...… 36

Table 5 Environmental changes and their influence on fishing, impact -

on fish catch, fish availability, education, age, and deep sea and -

near shore fishing…………………………………………………. 40

Table 6 Impacts on specific fish species………………………………...… 42

Table 7 Reasons behind fewer fish compared to the past…………………. 44

Table 8 Amount of debts by families that took loans from Banks or -

NGO’s……………………………………………………………. 50

Table 9 Sickness experienced by fishers themselves during fishing -

activities …….………………………………………………..…... 51

Table 10 Sickness experienced by peer fishers ……………………...…...… 52

Table 11 Primary care tendency in case of serious illness of fishers-

during fishing……………………………………….…….……..... 53

Table 12 Carrying primary medicines by experiencing sickness ……...... … 54

Table 13 Essential equipment and safety materials need….……………...… 60

Table 14 Following forecasts provided by the radio; education and age...… 61

Table 15 Difficulties during fishing activities reported by fishers ………… 63

Table 16 Measures taking tendencies during severe weather ………….…... 64

Table 17 Priority considerations during extreme weather………………….. 65

Table 18 Consequences to families that lost fishers……………………….. 67

Table 19 Quit fishing as a profession by ownership of boats and nets……. 69

Table 20 Preference of alternative professions ……………………...…...… 70

Table 21 Remote sensing data ……….……….……………………………. 79

Table 22 Description of MS, TM, and Landsat 8 scenes and corresponding-

reference………………………………………………………… 81

…

Table 23 Error matrix for 1972 MS image ………………………………… 83

Table 24 Error matrix for 1978 MS image ……………..………………….. 83

Table 25 Error matrix for 1989 Landsat TM image………………………... 84

Table 26 Error matrix for 2009 Landsat TM image…………………..……. 84

Table 27 Error matrix for 2013 Landsat 8 image …………...…………...… 85

Table 28 Landuse classes and area in km² …………………..……………... 92

Table 29 Land cover change in km² ……………………….…...………...… 95

Table 30 Descriptions of 1972 - 2013 land cover classes and the-

2012 landuse patterns …………………………………………..… 97

Table 31a The 2012 landuse patterns of Kutubdia Island ……………..……. 98

Table 31b The 2012 landuse patterns of Kutubdia Island……………..…….. 98

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am grateful to my advisor and committee members for their guidance throughout my

Ph.D. research over the last several years. I want to express deepest honor and gratitude to Dr.

Thomas W Schmidlin whose passion, inspiration, love, guidance and support has contributed to my successes as a geographer. Dr. Schmidlin provided his kind help even during the time when our classes were not in session. I also owe much of my successes to Dr. Sheridan as he helped and guided me in every single step of my Ph.D. program. I want to thank Dr. Tyner for serving as a committee member, his guidance and feedback helped me to organize my research plan. I am thankful to Dr. Tyner for his seminar course that contributed to my critical knowledge regarding global environmental issues. I am thankful to Dr. Javed I Khan who agreed to serve as committee member.

Especial thanks to Jeanne Schmidlin for her passion to review my writing. To Dr. Mandy

Munro-Stasiuk, I thank you for all the support that include pilot study, questionnaire surveys, and a post disasters assessment study through multiple visits to Bangladesh. I am also grateful to

Dr. Curtis who supported me to utilize geo-spatial tools in my study.

I am also grateful to Dr. Bimal Kanti Paul for his continuous support encouragement, and love that has motivated me to accomplish my research work. Finally, I wish to thank all the

Graduate Students, Faculty, and Staffs especially to Mary Lou and those who I have interacted with while at Kent State., I wish you all the best and that you all have very successful future. I

xii would like to thank my friend Mohammad Al-Nasrallah for his enormous support during my stay at Kent.

I want to thank Dr. Kay Weller whose love and support changed my life. My sincere respects go to my father Munshi Atiar Rahman and my mother Saleha Begum, for all their supports, sacrifice, and love. I am truly grateful to my wife Afreen Alam Ashha who showed passion in every step of my work and being supportive. I would like to thank, Ahmad Ullah,

Aworongo Jeb, Tareq, and people those who volunteered and participated in questionnaire surveys and filed work. I am thankful to Mr. Shujon Mehedi who encouraged me to explore the livelihoods of fishing communities of Kutubdia Island.

I would like to thank the Graduate Student Senate of Kent State University for providing me the international travel grants to conduct pilot study and field surveys. I feel very much honored to receive Gandhi Scholarship and Beck Research Award for conducting my dissertation research.

Finally, I would like to thank the United State Geological Survey (USGS) for providing me the satellite images. I like to thank the Coast BD and Coast Trust NGO’s for their support during my field visits. Last but not least, I am very much grateful to the volunteers those who provided me enormous support during my field work on Kutubdia Island.

xiii

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

In Bangladesh fish and fisheries are an inseparable part of the day-to-day life and livelihoods of the people. The fisheries sector plays a significant role in alleviating protein shortages, providing jobs, earning foreign currencies and the socio-economic development of

Bangladesh. The fisheries sector contributes to 4.43% of the national GDP and 22.21% to the total agricultural GDP Department of Fisheries (DoF) 2011). Ready-made garments and textile products are the nation’s number one export accounting for 80% of Bangladesh’s total exports

(Yardley 2012). Currently, fisheries is the second largest export sector in Bangladesh

(Chowdhury et al. 2010; Wahab et al. 2012). In the fiscal year of 2010-2011, the total of the country’s export earnings from this sector was 2.73% (DoF 2011). An estimated 1.4 million people are engaged full-time and 12 million people as part-time in the fisheries sector (Ahmed et al. 2012).

Bangladesh is densely populated, and its geological setting and extended coastal lands and islands are dynamic in nature, and vulnerable to multiple disasters (Mallick and Vogt 2009;

Hossain et al. 2012). Due to the geographical location of Bangladesh, its people are exposed to natural hazards such as floods, cyclones, drought, and riverbank erosion (Penning- Rowsell et al.

2012). According to the World Risk Report (2012), Bangladesh was the fifth most natural disaster prone country among 173 countries in the world.

Coastal zones are considered as one of the hot spots for the impacts of climate change globally (Parry et al. 2007; Torresan et al. 2012). Fishing communities in the coastal regions of

Bangladesh are highly vulnerable to climate change (Allison et al. 2009).The livelihoods of

1 coastal communities are highly dependent on agriculture, fishery, forestry, transportation, and salt farming (Miah et al. 2010). People who depend on fishing as their primary or secondary professions are vulnerable both environmentally and socially. Kutubdia Island (Figure 1) is located in southeastern part of Bangladesh on the Bay of Bengal where coastal erosion, cyclones, floods, and storm surges are frequent.

Figure 1. Study Area

Cyclone Gorky on April 30, 1991 swept across the southeastern coast of Bangladesh killing 140,000 residents including 22,000 from Kutubdia Island (Paul 2009; Penning- Rowsell

3 et al. 2012). People living on Kutubdia Island are mostly involved in agriculture and fishing as their primary and secondary occupation.

The fishing communities of Kutubdia Island face multiple environmentally-induced challenges in their livelihoods. Continuous erosion of the island displaced hundreds of families including both the fishers and non-fishers families. As coastal fishing communities have very limited economic options, often fishers ignore weather forecasts provided by a radio and continue their fishing activities which results in many fatalities every year (Ahmed and Neelormi

2008). Tropical Cyclone Sidr in 2007 killed many fishers although there is no official record of how many fishers were killed (Islam 2011). According to the Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock

(MoFL), nearly 150 fishermen die every year while fishing in the Bay of Bengal (Islam 2012).

1.1 Statement of Specific Problems

Fisheries are an important source of livelihood on Kutubdia Island, as well as in the entire coastal belt of Bangladesh. Numerous island communities, in particular, are highly dependent on fishing. The health of the fisheries along the coast of Bangladesh has always been sensitive to changes in marine environment in the Bay of Bengal. There are increasing signs that recent climate change has significantly altered the marine environment of the Bay of Bengal. Sea surface temperatures have increased; sea level has been rising slowly but perceptibly; cyclone activities have increased; and the magnitudes of both cyclones and the storm surges have increased. All of these changes are causing havoc on coastal communities. Several island communities which are heavily dependent on fisheries for their livelihoods are particularly vulnerable to these changes. They have been suffering from coastal erosion due to sea level rise and an increase in storm activities. Coastal erosion has destroyed their homes forcing them to resettle, costing them financial and physical hardships. Their fishing activities have been 4 shortened due to increase in storminess. Kutubdia Island is especially vulnerable to these environmental changes because of its heavy reliance on fisheries. Every year during fishing activities hundreds of fishermen are disappearing in the Bay of Bengal due to severe weather and lack of safety equipment on board. Families that lost fishers face multiple challenges in their livelihoods. The environmental (e.g., coastal erosion, land loss, and land cover change) and social vulnerabilities (e.g., disappearance of fishers) lead to multiple risks and socio-economic challenges to the fishing communities of Kutubdia. On Kutubdia Island land loss, land cover, and landuse have significantly changed over the last couple of decades mostly because of saline water intrusion, embankment breaching, tidal waves, cyclones, and coastal flooding.

This research aims to understand, describe, and propose how to reduce the vulnerabilities associated with environmental and social attributes that are linked to the livelihoods of fishing communities. Some recommendations are provided to address the vulnerabilities and livelihoods issues of Kutubdia Island, Bangladesh.

1.2 Rational for Conducting Land Cover Change and Landuse Patterns Analysis

The landuse and land cover patterns of a particular region define the socio-economic and environmental conditions. People of Kutubdia Island heavily rely on agriculture productions and fishing activities. Although this study considered only fishing communities of Kutubdia, most of the fishers family are also involved in crop production and salt cultivation in this region. The loss of crop production due to the salt water intrusion to inland salt cultivation now became an inseparable part of their livelihoods. Continuous coastal erosion and salt cultivation on agricultural land this island caused change in the landuse and land cover patterns in the recent years. It is essential to address issues such as coastal erosion, salt water intrusion due to inland

5 embankment breaching and asses the existing landuse patterns, so that government and local policy makers can take actions and adopt policy for a sustainable future. There was no previous published study that assessed the historical land cover change and recent landuse patterns of this island. As this study focuses on environmental and social vulnerability considering land cover change and landuse patterns is included in this study.

1.3 Objectives

This research would make significant contribution to vulnerability literature and a better understanding of the livelihoods of coastal fishing communities. It may also be able to find ways to limit the loss of life and show the way to a better life with sustainable livelihoods for the fishing communities in Bangladesh as well as other developing countries in the world.

The objectives of this study are to examine the following issues:

1. What are the perceptions of environmental change associated with natural hazards and

their impacts on the livelihoods of fishing communities?

2. What socio-economic and other challenges do fishing communities and fishers face?

3. What are the causes behind the frequent loss of fishers?

4. How does the loss of fishers affect the remaining families and communities?

5. What are the past and present land cover and landuse patterns of Kutubdia Island?

This study will be useful for policy recommendation and official actions to address the vulnerabilities (Figure 2) and livelihoods of fishing communities of Kutubdia Island. Besides

Bangladesh, this study will be useful for other developing countries (e.g., India and Kenya) where fishing communities face similar difficulties in their livelihoods.

Figure 2.Vulnerability of fishing communities

1.4 Chapter Outline

In Chapter two, an overview on literature has been provided about the environmental and social vulnerabilities, and livelihoods of fishers.

In chapter three, the methodologies used for this research have been provided. Information concerning how the data were collected has been presented. The respondent’s socio-economic and demographic data are provided to understand the socio-economic conditions of the fishing communities in Kutubdia.

In chapter four, the results obtained from the research have been discussed. Results of chi-square tests of selected variables, charts, and tables have been provided in order to identify the environmental and social factors that influence the livelihoods of fishing communities as well as to understand the reason/reasons behind the loss of fishers at sea and know the consequences to the families that lost fishers.

In the last chapter (chapter 5), the results that have been obtained in chapter four have been summarized and discussed for recommendations to address the vulnerabilities and livelihoods of fishing communities of Kutubdia Island. A model is proposed for reducing the vulnerability of fishing communities. Finally, in this chapter a few limitations faced by the researcher while conducting this research have been discussed.

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2.1 Natural Hazards in Coastal Bangladesh

The total area of Bangladesh is about 56977mi² (147, 570 km2) and the coastal area covers about 32 percent or18233mi² (47, 222 km2) of the total area. Out of 64 districts in

Bangladesh, 19 districts fall in the coastal belt where about 36.8 million Bangladeshis live (Islam

2008). Bangladesh experiences several different kinds of natural hazards. Floods, tropical cyclones, droughts, and riverbank erosion are the most common disasters in Bangladesh

(Penning- Rowsell et al. 2012). According to the MoWR (2005), common natural hazards in coastal areas of Bangladesh are coastal flooding, cyclones, storm surges, erosion, saltwater intrusion, arsenic contamination, and pollution. A study conducted by Parvin et al. (2008), indicated that climate change may impact sea level, sinking, change of upstream river drainage, cyclones, and erosion of coastal embankments all which could accelerate the natural hazards in coastal areas of Bangladesh. Thus tropical cyclones, floods, coastal and river bank erosion, and a rise in sea level qualify as coastal natural hazards in Bangladesh and are relevant to this study.

2.1.1 Tropical Cyclones The Bay of Bengal is an ideal breeding ground for tropical cyclones (Hossain et al.

2012). Bangladesh is widely known as the most vulnerable country in the world to tropical cyclones (Rawlani and Sovacool 2011). According to Ali (1996), an estimated 10 percent of the world’s tropical cyclones form in the Bay of Bengal. There is an increasing trend of cyclone

9 disasters in the coastal areas around the world (Ali 1996; Khan et al. 2000; Dasgupta et al. 2009,

2010).

The unique geophysical characteristics of the Bangladesh coast and the socio-economic characteristics of coastal communities increase the vulnerability of the residents to cyclones

(Paul 2009). In recent years, cyclonic activity in the Bay of Bengal has become more frequent, causing rougher seas that are dangerous for fishermen and small craft (Hussain and Hoq 2010;

MoEF 2008). It is estimated that 49% of the world’s total deaths due to tropical cyclones occurred in Bangladesh (Ali 1996). Between 1877 and 2009, Bangladesh was hit by 159 cyclones, including 48 severe cyclonic storms, 43 cyclonic storms and 68 tropical depressions

(Singh et al. 2001; Mallick, Rahaman, and Vogt 2011). Generally, Bangladesh experiences a severe cyclone every three years (MoEF 2008). Tropical Cyclone Sidr (November 2007) and

Cyclone Aila (May 2009) in Bangladesh and cyclone Nargis (May 2008) in the Irrawady delta of

Myanmar demonstrated the results of devastating storm-surge and its impacts in coastal areas

(Mallick and Vogt 2012). All these recent cyclonic events caused deaths of humans, and affected the livelihoods, socio-economic systems, and environment of the coastal communities in

Bangladesh. The death toll from the Cyclone Sidr was about 3406 (Paul 2009). Cyclone Sidr caused an estimated loss of US $1.7 billion (World Bank 2010). The death toll from Cyclone

Aila was 237 along with more than 8000 missing persons (Mallick et al. 2011). Additionally, in

19 coastal districts of Bangladesh including Kutubdia Island, Cyclone Aila destroyed 160 miles

(259 km) of roads, 316 miles (509 km) of embankments were washed away, and another 1339

(2155 km) of coastal embankment were severely damaged (Kumar et al. 2010).

These two tropical cyclones (Sidr and Aila) destroyed the coastal embankments of south and southwestern part of Bangladesh (Chowdhury et al.2010), which resulted in environmental

10 changes due to tidal waves, surges that pushed saline water inland, and destroyed crops. The fishing communities of the Kutubdia Island are highly vulnerable to the tropical cyclones and storm surges because residents have little or no option to move to a new place. Many families had already left the Island due to the environmental changes but those who remain have no choice. If they leave Kutubdia Island, they face homelessness elsewhere in Bangladesh.

2.1.2 Floods Flooding in Bangladesh is frequent and it makes the country more vulnerable to natural disasters. Catastrophic floods have had major impacts that slowed the development and economic growth of Bangladesh (Ahmad 2003). In an ‘average’ year one quarter of the country gets inundated (MoEF 2008). In the last three decades, major catastrophic flood events in 1987,

1988, 2004, and 2007 killed hundreds of people, damaged crops, properties, and business worth billions of dollars (Penning- Rowsell et al. 2012). The impacts of flood events may vary because of the elevation and physiographic conditions. According to the MoEF (2008), two-thirds of the country is less than 5 meters above sea level and is susceptible to flooding in lower lying coastal areas. As a consequence of global climatic change, rises in temperature may increase snowmelt from the Himalayan glaciers and force more water to ﬂow through the Ganges, Meghna, and

Brahmaputra river systems and their river networks resulting in more floods (Hossain et al.

2012). The study area is located in the southeastern coastal belt of Bangladesh where tidal floods during storm surges are frequent phenomena. The global and regional climatic effects will contribute more threats associated with floods in the coastal environment of Bangladesh including the study area.

2.1.3 Coastal Erosion

The physiographic shape of Bangladesh coastal and marine areas are controlled by dynamic natural forces such as tides, wave actions, strong winds and sea level variations

(Hossain 2012). Coastal erosions are common in Bangladesh year round due to regular tidal activities. Coastal erosion usually occurs during monsoon seasons, but it is more severe during a southwest monsoon or any episodic events such as storm surges or sea swells (MoEF 2007). The increased erosion and saline water intrusion in coastal areas are likely to displace hundreds of thousands of people who will be forced to migrate to big cities (MoEF 2008). It is predicted that in Bangladesh, 22 million people will be forced from their homes by 2050 because of climate change (Parenti 2011) which is associated with river and coastal bank erosions. People who live in coastal regions of Bangladesh experience frequent displacement of their residence due to erosion. Fishers living in the coastal region are mostly poor. Due to climate change the livelihoods of coastal fishers are threatened (Chowdhury et al. 2012). The fishing communities of Kutubdia Island are victims of coastal erosion and their livelihoods face severe consequences as the island is shrinking in size over the years (Shamsuddoha and Chowdhury 2007).

2.1.4 Sea Level Rise Sea level rise associated with climate change is the single most important factor that may change the socio-economic and environmental situation in the entire coastal area of Bangladesh

(Saroar and Routray 2010). Sea level rise is a serious factor that determines the vulnerability of

Bangladesh to climate change impacts (Paul 2011). The coastal zone of Bangladesh is one of the top 10 potentially deadly spots (Dasgupta et al. 2009) and it is where about 29 percent of the country’s people live. This causes these coastal areas to become potentially deadly spots because of the poor management of coastal embankment and old fashioned design of the embankment

12 structure (Dasgupta et al. 2009, 2010). It is estimated that under a worst-case scenario about 36 percent of people in Bangladesh will be directly affected by sea level rise in 2100 (Ericson et al.

2006). If sea level rises then coastal polders and embankment failure could cause six to eight million people to be displaced by 2050 (MoEF 2008). According to the MoEF (2008), sea level rise will lead to submergence of low-lying coastal areas, cause saline water intrusion up into coastal rivers and inland into groundwater aquifers, will reduce freshwater availability, will damage the Sundarbans mangrove forest, a World Heritage site with rich biodiversity and cause drainage congestion inside coastal polders, thereby adversely affecting agriculture. Sea level rise has already been impacting the coastal area of Bangladesh. Singh et al. (2001), showed that sea level rise in the coastal regions of Bangladesh has an association with monsoon precipitation because there is a significant increase of monsoon rainfall which is evident in seasonal anomalies of sea level rise in the coastal areas of Bangladesh. Yet there is no such study that shows how much land has been eroded or engulfed by the sea in the coastal area of Bangladesh. It is believed by the Bangladeshi scientists that due to sea level rise the coastal area of Bangladesh has already experienced impacts, due to frequent coastal inundation and erosion, saline intrusion, deforestation, loss of biodiversity and agriculture, and large scale migration (Rahman et al.

2011). Sea level may cause a higher storm surge rate than usual due to the increased water depth and height in the ocean.

2.1.5 Salinity Intrusion

Saline water intrusion is one of the major concerns in the coastal regions globally where most of the coastal cultivable lands are used for diverse agricultural practices. Intrusion of saline water in the coastal regions as well as inland of Bangladesh is a frequent problem. Intrusion of

13 saline water is mostly seasonal in Bangladesh; in winter months the saline front starts to breach inland and it caused a rise of 10 percent to more than 40 percent in the dry season than the normal saline water front (DoDM 2012). According the country’s top daily English newspaper the Daily Star (2011), salinity along the Bangladesh coast has already encroached over 100 km inland into domestic ponds, groundwater supplies and agricultural land, through the various estuaries and water inlets linked with major rivers. Intrusion of saline water is now considered a major factor affecting water resources along the coastal regions of Bangladesh (Rabbani et al.

2013). The two major cyclones (Cyclone Sidr and Cyclone Aila) that hit Bangladesh’s coastal zone in 2007 and 2009 respectively resulted in many ponds being submerged in sea water. It was reported that over 6,000 ponds were adversely affected by Cyclone Sidr induced salinity intrusion (Rabbani et al. 2010). In addition to cyclones, caused salinity intrusion in the coastal regions of Bangladesh is associated by tidal waves, coastal flood events, and a rise of sea level.

On Kutubdia Island, Bangladesh salinity intrusions are associated with tidal waves, tropical cyclones, and embankment breaching. Every year hundreds of families are experiencing salinity intrusion to their cultivable land where they used to produce crops and farm fish. In

Bangladesh’s coastal zones increasing soil salinity will aggravate the country’s food security concerns due to the decreasing trend of food productions in recent years.

2.2 Vulnerability and Livelihoods Contexts

2.2.1 Vulnerability

Vulnerability has several meanings depending upon the perspective and focus of individual research (Cutter 1996). In general, vulnerability to environmental hazards means the potential loss of lives, livelihoods, or property (Cutter 2003). Vulnerability is also seen as the outcome of a mixture of environmental, social, cultural, institutional, and economic structures, and processes related to poverty (Brouwer et al. 2007). According to Oliver-Smith (2004), vulnerability is defined as a political ecological concept: “vulnerability is the nexus that links the relationship that people have with their environment to social forces and institutions and the cultural values that sustain or contest them” (p. 10). A widely used definition defines vulnerability as the state of susceptibility to harm from the exposure to stresses (Adger 2006), whereby stresses can originate both from environmental and social changes that are affecting the respective system and are coupled with the absence of a capacity to adapt (Islam and Herbeck

2013). Based on the concept of vulnerability it is obvious that vulnerability is not an individual phenomenon that can be studied only from a biophysical perspective. Vulnerability of a person, group, communities, or a system cannot be a simple outcome of the intensity or magnitude of a disaster but it includes a longer period of time and combines both the physical and social factors of the built environment (Paul 2011).

2.2.2 Social Vulnerability

Poverty can be the leading cause of vulnerability but poverty is not synonymous with vulnerability (Wisner et al. 2004). Social vulnerability can be defined by the possession of social elements that accelerate susceptibility to disasters (Blaikie et al. 1994). The vulnerability

15 research conducted by Cutter et al. (2003) showed that social vulnerability to natural hazards increased for low income people, females, the elderly, children, rural poor who rely on extraction economies, those who rent, migrant workers, larger families, and people who need special assistance. Vulnerability can increase once a particular community loses their source of income and the resources that they rely on for their economic activity. Most of the people in rural

Bangladesh depend upon agriculture and like the fishers, do not own land, lack literacy, have poor housing, and have livelihoods that are impacted by frequent natural hazards (Ono and

Schmidlin 2011).

2.2.3 Environmental Vulnerability According to Paul (2011), “environmental vulnerability refers to the conditions of natural environment that either contribute to or reduce the sufferings of disaster victims from impacts of extreme events” (p. 80). Sometimes environmental vulnerability can be a result of human activities as well. For example a polder or an embankment can be a protector of coastal people from tidal waves and storm surges but an embankment failure or poorly structured embankment can be devastating and a source of multiple risks for the community who live in that area.

Bangladeshi society is highly vulnerable to the hazards of local storms, and the results of the storm often cause deeper descent into poverty for the families or the communities (Ono and

Schmidlin 2011).

Generally, coastal communities of Bangladesh experience multiple risks and hazards due to the environmental settings. Climate change may increase vulnerability of coastal zones

(Torresan et al. 2012). To understand the vulnerability it is important to conduct studies at the local and regional level (Torresan et al. 2008). It is essential to understand vulnerability due to environmental changes and their effects on the livelihoods of coastal communities that rely on

16 fishing. Fishing communities of Kutubdia Island, Bangladesh face multiple stresses and vulnerability due to environmental changes that impact their fishing activities as well as displacement because of coastal hazards such as erosion, floods, cyclones, and storm surges as reviewed earlier in this chapter.

2.2.4 Vulnerability of Fishers

Vulnerability is considered as a prime platform of fisher’s poverty (Bene 2009).

Fishermen are among the most vulnerable communities in Bangladesh (Kabir et al. 2012;

Rahman et al. 2012). As the fishers are poor, they are less resilient and less capable to recover from shocks or crises in their lives (Islam 2011). The exposure and sensitivity of fishers to risks are relatively high compared to the other socio-economic groups (Bene et al. 2010). The relationship between fisheries and poverty is complex and not well understood (Bene 2003). In

Bangladesh ﬁshing communities have been identiﬁed as the most food insecure, marginalized, vulnerable, and poorest people (Lein 2009). A disaster combined with social and environmental factors can destroy the routine life cycle of fishers and can significantly impact the livelihoods of fishing communities. Rough seas and frequent cyclones often force coastal fishers to stay home or to return early from their fishing trips (Jentoft et al. 2010). It is common that coastal fishers in

Bangladesh experience several risks during the rough weather at sea. After the 2007 Cyclone

Sidr, a large number of people who earn their livelihood by ﬁshing or ﬁsh-related businesses were severely impacted (Penning-Rowsell et al. 2012). Thus, fishing communities are highly vulnerable to natural disasters and to social forces that affect the livelihoods of fishing communities.

2.2.5 Livelihoods of Fishers A livelihood consists of means of support that people depend on to continue their living with capability and assets that include material and social resources. According to the World

Commission on Environment and Development report (WCED 1987) the definition of sustainable livelihood is as follows:

“Livelihood is defined as adequate stock and flows of food and cast to meet basic needs. Security refers to secure ownership of, or access to, resources and income-earning activities, including reserves and assets to offset risk, ease shocks, and meet contingencies. Sustainable refers to the maintenance or enhancement of resource productivity on a long-term basis. A household may be enabled to gain sustainable livelihood security in many ways - through ownership of land, livestock or trees; rights to grazing, fishing, hunting or gathering; through stable employment with adequate remuneration; or through varied repertories of activities.”

Generally local people's livelihoods and their survival depend on local and regional natural resources (e.g., Whittingham et al. 2003). Fishing is one of the challenging professions that people rely on as their means of livelihoods in many countries of the world. Fisheries, especially in developing countries, contribute to livelihoods in a variety of ways. They provide food, a source of income, and other social benefits, such as reduced vulnerability to poverty

(DFID undated). Historically, fishers in Bangladesh have not gained significant upgrades in their livelihoods (Deb and Haque 2011). Livelihoods are often influenced by policies, institutions, and systems that are affected by external factors associated with natural disasters (Carney 1998).

For a variety of reasons fishing communities are socially, economically, and politically disadvantaged people in Bangladesh. They do not have access to bank loans due to the poverty level of fishers. No bank is interested to finance fishers due to the uncertainty of their source of income. Fishing communities lack land ownership, fishing equipment, security and safety in their livelihoods. Fishing communities on Kutubdia Island are poorly equipped in terms of their fishing activities and their livelihoods. Most of the families that rely on fishing as their primary

18 source of income are socio-economically disadvantaged. The geophysical condition, lack of natural resources, higher population density, lack of education, unemployment, and limited agricultural practices squeezed the livelihoods of fishing communities of Kutubdia Island.

Families that own their boat and fishing equipment are better off compared to the ordinary fishers. However, the ordinary fishers and boat owners/lessors face enormous challenges in their livelihoods due to the frequent natural hazards, lack of safety equipment, and socio-economic disparities, and environmental influence.

2.3 Perception of Natural Hazards

Study on natural hazards and perception lies in a strong theoretical perspective developed more than five decades ago. Following the pioneer work of flood hazards in the United States by

White (1945), Burton and Kates (1964) studied how perception of natural hazard varied among different resource managers. In the natural hazards research context, the term perception refers to individual organization of stimuli that associated with an event or a human adjustment (White

1974). An examination of hazard perception allows one to determine how people view occurrences of extreme natural events, how such attitudes are influenced, and how such views relate to the options they consider to adjust with negative effects of hazards (White 1974).

To understand human perceptions and responses to different types of extreme natural events, White (1974) coordinated a comprehensive, cross-cultural survey of disaster survivors in

14 countries around the world. As a collaborator of the cross-cultural survey project, a hazard perception study was initiated in Bangladesh by Islam (1974). Using the same approach and theoretical premises advanced by White, Burton, and Kates, he investigated the perception of, and adjustment to, coastal cyclones in Bangladesh (Paul 1997). Later he and others examined

19 agricultural adjustments and response to other disasters, including flooding (Islam 1980; Paul

1997).

While many hazards studies in Bangladesh are rooted in the basic conceptual proposition of the White-Burton-Kates School of natural hazard research, others have adopted a broad social- historical and political economy approach (Paul 1997). For example, Zaman (1989) studied hazards and population resettlement in Bangladesh due to river bank erosion in a social and political context and found people affected by river bank erosion respond in a different way compared to the people living on the mainland. Another study conducted by Hutton and Haque

(2003) assessed the social, cultural and psychological aspects of river bank erosion-induced displacement in the Ganges-Brahmaputra-Jamuna floodplain in Bangladesh. Other studies soon followed (e.g., Paul and Routray 2009; Alam and Collins 2010).

Study on risk perception and natural hazards has a long history, little research has been done about hazards perception of coastal fishing communities in Bangladesh. The current study considers existing literature on natural hazards and perception as a basis to study natural hazards perception of fishing communities on Kutubdia Island, Bangladesh. Studies about fishers and their perception on natural hazards are important to address the mitigation and adaptation issues due to changes in global climate. Bangladesh is a vulnerable country with many coastal communities at risk of experiencing severe consequences due to global climate change and associated natural hazards (IPCC 2007).

Based up on the literature in Bangladesh fishing communities attracted many professionals and researchers but until now not even a single published effort was made to examine the livelihoods of fishing communities of Kutubdia Island. Fishing communities of

Kutubdia Island are exceptionally vulnerable compared to the fishing communities live in the

20 other coastal regions of Bangladesh. In recent years Kutubdia Island experienced severe coastal erosions associated with natural disasters people living in Kutubdia experienced difficulties to cope with the rapid environmental changes. In the upcoming chapter methodologies of this study are provided.

CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

3.1 Study Area Details

Kutubdia Island is an Upazila (subdistrict) of Bangladesh administrative division in

to״25׳north latitude and 91°47 ״45׳to 21° 57 ״18׳ Cox’s Bazar district. It is located within 21°42

east longitude. Kutubdia Island is famous for the only lighthouse in Bangladesh which ״27׳91°52 was built by the British during the British rule in 1846. The climate of Bangladesh is tropical monsoon with high temperature, heavy rainfall, generally excessive humidity, and distinct seasonal variations. The elevation of the island varies between 0 to 25 feet (7.6 m) above sea level. The average temperature of Kutubdia is 79°F (26°C) ranging from 90 °F (32°C) in the warmest month (May) to 59°F (15°C) in the coolest month (January). The annual average amount of rainfall is 2824 mm (111inches), ranging from 768 mm (30 inches) in the wettest month (July) to 7 mm (0.27 inches) in the driest month (January).The entire island is composed of 6 unions. According to the Bangladesh Population Census, the island had a population of 125,

279 in early 2011 (BBS 2011).There are various estimates for the size of the island (e.g., Vidal

2013; Shamsuddoha and Chowdhury 2007).

An initiative was made to estimate the current area of Kutubdia Island. I collected ground truth GPS data, satellite imageries provided by the United State Geological Survey (USGS) available to download via earth explorer, and overlaid with Google Earth, ESRI imagery base map, Bing aerial maps and hybrid maps. A contour GPS camera (contour +2) was used to capture spatial video and for ground truth data and assessing the 2012 landuse patterns. The estimated area of the island was cross-checked by using ArcGIS to overlay the maps using the

22 collected ground truth GPS data with ground control points. Based on these methods, in summer

2012, Kutubdia Island has an area of 26 mi² (68 km2). By using the remote sensing data of 1972,

1978, 1989, 2009, and 2013 land cover change detection was done along with the change of the area of Kutubdia. Due to the unavailability of census data about people’s professions in

Kutubdia, local leaders and professionals were asked to provide their idea about the percentage of people involved in different sectors. According to their estimation, people of this island are mostly involved in agriculture (42%), salt cultivation (37%), fishing (12%), business (4%), service (3%), and others (2%). This study focuses on people who are involved in fishing.

3.2 Data Collection and Analysis

In this study both primary and secondary data have been used. Primary data were collected using questionnaire surveys administered to 300 people (Figure 3) who were involved in fishing as their primary occupation on Kutubdia Island, Bangladesh following a simple random sampling technique. To select the households randomly, voter lists of fishing villages were collected from the Kutubdia Upazila office. In this study both primary and secondary data have been used. Primary data were collected using questionnaire surveys administered to 300 people. If the randomly selected household was unavailable at the time of the survey, then the neighboring household was interviewed. The survey consisted of open and closed- ended questions (Appendix A). The survey was conducted between May - July, 2012. Prior to the survey, a pilot study was done in May- June, 2011 to develop the questionnaire and become familiar with the people and environment of the study area. In addition to the questionnaire surveys focus group discussions were conducted with the ordinary fishers and the lessors who provide fishing materials to the fishers on conditions.

Anonymity for the participants was assured before recruiting them in this study. If their identity was revealed, it could negatively affect the employment of the fishers. It was mentioned up front to each participant that the researcher will not be able to solve the problems of fishing communities of Kutubdia Island. However, this study will be beneficial for reducing vulnerability of fishing communities on Kutubdia Island. The government of Bangladesh, NGO's and International Organizations will be able to use this study for adopting policies that will reduce the potential risk and improve the livelihoods of fishing communities of Kutubdia Island.

The following questions were provided to the focus group participants:

In addition to the questionnaire surveys focus group discussions were conducted with the ordinary fishers and the lessors who provide fishing materials to the fishers on condition.

A. Describe reason behind the frequent disappearance of fishers?

B. What happened when someone drowned/ went missing with the remaining family, wife

and kids?

C. What are the safety measures and materials you carry on board?

D. Describe the major socio-economic and environmental concerns you face in your

livelihoods and the fishing communities?

E. Suggest actions and measures that should be taken to alleviate problems in the livelihoods

of fishers, and the fishing communities?

Four focus group discussions (Table 1) were conducted during the data collection period of this study. The participants of the focus groups discussions were selected from four different locations of the study area. The meeting place for the focus group discussions held in market places (tea stalls) because fishers were comfortable sitting at the tea stall.

Table 1. Events of focus group discussions with ordinary fishers and boat owners/lessors

No Group Members Time

1 8 Ordinary Fishers and 4 Lessors May 17, 2012

2 7 Ordinary Fishers and 2 Lessors May 16, 2012

3 6 Ordinary Fisher and 2 Lessors May 18, 2012

4 7 Ordinary Fisher and 3 Lessors May 21, 2012

Questionnaire survey data included socio-economic and environmental perception data, and livelihoods of fishing communities and were analyzed using Microsoft Excel 2010. The analysis was carried out in two stages: stages 1- data were tabulated in a Microsoft excel sheet, and stage 2- chi-square tests were run to test for relationships among several variables. Finally, descriptive analysis was conducted that included textual and tabular forms describing study results. The results of focus group discussions are presented in results section (Chapter 4).

The secondary data were collected from various sources, including previous research related to fishers and fishing communities, journal articles both published and unpublished, government reports, thesis and dissertations, NGOs and INGOs based national international projects and their published reports. Geospatial and Remote Sensing data were collected from

Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI), United States Geological Surveys (USGS), earth explorer, and Department of Geography, University of Dhaka, Bangladesh. The theoretical perspective of this study was adopted from hazards and disasters related research works.

3.3 Application of GIS and GPS in Data Collection

During the questionnaire surveys hand held GPS (eTrex Legend HCx) was used to store the respondents locations for all 300 respondents (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Location of household surveys

The results of GIS and Remote Sensing analyses on land cover change (1972 to 2013) and the 2012 landuse patterns are presented at the end of the result section (chapter 4).

3.4 Ethical Consideration

As this research was conducted using questionnaire surveys, and focus group discussions, the involvement of people was essential in all stage of data collection and surveys. Because of the involvement of community people in this study, I applied for and received approval

Institutional Review Board (IRB) at Kent State University on February 7, 2012. I conducted interviews and focus group discussion. The participants were informed about their benefits of providing information relevant to this study. It was assured that participants will be anonymous and unidentified. The copy of IRB consent letter is attached in Appendix B.

CHAPTER 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The results provided in this chapter are primarily based on the analysis of data that were collected by questionnaire surveys, focus group discussions, and Geo-spatial data. All these data were collected to full fill the five objectives or research questions of this study. Within this chapter summary of the questionnaire surveys results are presented by using tables, charts, and pie diagrams. The results of the focus group discussion are presented as a summary after the questionnaire survey results. At the end results of geospatial analysis are presented. In the imminent sections results of this study that addressed the five research questions are orderly presented.

The objectives of this study are to examine the following issues: 1. What are the perceptions of environmental change associated with natural hazards and

their impacts on the livelihoods of fishing communities?

2. What socio-economic and other challenges do fishing communities and fishers face?

3. What are the causes behind the frequent loss of fishers?

4. How does the loss of fishers affect the remaining families and communities?

5. What are the past and present land cover and landuse patterns of Kutubdia Island?

4.1 Demographics (Survey Questions: 1-7, 53-56, 59)

The age of the household head ranged between 18 and 70 years with a mean of 36.6 years and standard deviation of distribution of 9. The age distribution pattern shows that the fishing activities in the study area are highly dependent on the people who are within 31-40 years (Table

2).

Table 2. Respondents selected characteristics (N=300)

Characteristic Number Percentage Age (in years) 18-30 65 22 31-40 141 47 41-50 68 23 51-60 22 7 > 60 4 1 Level of education Illiterate 125 42 Primary 136 45 High School 39 13 Household size 3-5 138 46 6-8 136 45 ≥ 9 26 9 Number of people involved in fishing per household 1 232 77 2 45 15 >2 23 8 Fishing boat ownership Own 32 11 Leased 268 89 Monthly income (in taka)* 0-5000 133 44 6000-10,000 138 46 >10,000 29 10 *1 USD=80 Taka

The survey results revealed that the highest number of the respondents (45%) had only a primary education, and (13%) had high school education and (42%) of the respondents were illiterate. The household size of the fishing communities are between 3-14 people. Most of the households were made up of a husband, wife, children, and extended family members. All these form a household in the tradition of Bangladeshi culture. The national average size of households in Bangladesh is 4.4 (GoB 2011). Most of the households on Kutubdia Island have a larger family size than the national average. Most (77%) of the households had a single person wage-earner for the family who was responsible to take care of all the family members.

The ownership of fishing equipment is very significant to the fishers and fishing communities. The survey results showed that most of the fishers did not have their own boats and nets, so they rely on lessors who rent their boats and nets to the ordinary fishers on some conditions (e.g., share of fish they catch). It was found that 89% of the fishers reported that they do not own either boat or net and they rely on the lessors for their fishing equipment.

The average monthly income of a fishing family is very small. According to the survey data 44% of the households have monthly income of taka 0-5000; 46% of the households have monthly income of taka 6000-10,000, and 10% of the households have income >10,000.The households that had a monthly income of > taka10,000 were mostly involved in additional economic activities besides fishing and some of them had their own fishing equipment. Some families not only relied on fishing as their primary occupation but also practiced some additional agricultural activities (e.g., crop production and salt cultivation).

There are two different kinds of fishing activities on Kutubdia Island, deep sea fishing and near shore fishing. The fishers who go to deep sea use larger boats and stay 5-10 days or even more depending on the distance fishers cross for a single trip with a group of 7 to 10 or

more fishers (Figures 4 and 5). The fishers who fish near shore fish go on a daily basis and use smaller boats that usually carry 2 to 5 fishers on board.

Figure 4. Fishing boats for deep sea fishing

Figure 5. Fishing boat for near shore fishing

The fishers who fish near shore mostly fish all year round. But the fishers who fish at deep sea mainly considered October to February as a peak fishing season whereas, April to mid-

Septemberis a lean fishing season.Of all the respondents 249 (85%) go to deep sea fishing. The remaining respondents fish near shore on daily basis.

4.2 Environmental Factors and Livelihoods of Fishing Communities

Research Question 1.What are the perceptions of environmental change associated with natural hazards and their impacts on the livelihoods of fishing communities?

(Survey Questions: 38-51)

4.2.1 Perception of Natural Hazards

The respondents were asked whether they noticed any environmental change on the island. They were also asked to provide their perception about the changes they had experienced in the island. Of the 300 respondents, 288 (96%) said they noticed environmental changes on

Kutubdia Island, whereas 12 (4%) said they did not see any changes where they were living over the last couple of decades. The perceptions about the environmental change of Kutubdia were more noticeable to the people who had been living on the island longer compared to the people living on the island for a shorter period of time. There were multiple responses in terms of environmental changes mentioned by the respondents. The survey result (Table 3) showed the highest number of the respondents (73%) mentioned more coastal erosion. The rest of the respondents perceptions were categorized as more floods, more cyclones, more tidal waves and surges, more wind, climate change, more hot weather, more precipitation, and sea level rise.

Table 3. Perception of natural hazards reported by the respondents

% of 300 Changes Number* Respondents

More coastal erosion 220 73

More floods 154 51

More cyclones 120 40

More tidal waves and surges 98 33

More wind 70 23

Climate change 50 17

More hot weather 45 15

More precipitation 35 12

Sea level rise 30 10

No changes 12 4

*Multiple response possible

Literacy and education play significant roles for individuals to understand their surrounding environment as well as decision-making related to their daily lives. Presumably a literate person has better understanding about any changes in their surrounding environment and their impacts on economic activities. However, a person with no literacy is also capable to understand the changes of environment where they live. An attempt was made to see whether there was a significant relationship between the literacy and noticing of environmental changes.

The survey results (Table 4) showed no significant relationship between literacy and notice of environmental changes.

Table 4. Noticing of environmental changes by education

Yes Percentage No Percentage Total

Literate 169 97 5 3 174

Illiterate 119 94 7 6 126

Total 288 96 12 4 300

Pearson Chi-Square: 0.76 (df=1; p=0.5833)

Respondents were asked about specific natural hazards (coastal erosion, coastal floods, cyclones and storm surges, and tidal waves) intensity compared to the past. Of all the respondents 264 (88%) mentioned the intensity of all these natural hazards have increased compared to the previous years. No respondents mentioned that the intensity of all the natural hazards decreased overtime. Only a few respondents 34 (11%) mentioned they were not sure whether they have changed. The remaining 2 (1%) of the respondents said no comparable changes occurred in the intensity of different natural hazards.

4.2.2 Impacts on Fishing Activities

Respondents were asked about the impacts associated with natural hazards such as cyclone and floods cause property damage and displacement of people (Figure 6) due to coastal erosion (Figure 7).

Figure 6. Displaced families due to natural disasters

Figure 7. Coastal erosion

According to the fishers, the number of fishing days has decreased due to the cyclonic activities and high wind in the Bay of Bengal. The respondents were asked about whether the environmental changes had any influence on fishing activities (e.g., more cyclones, more floods, and more wind). The survey results showed 264 (88%) of the respondents experienced changes of their fishing activities because of the environmental changes over time, whereas 36 (12%) of the respondents did not experience any changes. The respondents were asked to provide their experiences regarding any impact on fish availability and their catch compared to the past. The survey results showed that 267 (89%) respondents found less fish and amount of catch have decreased over time due to the environmental changes. The remaining 33 (11%) of the

respondents said they did not notice any changes in terms of fish availability and their catch due to the environmental changes. It was found from the survey results that 175 (58%) respondents said they experienced fewer fish due to the environmental changes, whereas 125 (42%) respondents said they did not experience any changes in fish availability due to the environmental changes compared to the past. These information was based upon the respondent’s perceptions. The reason behind fewer fish compared to the past was not known to the fishers. Fishers mentioned that the variation of temperature and frequent cyclonic activities may have an influence on destroying the fish habitat and movement of fish. During the monsoon season continuous rain often interrupts the fishing activities at sea.

The relationship between the literacy and experiencing environmental influence on fishing activity was examined (Table 5). Relationships between fish production and catch with age and literacy were examined to find statistical significance. Additionally, fishers who go to deep sea and who fish near shore were identified.

Table 5. Environmental changes and their influence on fishing activities, impact on fish catch, fish availability, education, age, and deep sea and near shore fishing

Yes Percentage No Percentage Total

Changes in fishing activities by education Literate 152 87 22 13 174

Illiterate 112 89 14 11 126

Total 264 88 36 12 300

Pearson Chi-Square: 0.05 (df=1; p=0.8231) Changes in fish catch by education

Literate 158 91 15 9 173

Illiterate 109 86 18 14 127

Total 267 89 33 11 300

Pearson Chi-Square: 1.74 (df=1; p=0.1878) Changes in fish catch by age

Age 18-40 202 98 5 2 207

Age 41->50 65 70 28 30 93

Total 267 89 33 11 300

Pearson Chi-Square: 47.48 (df=1; p=< .0001) Changes in fish catch by age

Deep sea 159 62 96 38 255

Near shore 16 36 29 64 45

Total 175 58 125 42 300

Pearson Chi-Square: 10.23 (df=1; p=0.0014)

Literacy status was not statistically associated with stating that environmental change had influenced fishing (p=0.82). Both literate (87%) and illiterate (89%) persons thought that

environmental change had influenced fishing. Literacy was not associated with stating that environmental change had influenced fish catch (p=0.19). Both literate (91%) and illiterate

(86%) persons thought that environmental change had influenced fishing catch. Age of the fishers was statistically associated with stating that environmental change had influenced fish catch (p<0.01). Fishers 40 years or younger were more likely to say that environmental change had influenced fish catch (98%) than were older fishers (70%). Type of fishing (deep sea vs. near shore) was statistically associated with stating that environmental change had influenced fish availability (p<.01). Deep sea fishers were more likely to say that environmental change had influenced fish availability (62%) than were near shore fishers (36%).

4.2.3 Impacts on Fish Availability

Fish availability is a great concern to the fishers those who just rely on fishing as their primary source of income. In recent years both the deep sea fishers and near shore fishers experienced different fish species being less available in the Bay of Bengal compared to the past.

All respondents were asked whether they have experienced any kind of fish species that were once more available compared to the present. In (Table 6) shows the name of fish species provided by the respondents that were less available. According to the survey results the highest number of response was hilsha fish 121 (40%) and the lowest response was Gangeni fish 4 (1%) of the 300 respondents.

Table 6. Impacts on specific fish species

Local Scientific Name Fish Base Name *Number % of 300

Name Respondents

Ilish Tenualosailisha Hilsa shad 121 40

Shrimp Metapenaeusmonocero- Chingri 108

s 36

Loitta Harpadonnehereus Bombay-duck 87 29

Suri Sparse-rayed frostfish Benthodesmusoligoradiat- 37

us 12

Guizza Sperataseenghala Ayre 29 10

Bhetki Latescalcarifer Barramundi 29 10

Pabda Ompokpabo Pabo catfish 20 7

Lakkha Eleutheronematetradact Fourfinger threadfin 19

-ylum 6

Rup chada Parastromateusniger Black pomfret 16 5

Tuna Thunnusobesus Bigeye tuna 12 4

Phasa Setipinnaphasa Gangetichairfin anchovy 10 3

Koi Clariasbatrachus Philippine catfish 9 3

Bata Liza parsia Parshebata 8 3

Ghora Securiculagora Ghora chela 6 2

Gangeni Chacachaca Squarehead catfish 4 1

*Multiple response possible

In Bangladesh May to October is generally considered the hilsa catching season. This time of the year both the deep sea and near shore fishers fish in the Padma, Jamuna, Meghna,

Karnafully and other coastal rivers of Bangladesh and the entire Bay of Bengal. However, fishing activities continue year round while fishers catch variety of fishes depending on the seasonality and availability of fish.According the department of fisheries (DOF 2011), hilsa has the highest contribution in the country's fish production as the single fish species and more than

11% of the country's fish production comes from hilsa. In recent years families that rely on fishing are passing hard times as the catches are not sufficient enough to retrieve the cost of their fishing trips that they made at sea. Respondents were asked to provide their opinions behind the reason for fewer fish at sea compared to their past catch. In (Table 7) shows the reasons why fishers found fewer fish at sea. The survey results shows that overfishing 300 (100%) was the major concern behind fewer fish at sea. Some of the respondents were not aware of the reason behind fewer fish at sea, representing 50 (17%) of the 300 respondents. However, due to the increasing number of fishing boats, sophisticated nets, climatic shift, and catching juvenile fish are considered as major causes behind fewer fish at sea in the Bay of Bengal.

Table 7. Reasons behind fewer fish compared to the past

Reasons behind fewer fish *Number % of 300 Respondents

Over fishing and catching smaller fish 300 100

Increasing number of fishing boats 140 47

Foreign fishing trawlers and boats 81 27

Climate change 60 20

Not sure 50 17

*Multiple response possible

4.2.4 Impacts on Housing

The questionnaire survey showed that 72 (24%) of the respondents had to move their home due to the coastal erosion of Kutubdia Island. Some of the respondents mentioned that they had to relocate their living place multiple times. The distance that respondents who relocated their household once or more than once from their first/original place ranged from no move to

1.6 kilometers (Figure 8).

Figure 8. Change of living place of the respondents and distance moved

Moving or relocating an individual household and access to new land (Figure 9) was not easy.

Figure 9. Access to new land after displacement

Survey results show that 45 (63%) of the respondents who relocated their home were not able to buy land because of poverty and relocated to government land; mostly roadside

settlements. Many families sheltered on government land and roads or even on the embankment

(Figure 10). Some of them moved in with relatives but having lost their land made them more vulnerable and poorer. Some respondents mentioned that many of their neighbors already migrated to the nearest cities. But the living standard of these households were marginalized as poverty is a constant phenomenon in their livelihoods. Respondents who moved to the place provided by their relatives were mostly with their own families or in-laws. It was common that fishers prefer to live near the coast as opposed to the interior part of the island because of their accessibility to the sea. Most of the households who live on the roadside or government land had no other alternatives. The infrastructure of their home was poorly designed and fragile. A little rain or wind frequently disrupts their living and destroy their homes and belongings.

Figure 10. Roadside settlements

4.3 Social Vulnerabilities and Livelihoods

Research Question 2: What socio-economic and other challenges fishing communities and fishers face? (Survey Questions: 29-37, 52, 56, 57, 58)

4.3.1 Income and Housing Conditions

Fishing communities on Kutubdia Island do not have a decent economic condition.An ordinary fisher can earn an average 7,000 taka per month where as a lessor could have an amount from 10,000 taka to >100,000 taka. Income of an ordinary fishing family and a lessor vary due to different economic conditions in the society. The study results revealed that out of 300 respondents including ordinary fishers and lessors 86 (29%) had debts from banks and NGO’s.

The families that had loans were economically better compared to the other fishing families 214

(71%) of the respondents). Most of the ordinary fishers borrow money from the lessors on certain conditions. This kind of dealing between fishers and lessors known as dadan. Taking dadan from lessors makes a fisher more inconsistent in their living because there is constant pressure that comes from lessor to pay back as soon as they can by catching fish as much as they can. Often times this leads to fishers continue fishing activities during severe weather that result death or disappearance of entire fishing team with boats and nets at sea.

The housing in the fishing communities of Kutubdia Island is very poorly structured compared to the people who are involved in small business or the owners of boats and nets.

Housing type was categorized depending upon the building materials on its roof and wall. The majority of the respondents 240 (80%) had their houses corrugated tin on their roof and wall is made of mud and or bamboo fence (Figure 11 and 12). The other housing types were polythin 34

(11%) and straws 26 (9%) on the roof and fence was made with either bamboo or mud. Families who had the capacity to buy corrugated tin were able to protect them from constant interruption 47

from rain fall on their roof. Houses that were made by polythin and straws were poorly constructed to defend against rainfall and high wind. A poorly structured house is the host of many bacterial and viral diseases where soggy condition in the floor of the house prevails. Poor fishers usually could not build a better house as they cannot save money after meeting the needs of their basic family demand. Families who had corrugated tin roof were economically richer compared to the people those who had their house roof made by polythin and straws.

Figure 11. Typical housing of fishing communities

9% 11%

Straws Polythin Corrugated Tin 80%

Figure 12. Building materials of housing

4.3.2 Debts of Fishers

Some families involved in fishing in Kutubdia borrowed money from banks or non- government organizations (NGO). The survey results showed that 86 (29%) of the respondents borrowed money either from banks or NGOs. There is a trend in the fishing communities for fishers to borrow money from their boat lessor in advance to maintain their families. During the time when fishers do not go to sea for fishing (off season) fishers mostly rely on the mercy of boat owners to provide monetary support to fishers and their families. Fishers do not consider this support as a debt. Instead, it is an obligation to work for the boat owner in the future at a lower than market wage. This kind of practice is widely used among fishing communities in coastal Bangladesh. This type of informal economic transaction is known as dadan system. It provides loans to the fishers but may lead to exploitation over ordinary fishers who do not own boats and nets. The respondents were asked about their current amount of debts they had besides dadan. In (Table 8) shows the amount of debts either from banks or NGOs that fishers had during the time they were interviewed.

Table 8. Amount of debts by families that took loans from Banks or NGO’s

Debt in Taka % of 86 Respondents

> 20,000 6

17000-20,000 8

13000-16,000 8

9000-12,000 35

5000-8,000 43

4.3.3 Health Issues

Sea sickness is a common concern among the people who spend time at sea, although most of the time people get used to stay at sea after several visits at sea. The people of Kutubdia

Island do not have access to advanced health care locally. There is a hospital on the Island but due to lack of electricity, medical treatments; intensive care and hospital emergency care are not possible. In case of emergency, people have to go to the main land crossing the sea using engine boats/trawlers that are available as water transportation. Fishers who fish at sea and stay for a longer period of time are susceptible to multiple health problems. The respondents were asked to provide information whether respondents themselves or their peer fishers experienced any kind of sickness during their fishing activities at sea. The survey results showed that of all the respondents 185 (62%) fishers experienced sickness during fishing activities at sea. In (Table 9) shows the type of sickness fishers experienced.

Table 9. Sickness experienced by fishers themselves during fishing activities

Sickness type Frequency %

Fever 19 8

Back Pain 21 9

Cough 42 17

Diarrhea 49 20

Dizziness 51 21

Vomiting 59 24

*Multiple response possible

It was very complicated to draw a conclusion about what makes an individual fisher get sick, as there were different age groups and the health condition of individuals were not homogenous. Generally, food availability, cooking methods, hygienic issues, and safe drinking water play a vital role in terms of getting sick.

Health concerns for an individual fisher during fishing trip is a matter of great concern to all the other members of the boat due to the dependency on each other for fishing activities. Generally fishers who go to sea are assigned activities by their leader (majhee) of the boat. However, an individual or group of fishers getting sick could impact the amount of catch and cost for the fishing trip. All the respondents were asked to provide their experience in terms of sickness of their peer fishers on board. According to the survey results 194 (63.3%) of the respondents said that they experienced their peer fishers gotsick during their fishing activities at sea. In (Table 10) sickness experienced by peer fishers are provided.

Table 10. Sickness experienced by peer fishers

Sickness type Frequency %

Back Pain 7 3

Fever 17 7

Cough 44 18

Dizziness 53 21

Vomiting 59 25

Diarrhea 61 26

*Multiple response possible

4.3.4 Medical Emergency

Medical emergency during fishing trip at sea is frequent among fishers. The respondents were asked whether they carried first aid kit and necessary medicines with them during their fishing trips. According to the survey results 194 (65%) respondents said that they did not carry any first aid kits and primary medicines. In (Table 11) primary care in case of serious illness during fishing trips are provided.

Table 11. Primary care in case of serious illness of fishers during fishing

Care tendencies Number* % of 300 Respondents

Stop fishing and come back 57 19

Send back the sick person home with other boats 120 40

Take primary medicines that they carry 163 54

*Multiple response possible

All the respondents participated in the surveys were asked to provide their opinion regarding how they managed if a fisher or fishers get sick on board or any other emergency occurred. The survey results showed of all the respondents the highest number of responses were

163 (54%) mentioned that they took care of the sick person with the medicine they carried with them during fishing trips. It was mentioned by some of the respondents that when a person gets sick they try to take care first. Once they see no improvement of that person’s health then they try to find some other fishing boats that were going back to shore after their fishing trips. But it was not an easy job to find a fishing boat that was coming back after their fishing trips.

Meanwhile the sick person could get sicker as there were no other alternatives. It was mentioned by some of the respondents that they could not return home even though they experienced severe health related problems during their fishing trips. They had to stay with the other fishers under the direction of leader (majhee) until they finish their predetermined time frame of that fishing trip and certain amount of fish. In some cases if a fisher dies because of severe illness it is often called that the person died because of heart attack. Sometimes fishers continued working even though they were sick, and it was mentioned by some respondents that some fishers fell from the boat during their fishing activities and drowned due to the inability to avoid their fishing activities.

In general a health related emergency on board is very complex to handle but a first aid kit and primary medicine that do not require any prescription can provide temporary relief/treatment to a sick person on board. Respondents who carried first aid kit and primary medicine had better sense and awareness about their health issues. It should be a mandatory responsibility of the boat owners/lessors to provide first aid kit and necessary medicines to the fishers when they go to their fishing trips for couple of days to weeks. Some of the respondents mentioned that they bought their necessary medicine and first aid kit by their own. Some respondents mentioned other alternative option for fishers is to buy first aid kit and medicine on their own cost and then they can subtract the amount of money from their shared percentage of income with the boat owner/ lessees. But most of the time that does not happen because buying medicine on their (fishers) own money reduces the amount of money they earn by their fishing.

An attempt was made to see whether there was a significant relationship between sickness and carrying primary medicines. The survey results (Table 12) showed no significant relationship between whether fishers got sick and carrying their primary medicines.

Table 12. Carrying primary medicines by experiencing sickness

Yes Percentage No Percentage Total

Got Sickness 67 36 118 64 185

No Sickness 39 34 76 66 115

Total 106 35 194 65 300

Pearson Chi-Square: 0.08 (df:1; P =0.7773)

In (Table 12) shows that experience sickness status was not statistically associated with carrying medicines (p=0.77). The same percentage of fishers who got sick (36%) and those did not experience sickness (34%) carried medicines during their fishing trips.

4.4 Reasons Behind Death/Disappearance of Fishers

Research Question 3: What are the causes behind frequent loss of fishers? (Survey Questions:

10-17, 21-28)

4.4.1 Death or Disappearing of Fishers

Every year numerous fishers are disappearing at sea in the Bay of Bengal. Families that lost their only earning member of their family faced multiple shocks, stresses and economic challenges in their lives. There is no estimated data that can provide the number of fishers who disappeared or went missing at sea in the Bay of Bengal. An effort was made in this study to document the number of fishers who were lost since 1991 in Kutubdia. Respondents were asked whether they were missing fishers who were from their own household. The survey results show that 47 (16%) of the respondents reported that they had lost their family members who went to fish at sea. Respondents were also asked whether they had lost any of their relatives who were involved in fishing. The survey results showed that 62 (21%) of the respondents reported that they lost a relative who was involved in fishing. According to the reported number of deaths a total of 109 fishers were missing including 47 household members and 62 relatives outside of the household. There were families that lost more than one household member and relative.

Respondents were asked whether they were able to recover the bodies of the disappeared fishers.

According to the survey results only 13 (12%) of the respondents reported that they found the

dead bodies of their household members and relatives. Many families still believed that fishers who went fishing and did not return might yet come back. Respondents were asked about the seasonality and reason behind deaths/disappearing of fishers as an open ended question. The reasons behind deaths/disappearing and seasonality of the deaths/disappearing of fishers are shown in (Figures13 and 14).

Unknown 13%

Boat Capsized 27%

Cyclones 60%

Figure 13. Reasons behind death/disappearing of fishers

17 5 6

January to April to July to October to March June September December

Figure 14. Death or disappearing seasonality of fishers

Due to the different estuarine ecosystems and seasonality there are different patterns in terms of fish availability in the Bay of Bengal. In Bangladesh, commercial hilsa fishing occurs in the marine and riverine areas throughout the year, but the peak fishing season is September-

October every year (BOBLME 2010). In the coast of Chittagong the fishing activities go on

throughout the year although the rate of fishing trips get impacted during the monsoon months

(June-August) because of the severe weather. Fishers from Kutubdia Island fish both long-term and daily basis. Fishers who go for long-term fishing stay more than a week or more and cross long distance where no cell phone networks are available. Fishing seasonality, number of days fishers spend for their fishing trip at sea and extreme weather particularly cyclone results in a huge number of deaths and missing of fishers during the month of April to November. However, study results showed that not only severe weather caused deaths and disappearing of fishers at sea but there are some other factors like capsizing boat due to mechanical failure of boat, caused deaths of fishers in the study area. Some respondents mentioned that the reason behind death of a fisher is unknown. Snake bite as a reason for death of fishers is unique but this is a fact that was reported by some of the respondents. Sometimes owner of the boat/lessors could avoid paying compensation for the victim’s family by using snake bite as a reason of fisher’s death during their fishing activities. Such a situation was always influenced by the leader of the boat who is in charge of leading all the ordinary fishers as reported by the victims’ families. The relationship between the lessors and leader is much stronger than ordinary fishers as they enjoy the major share of profit by selling their fish.Families (Figure 15) that lost the fishers in their household experienced severe economic and social turmoil in their lives.

Figure 15. Families that lost fishers

4.4.2 Safety Equipment (radio, cell phone, compass, and life jackets)

Safety at sea is a great concern for the fishers who fish in the deep sea and near shore.

Any mishap can destroy boats and cause death or disappearance of fishers. Fishing boats should carry necessary safety equipment such as life jackets, a compass or other devices for navigation at sea, and a radio for communication, and weather forecasts to avoid risks associated with fishing activities at sea. The respondents were asked whether they carried radio, cellphone, compass, and life jackets on board during their fishing trip at sea. The survey results showed 150

(50%) of the respondents said they carried a radio during their fishing trip and 276 (92%) of the respondents carried a cell phone during their fishing trip. It was stated by some of the

respondents who did not carry a radio on board that they carried a cell phone instead of a radio.

Uses of a cell phone sometimes add more risk and uncertainty if networks are unavailable or cellphone’s batteries are unavailable. However, a radio with batteries can provide continuous weather updates.

A compass is a convenient tool that provides navigation for the fishing boats. The survey results showed that 253 (84%) of the respondents carried a compass on board during their fishing trips. Some of the respondents mentioned that often time they followed other fishing boats during their fishing trips so they do not carry a compass on board.

Life jacket availability on board is one of the main life support objects that can help fishers during an accident at sea. Generally if the fishing boat is owned by the fisher/fishers then it is their own responsibility to carry all the necessary materials for safety at sea. But if the boat is owned by the lessor then it is his responsibility to provide all the safety measures on board. A question was asked to the respondents whether they carried life jackets on board during their fishing trips. The survey results showed that 59 (20%) of the respondents carried life jackets on board. Reasons reported for the lack of life jackets included negligence of boat owners, lack of space to carry life jackets on board, and using a plastic water tanks as a floating device. Some of the respondents mentioned that they carry plastic water tanks that can work as an alternative to life jackets. But in reality there is a narrow chance to be saved at sea after any accident (e.g., capsize of boat) and water tanks may not be a feasible substitution for a life jacket.

A question was asked whether boat owners provided all the safety materials for the fishers. Seventy-eight (26%) of the respondents answered positively and said they received the necessary safety equipment from the boat owners. It is worth mentioning that the respondents who answered positively were the group of respondents who own their boat as well as fishers

who lease boats. To assure the safety of fishers at sea some necessary tools and objects are essential to carry on board during their fishing trips. The respondents were asked what are the essential tools and equipment they needed to assure their safety at sea as an open ended question.

In (Table 13) shows the necessary equipment and safety materials fishers needed to have on board to reduce risks and increase safety.

Table 13. Essential equipment and safety materials need

Equipment/tools Number* % of 222 Respondents

Life jacket 263 100

Lifebuoy/ring buoy 211 95

Medicine 106 48

Radio 76 34

Sandbag (in case of fire) 15 7

Cell phone 12 5

Fire extinguisher 7 3

*Multiple response possible

4.4.3 Following Weather Forecasts

A question was asked to the respondents whether they follow weather forecasts that radio provides during fishing at sea. Most respondents 258 (86%) said they followed signals/weather forecasts that radio provided. Although some fishing boats did not have any radio, they followed

other fishing boats around them while fishing at sea. The income of the fishers depends upon the amount of fish caught so the fishers and leader (majhee) on board often continue fishing at sea even if the weather forecast indicates severe weather, thus putting the fishers at risk. In (Table

14) statistical results are provided.

Table 14. Following forecasts provided by the radio; education and age

Yes Percentage No Percentage Total

Following forecasts by education

Literate 156 90 18 10 174

Illiterate 102 81 24 19 126

Total 258 86 42 14 300

Pearson Chi-Square:3.9 (df=1; p=0.0483)

Following forecasts by age

Age 18-40 179 87 27 13 206

Age 41->50 79 84 15 16 94

Total 258 86 42 14 300

Pearson Chi-Square: 0.23 (df=1; p=0.6315)

The literacy status was statistically associated with following forecasts provided by the radio (p=0.04). More literate persons (90%) followed forecasts compared to the illiterate persons

(81%). Age was not associated with following forecasts provided by the radio (p=0.63). Both age groups 19-40 years old (87%) and age >40 years old (84%) followed forecasts provided by the radio.

4.4.4 Leadership Issue and Difficulties During Fishing Activities

Usually fishers who go to the deep sea consist of a group of 8-15 fishers depending on the size of the boat. Fishers who fish daily stay near shore fish with a group of 3-5 people. For each individual boat there should be a leader (majhee) who usually gets a higher salary and directs and guides all other fishers on board. A majhee is the head fisherman who has experience in the sea and leads a team of more than two people on board. A leader is often responsible for the entire fishing activities and quantity of catch for the entire fishing season. An ordinary fisher/ crew member under a leader earns a fixed wage set by the boat owner or wage plus a share of the catch. Other ordinary fishers (crew members) are supposed to follow their boat leader even if the leader is wrong.

Some of the respondents mentioned that fishers who do not own boats and nets are often exploited by the boat owner as well as their leader. Even though there might be a weather forecast that indicates severe weather the leader directs the fishers to continue their fishing activities as both the boat owner and leader want them to catch more fish and maximize their profit. The decision making process is controlled by the leader. Some of the respondents mentioned that fishers may get sick and they cannot take a rest even though severe weather warning was issued. Thus leadership may lead to distress or even loss of fishers. Fishers who fish close to the shore face the same problems with decision making. The relationships between the leader and ordinary fishers needed to be friendly to avoid misunderstanding and risks associated with weather and fishing activities at sea.

The survey results showed 207 (69%) of the respondents experienced difficulties in their fishing activities. An open-ended question was asked to describe the difficulties they faced

during their fishing activities. The respondents provided multiple responses in terms of the difficulties they faced. In (Table 15) shows the challenges and obstacles reported by the fishers.

Table 15. Difficulties during fishing activities reported by fishers

Difficulties Number* % of 300 Respondents

Engine failure 40 13

Shouting 50 17

Larger boats 60 20

Pirates 181 60

Severe weather 207 69

* Multiple response possible

Of the 300 respondents the most frequent response (69 %) was severe weather. The rest of the responses were pirate attacks, larger boats, shouting/ quarrelling, and engine failure.

Weather related issues are the great concerns that fishers face during their fishing activities at sea. Extreme and unusual weather events affect the fishing trips and number of fishing days.

Pirate attack is a great concern that fishers face during their fishing trips at sea. Fishers who go to deep sea for several days have greater risk of pirate attack compared to the fishers who fish close to the shore on a daily basis. Pirates target the larger fishing boats that carry more resources

(fish, nets, engine, food supplies, cell phones, and cash). Bangladesh Coast Guard and

Bangladesh Navy are the responsible authority for protecting the maritime environment. The respondents reported that they do not get help from the Naval force and Coast Guard as those agencies do not work as a police force to arrest pirates. It was reported by the respondents that during any emergency at sea fishers received help and support from Naval personnel in terms of

emergency medical issues but fishers may be in remote places where Naval forces and their patrol activities do not exist. Fishers who use smaller boats in their fishing activities encounter larger fishing boats that destroy their nets and occupy their targeted fishing places. As a result shouting and quarrelling arise between the crews of larger fishing trawlers and smaller fishing boats. Engine failure during fishing trip was another concern for the fishers. Most of the engine boats did not have any backup engine so failure of the engine can result in tragedy. Regular engine checkup and maintenance can reduce the likelihood of engine failure at sea but boat owners and fishers often ignored this fact and face severe consequences.

4.4.5 Priority Consideration During Fishing Activities

Taking a quick decision in case of severe weather at sea is very important for the safety of fishers’ lives, although not all the fishing trawlers and boats carry radio to get the weather forecast and update on regularly. Many of the respondents mentioned that they were able to predict the weather and condition at sea from their previous experience.Respondents were asked about their decision making during severe weather. In (Tables 16 and 17) show fishers measures taking tendencies and priority considerations.

Table 16. Measures taking tendencies during severe weather

Measures Number* % of 300 Respondents

Continue fishing 4 1

Come back to Shore 73 24

Stop fishing for the time being 283 94

*Multiple response possible

Table 17. Priority considerations during extreme weather

Measures Number* % of 300 Respondents

Number/amount of fish caught 120 40

Fishing nets and other valuable things 151 50

Safety of life 264 88

*Multiple response possible

The survey results showed the highest number of respondents 283 (94 %) reported that they stopped fishing during the extreme weather, 73 (24%) respondents mentioned that they came back to shore, and 4 (1%) respondents mentioned they continued fishing. “Stop fishing” cannot be a safety measure that can reduce risks and disaster at sea for fishers. So fishers experienced similar weather events at sea as they wait to see if the weather gets better and they can continue their fishing activities. This kind of decision making may lead to catastrophic events for the fishers and their remaining families. However, respondents also mentioned that sometimes they stop their fishing during the storms and once the storms get weaker that they continue their fishing.

The respondents who mentioned “continued fishing activities” may be under the stress of debts and economic concerns of their families. The respondents were asked to provide their priority considerations during fishing activities at sea. The majority of the respondents 264

(88%) mentioned they considered the safety of their life, 151 (50%) were concerned with fishing nets and other valuable things, and 120 (40%) the amount of fish they caught. The respondents who provided these kinds of responses may have had a fear of their debts and the loss of the opportunity to continue their fishing activities. Some of the respondents mentioned that debts to the boat owners and stresses from economic crisis of the individual family of fishing

communities often lead to take risks (e.g., avoid forecast provided by a radio) and accident occurred.

4.4.6 Training for Fishing Activities

All respondents provided similar answers in response to the question of having training before they go to fish at sea. Respondents mentioned no formal training was necessary to fish at sea. Not even a single respondent mentioned that they had any kind of professional or formal training before they go to sea for fishing. Some respondents mentioned that when a fisher goes to sea for the first time he frequently faces some health related problems (e.g., vomiting and headache) because the ocean waves keep the boat bouncing. A novice fisher has to go through such experiences for several times to get adapted to the sea and stay on boat for couple days to a week or even longer. It was mentioned by some respondents that before a fisher can get hired by the boat owner or lessor he must show the number of times he had gone to sea and whether he experienced any sickness on board during his fishing activities.

Although in Bangladesh fishing activities do not require any kind of professional training and certification, it would be helpful to have some practical knowledge related to fishing activities prior to go fish at sea. Some of the respondents mentioned that it could be very helpful if they could use GPS technology for navigating their fishing routes at sea. Providing some training beforehand could make the fishing activities more efficient and cost-effective. Having some educations about safety measures during severe weather could help to reduce disappearing of fishers at sea. To ensure that the government, local administration, and boat owners need to work mutually for safety of the fishers at sea.

4.5 Consequences to Families that Lost Fishers

Research Question 4: How does the loss of fishers affect the remaining families and communities? (Survey Questions: 18-20)

Death or disappearing of a fisher impacts the family income and accelerates poverty adding multiple challenges in the livelihoods of the remaining family members. Respondents who reported the death or disappearing of fishers in their household or relatives were asked to explain the consequences of the victims’ families. In (Table 18) shows the responses that were provided by the families in response to an open-ended question regarding the consequences to families that lost fishers.

Table 18. Consequences to families that lost fishers

Number* % of 300 Consequences and Challenges Respondents

Economic hardship and broken family 209 70

No financial help from lessors 119 40

No comments 70 23

Help from relatives and neighbors 50 17

Moved to other places 40 13

Little aid from local government 35 12

Compensation by boat owners/lessors 30 10

Widow got remarried 5 1.7

*Multiple response possible

The survey results showed that 209 (70%) of the respondents mentioned economic hardship and broken family were major concerns due to the death/disappearing of fishers.

Although boat owners have some responsibilities to pay compensation to the remaining family members if a fisher is disappearing at sea due to a boat accident, there is no legal obligation for the boat owners other than some social and community responsibilities set by local community leaders. The family that lost a fisher often finds shelter with their relatives. Sometimes boat owners can be pressured into compensating victim’s family as a responsibility. Families of an ordinary fisher might receive 10,000 to 30,000 taka as compensation whereas the family of a majhee might receive 50,000 to 100,000 taka. The widow who had children faced multiple challenges to raise the children and meet their daily needs. Under this circumstance the widow usually returns to her parents and become a family member with her parents which often makes for financial and social burdens on her parents. It is unlikely that a widow receives support from her deceased husband’s family. The survey results showed that 5 (1.7%) of the respondents said that the widow can get remarried if they were young in age, good looking, had no children, otherwise they remained a widow. The children who lost their father face multiple challenges due to economic hardship and lack of parenting support. These scenarios lead to poor mental and physical development of the children and deprive them of fundamental needs of food, education, shelter, clothing, and health care.

4.5.1 Quit Fishing as a Profession

The respondents were asked to provide their opinions about whether they wanted to quit fishing as a profession. The survey results showed that 149 (50%) of the respondents said they would like to quit fishing as a profession. An effort was made to see the relationship between fishers who owned their boats and nets and those who did not and the desire to quit fishing as a profession (Table 19).

Table 19. Quit fishing as a profession by ownership of boats and nets

Yes Percentage No Percentage Total

Owners 25 78 7 22 32

Lessees 124 46 144 54 268

Total 149 50 151 50 300

Pearson Chi-Square: 10.37 (df=1; p=0.0013)

The survey results showed ownership of boats and nets was statistically associated with the desire to quit fishing as a profession (p<0.01). Owners/lessors were more likely (78%) to express a desire to quit fishing than were ordinary fishers/lessees (46%). Some boat owners and ordinary fishers stated that they earned more money by cultivating salt. So salt cultivation was an influential factor to encourage both boat owners and lessees to quit fishing as a profession.Presently salt farming is a lucrative economic activity on Kutubdia Island. Many fishing boat owners are investing their money in salt farming that provides more profits and fewer risks compared to fishing activities. Some of the boat owners mentioned that they needed financing to continue their fishing business from either Government banks or NGOs but there were no such financial or banking agencies that provide loans for fishing related activities. To buy nets and boats, bigger capital is needed so once boat owners lose their entire investment due to loss of their boat at sea, they face economic turmoil. Frequent boat accidents at sea and disappearing of fishers lead some boat owners and ordinary fishers to find an alternative profession over fishing. In (Table 20) shows the respondents preferred professions.

Table 20. Preference of alternative professions

Preferred Professions Number* % of 149 Respondents

Salt cultivation 130 87

Small business 120 81

Day labor 12 8

Rickshaw pulling 5 3

* Multiple response possible

The respondents who expressed a desire to quit fishing as a profession were asked to provide their preference of alternative profession/professions. The survey results showed that salt cultivation was the top preference of all the preferred alternative professions. Multiple responses were possible in this case. Over the last couple of years Kutubdia Island became an ideal place to cultivate salt. Farmers who used to produce agricultural crops turned their interests to salt farming due to the salinity intrusion with tidal waves and embankment breaching that bring salt water into the land and resulted in decreased soil fertility. More money is earned by cultivating salt than in the agriculture and fishing activities. Fishers who are able to borrow land from a landlord and cultivated salt were able to make more money. Salt cultivation may provide some financial solvency for the salt farmers but ultimately the crop productions have decreased over the last couple of years in Kutubdia due to land-use/cover change (crop production to salt farming). Salt cultivation reduced the production of local rice and other agricultural crops and impacted on local food supplies already. Switching from fishing to salt cultivation brings economic solvency for the local communities but overall concerns for agricultural productions remain as a problem in the region. The government needs to adopt some measures to provide

local farmers and fishing communities with alternative employment opportunities locally and provide financial support and subsidies to the farmers who are involved in agriculture, especially rice and vegetable productions to keep the local food production alive.

4.6 Focus Group Discussion (FGD)

Following questions were asked to the ordinary fishers and lessors separately and summary of their reactions are orderly presented.

FGD. Question 1. Describe reason behind the frequent disappearing/drowning of fishers at sea?

FGD. Question 2. What happened when someone drown/disappearing with the remaining family, wife and kids?

FGD. Question 3. What are the safety measures and materials you carry on board?

FGD. Question 4. Describe the major socio-economic and environmental concerns you face in your livelihoods and the fishing communities?

FGD. Question 5. Suggest actions and measures that should be taken to alleviate problems in the livelihoods of fishers, and the fishing community and safer situation while fishers go for their fishing trip?

4.6.1 Response by Ordinary Fishers

FGD Question 1.During the focus group discussions ordinary fishers mentioned the reasons behind death/disappearing of fishers that overlapped with the responses that were collected by questionnaire surveys. Some of the causes behind frequent missing of fishers were not mentioned during the questionnaire surveys but were mentioned during the focus group discussions.

Ignoring signals, life jackets, and continuing fishing even if it was severe weather and warning

was issued were identified as main causes behind death/disappearing of fishers. Some respondents said “…we do not carry radio nowadays as we have cell phone but it does not work after a certain distance from the network, sometimes pirates attack us to snatch our fish, nets and valuable goods, so it would be better to carry radio, but our boat owners did not want to spend a little amount of money to buy a radio” (anonymous).

FGD Question 2.When someone was disappeared during their fishing trips it was a complete disaster for the remaining family. Usually fishers fish at sea in a group so any mishap at sea of a certain fishing boat leads several fatalities/ missing of fishers. There was no hard and fast rule to compensate the remaining family of missing fishers by the lessors/ boat owners. But there are some social rules that are practiced by the community leader for the victim’s family members. If a fisher died/disappeared then the remaining family can get a compensation amount that ranged from 5000- 50000 taka. However, it depends upon how well off that particular boat owner was and how strongly the victim’s family was able to create pressure on that particular lessor. It was common that every time a death/disappearing occurred the boat owners tried to skip the fact and that made a way for them to save money. Sometimes snake bite, heart attack, and natural deaths are named if someone drowned or died during fishing activities. It is common in the fishing communities of Kutubdia Island that many families lost their only earning member of their family and became homeless or even left the island for good. If the relatives were well off then those victims can get help from them if not then they just became helpless. Women became widow and their children faced multiple challenges in their lives to grow up, unfriendly and economically vulnerable situation become constant for the entire family. Sometimes they received a little bit of help from NGO’s and local government but they were small amount that did not turn the lights on for the remaining family. Families that lost fishers and did not receive

help either from relatives or neighbors they often left the island and or became street people, even some point neighbors had no idea where they are gone, may be the migrated to nearby cities.

FGD Question 3. Not all the respondents provided positive reactions in terms of safety measure and material on board. It was found that fifty percent of the focus group members said they did not have any life jackets and radio. This could be a result of having people together who used to go fish at deep sea and people who did not go to deep sea. Some of the respondents mentioned they carried plastic containers instead of life jackets and they relied on plastic containers that help them to float on water if the fishing boat wassunk. Some respondents mentioned that “…. they could survive even if the boat was lost in the middle of the ocean and they look for other fishing boats to rescue them. But it would be very helpful to have life jacket on board to safe lives during disaster at sea.”

FGD Question 4. The member of focus group discussion repeatedly mentioned about concerns such as jobless, less fish, high interest rate for informal loans, and pirates attack. On the other hand natural disasters such as floods, cyclones, storm surges, coastal bank erosions, and shrinking the size of the island, sea level rise were frequently mentioned by all the members who participated in focus group discussions.

FGD Question 5. The members of focus group discussions were combined with people who usually carried safety equipment on board and who did carry safety measures on board. It was an immediate demand from all the fishers who did not have any safety equipment on board were asking to make sure their boat owners always provide them the safety equipment (life jackets, radio, fire extinguishers, first aid kits, and necessary medicines). They mentioned that necessary actions were not taken for the families who lost their family members during their fishing

activities. So, they asked for a transparent, documented and legal obligation for getting compensation to the ordinary fishers in case they die, get injured or disappear during their fishing trip. It was mentioned by some of the fishers that the leader (majhee) on board who is the commander to guide and order the ordinary fishers on board for their assigned duties. During extreme weather at sea the leader often directs them to continue fishing even if there were severe weather warnings issued. Sometimes fishers become sick and without any treatment they received negligence from their leader as well as from the peer fishers because they were not able to work.

Over the time the relationships between the leader (majhee and ordinary fishers) have deteriorated as some of the respondents mentioned. It is essential to develop a better relationship between the lessors and ordinary fishers to have a friendly way to conducting their fishing activities. Some fishers claimed that they did not receive help from the government. So it is an urgent need to have some regulations that will provide benefits the fishers in case of become victim. To receive loans from the government was a common voice from the fishers so that they asked to establish a fisher’s bank that will finance only fishers at a lower interest rate compared to other banks. Another great concern was pirates attack at sea. All the fishers mentioned that felt insecure and helpless at sea because pirates attack them frequently and beat them and or often killed fishers. Some of the fishers mentioned that pirates snatched everything they had for their fishing activities, belongings, and food supplies they had with them. Although coast guards and naval forces are there but they often said “..watching pirates at sea is not their job it is the responsibility of police department.”

(anonymous).Ensure security at sea for fishers is very essential to protect the entire fishing communities of Kutubdia Island as well as for the entire coastal area of Bangladesh.

4.6.2 Response by Lessors

FGD Question 1. After conducting several focus group discussions with the lessors/boat owners it was found that most of the lessors did not provide any reasonable statements regarding why they do not provide safety equipment that fishers needed for their safety at sea. Most of the lessors avoided answering when they were asked about the reason behind death or disappearing of fishers except severe weather related issues. Most of them said “..it is all about weather and their fate, we invested huge amount of money to send them out to sea and fish, we both are the sufferer if someone is lost during fishing.” (Anonymous). Another statement that was given by a lessor was “... sometimes errors in disseminating signals of weather forecasts provided by a radio often make confusions and that lead loss of fishing boats and fishers at sea, because frequently radio issues improper signals that can lead the severe consequence to the fishers and their fishing trips.” (anonymous).Most of the lessors mentioned that “…we invest our resources to make sure the safety of all fishers at sea but sometimes it gets out of control so we do not have any control over that situation.” (anonymous).

FGD Question 2. Most of the lessors mentioned that they tried to help the victim’s remaining families with some compensations amount that range from 20,000 to 50,000 taka. It depends on the family size and the responsibility of that particular fisher and his assigned duty and rank as a fisher. If the victim is a majhee/leader then the compensation amount is higher compared to the ordinary fishers that range from 50,000 to >100,000 or more taka because they are the leader and highly experienced people on board so they had to pay a higher amount of compensation for the victim’s families.

FGD Question 3. In terms of providing safety equipment, most of the lessors said they do provide life jackets, radios, compass, and necessary medicines for the fishers when they go for their regular fishing trips. But some of them did not provide any comments regarding this question because they did not feel comfortable with this kind of question/issue. Those who did not provide any response regarding safety issues and material on board were accusing the fishers saying that they do not use the life jacket or radio even if we provided them. It was mentioned by the lessors that fishers have their own responsibility too, to take care of the things that they needed on board. It was found from the focus group discussion that not all the lessors were equally holding the responsibilities to make sure the safety of fishers during their fishing activities at sea.

FGD Question 4. According to the discussion with the lessors there were multiple challenges that they faced in their livelihoods. Frequently disappearance of fishers turned them into a serious economic crisis. Once a fishing boat was missing then the entire investment of the lessors was gone and they hardly received any help from either the government or community people. Many lessors experienced the deterioration of their living standard because of losing their fishing boats and nets at sea (Figure 16). It was mentioned by some of the respondents that they do not get loans from government banks because there is a chance that the boat may sink at sea and loan providers may not get their invested money back after any mishap occurs.

Figure 16. Lessor’s family that lost boats

FGD Question 5. All the participants asked for government help to have the electricity supplies for the residents of Kutubdia Island. The participants mentioned that they needed an association that would help fishing communities “…we need to have a committee to be organized by fishers but it was before and it is no more in action” (anonymous). Sometimes bigger fishing trawlers come from neighboring countries (e.g., India) …”so we need to have strong border security so that we might have some more control over our fishing zone …we need to have modern technologies and cell phone and Global Position System network connections while fishers go for fishing.”

(anonymous) so they needed to re-engineering and rebuild the embankment around the island.

Research Question 5. What are the past and present land cover and landuse patterns of Kutubdia

Island?

4.7 Land Cover Change (1972 to 2013) and the 2012 Landuse Patterns of Kutubdia Island

To identify the past and present land cover and land-use patterns an effort was made to apply remote sensing and GIS for detecting change of land cover from 1972 to 2013, and assess the 2012 land-use pattern by using GIS of the study area. The 2012 was selected for assessing the landuse patterns because the field data were collected only for that year. This effort was made to assess the land-use patterns of Kutubdia Island. It is an urgent need to adopt sustainable land-use policies to address the food security concerns that this region will face.

To perform the change detection of land cover, an effort was made to estimating land loss and accretion because a large area of Kutubdia Island no longer exists. The methods and results of estimation of land loss, accretion, land cover change, and the 2012 landuse patterns are orderly presented.

4.7.1 Data and Methodology for Remote Sensing and GIS Analyses

Remote sensing and GIS data were used in this study. The remote sensing data includes

Landsat Multispectral Scanner (MSS) images of 1972 and 1978, Landsat Thematic Mapper (TM) images of 1989 and 2009, and Landsat 8 image of 2013 obtained from the United States

Geological Survey (UGSG), earth explorer website. These data were readily available for download and already georeferenced and orthorectified at the Universal Transverse Mercator

(UTM) projection system (zone: 46N, datum: WGS-84). In (Table 21) details date, path/row, and image types are provided. Before conducting the analysis the MSS images were reclassified into

30 meter by 30 meter resolution from 60 meter by 60 meter resolution. The GIS data used in this study are collected by spatial video and GPS.

Table 21. Remote sensing data

Date Path/row Satellite Sensor

1972/11/3 146/45 MSS

1978/11/8 146/45 MSS

1989/1/21 136/45 TM

2009/2/5 136/45 TM

2013/12/17 136/45 Landsat8 OLI

4.7.2 Estimation of Land Loss and Accretion

All the individual images were overlayed in ArcGIS 10.1 and image analysis tool for composting the images. The band combination 457 was used for the MSS image, for the TM image the band combination was used 432, and for the Landsat 8 the band combination was 543.

To estimate the area of Kutubdia Island both the true and false color composition was used for all the individual years for extracting the area of the island by digitizing and using ArcGIS editor tool.

4.7.3 Remote Sensing Analysis for Land Cover Change

The supervised classification technique was used while the user is familiar with the area.

The maximum likelihood algorithm which is widely used in remote sensing analysis (Wentz et al. 2006) was used. After conducting the field work on the island and collecting ground truth

GPS data, the supervised classification was adopted to conduct the analysis.

Scenes were selected from the dry season to eliminate sun illumination differences and differences in vegetation and soil conditions (Kolios and Stylios 2013). In supervised classification three land cover types (water, trees and forest, and agriculture) were generated.

Adding more than three land cover types using supervised technique produced errors that lead to misinterpretation of the land cover exists in the region. To minimize the possibility of errors produced from supervised classification technique, only three classifications of land covers are used in this study. The ENVI 5.0 remote sensing software package was used for analyzing the remote sensing data. Then change detection analysis was conducted by using the Multispectral

Scanner (MSS) images of 1972 and 1978, Thematic Mapper (TM) images of 1989 and 2009, and the Landsat 8 OLI image of 2013. Finally three different maps were produced by using ArcGIS that show changes between the years. Due to change of Kutubdia Island’s physical shape over the years a 200 meter buffer was created around the island’s land area of 1972 and the same area with buffer was used for all other years to run the change detection technique smoothly.

Excluding the buffer area in 1972 the size of the island was 77 km2 and in 2013 the total area of the island was 68 km2. Addition a 200 meter buffer around the island the area was 86 km2. This was done to run the classification and change detection in remote sensing analysis smoothly.

4.7.4 Ground Truth Data Collection

Ground truth data were collected in June of 2012 by using hand held GPS (etrexHCx legend) and a high definition contour GPS camera to capture geospatial video from which the existing landuse pattern could be identified. Geospatial video, also known as mobile mapping or spatial video, is an emerging technology that combines Global Positioning Systems (GPS) with video (Mills et al. 2010; Curtis and Mills 2012).To capture spatial video footage of the entire

Kutubdia Island we used a motor bike with the contour GPS camera mounted on a motor bike.

The Contour GPS camera captures High Definition (HD) spatial video that captures GPS data accuracy within 10 meters and accuracy for elevation/altitude within 30 meters vertically. A total of 250 sample ground control/ truth points were collected by using the hand held GPS for cross verifying the estimation of landuse patterns of 2012 and also use them for accuracy assessment for land cover changes. In addition to the ground control GPS data, and spatial video other corresponding reference data were used. In (Table 22) description of corresponding reference data for land cover classification is provided.

Table 22. Description of MSS, TM, and Landsat 8 scenes and corresponding reference data

Satellite

Year Date of Acquisition Sensor Reference Data and Sources

November 03, 1972 MSS Chittagong District Map, Survey of

1972 Pakistan, 1955

November 08, 1978 MSS Topographical Map, Survey OF

1978 Bangladesh, 1979

January 21, 1989 TM Global Land Survey (GLS), USGS,

1989 NASA; ESRI 1990

February 05, 2009 TM Ministry of Land's Landuse Map

2009 Published in 2011

December 17, 2013 Landsat8 Google Earth Image acquired on 04

2013 OLI January 2014

4.7.5 Accuracy Assessment for Land Cover Change Analysis

The accuracy assessment was carried out using 250 ground control points generated by

ENVI software. These were checked by using the 250 ground controls points in the field and cross checking the ground control points with additional historical maps and imageries (see table

22) and visual interpretation were integrated with the classiﬁcation result using GIS in order to improve the classiﬁcation accuracy. For the images of 1972 and 1978, the Chittagong District map and Topographical map of Bangladesh were used as reference. For the images of 1989,

2009, and 2013 the Global Land Survey (GLS), the Ministry of Land's Landuse map, and the

Google Earth Image were used. For assessing the thematic accuracy of the land cover classes 70 random points were generated for each class. To assess the accuracy validation points were used for calculating overall classiﬁcation accuracy as well as producer’s (e.g., errors of omission) and user’s accuracies (e.g., errors of commission) for all the years. Comparison between producer and user accuracy was done by creating an error matrix from which different accuracy measures can be calculated. This was done by a random sampling technique in which a number of raster classes that were generated from collected ground control points and referenced maps. Both the classification result and the real world classes were computed. The use of Kappa index for accuracy assessment is common for land cover change study (Kumar &Ghosh, 2012; Dewan et al. 2012; Rozenstein and Karnieli, 2011). In Tables 23 to 27, error matrixes are provided. The calculated weighted Kappa value was1972 (.75), 1978 (.82), 1989 (.86), 2009 (.82), and for 2013 was (.77). The overall accuracy was 1972 (82 percent), 1978 (89 percent), 1989 (90 percent),

2009 (86 percent), and 2013 was (82 percent)

Table 23. Error matrix for 1972 MSS image

Trees and User's

Class names Water Agriculture forest Row Total Accuracy

Water 55 11 4 70 79

Agriculture 1 64 5 70 91

Trees and forest 5 10 55 70 79

Colum Total 61 85 64 210

Producer's

Accuracy 83 93 73

Table 24. Error matrix for 1978 MSS image

User's

Class names Water Agriculture Trees and forest Row total accuracy

Water 64 2 4 70 91

Agriculture 1 64 5 70 91

Trees and forest 5 6 59 70 84

Colum total 70 72 68 210

Producer's accuracy 97 93 79

Table 25. Error matrix for 1989 Landsat TM image

Trees and User's

Class names Water Agriculture forest Row total accuracy

Water 64 3 3 70 91

Agriculture 4 62 4 70 89

Trees and forest 2 4 64 70 91

Colum total 70 69 71 210

Producer's accuracy 97 90 85

Table 26. Error matrix for 2009 Landsat TM image

User's

Class names Water Agriculture Trees and forest Row total accuracy

Water 63 5 2 70 90

Agriculture 11 55 4 70 79

Trees and forest 2 5 63 70 90

Colum total 76 65 69 210

Producer's accuracy 95 80 84

Table 27. Error matrix for 2013 Landsat 8 image

User's

Class names Water Agriculture Trees and forest Row total accuracy

Water 62 6 2 70 89

Agriculture 5 51 14 70 73

Trees and forest 2 9 59 70 84

Colum total 69 66 75 210

Producer's 94 74 79 accuracy

4.7.6 GIS Analysis for the 2012 Landuse Patterns

The collected geospatial video data were further processed by using contour story teller software that is suitable for visualization and coding of the collected video data. This software is embedded within Google-earth and makes it easy to locate places on earth by using spatial video

(Figure 17). Google-earth (Curtis et al. 2013) and contour story teller software is an easy and efficient way to identify and digitize the landuse pattern by visual observation and is cross verified by using ground truth GPS points collected by hand held GPS. Landuse types were digitized in Google Earth and saved as Keyhole Markup Language (KML) files. All KML files were converted into shape file by using ArcGIS software. After the conversion process all shape files were projected into Bangladesh Transverse Mercator (BTM) projection. A final map of eight different types of landuse was created by using ArcGIS.

Figure 17. Spatial video data processing using contour story teller and Google earth

4.7.7 Land Loss from 1972 to 2013

The results show an estimated 9 km² land has been lost of Kutubdia Island. The area of

Kutubdia Island in 1972, 1978, 1989, 2009, and 2013 are shown in (Figure 18).

Figure 18. Area of Kutubdia Island from 1972 to 2013

4.7.8 Land Erosion and Accretion from 1972 to 2013

The results show an estimated 9 km² area erosion and .35 km² land accretion occurred along Kutubdia Island. In (Figure19) and erosion and accretion are shown.

Figure19. Land erosion and accretion

Due the erosion of cultivable land, human settlements, and other infrastructure have been threatened. As a result many families are resided in the south eastern part of Kutubdia became homeless.

To protect against erosion and storm surges the government constructed coastal embankments. However, due to the lack of proper management, and regular monitoring, faulty

construction, lack of reengineering, nepotism for construction tender, and corruption coastal embankments along Kutubdia Island have experienced embankment breaching. As a result of breaching hundreds of acres of land gets flooded with salty water rice and vegetables production in the region has been affected. Once salt water causes flooding on crop fields it bring sands and salinity which make the soil less productive.

4.7.9 Change Detection of Land Cover

Three different land cover types (water, trees and forest, and agriculture) were identified for all the years. The results show that a significant (9 km2) portion of the island disappeared during the periods (1972 to 2013). Due to the higher erosion rate only a .35 km2 area accretion occur during the study period. The major erosion occurred in the southern part of the island.The land cover classes of 1972 and 1978 are shown in Figure 20 and land cover classes of 1989,

2009, and 2013 are shown in Figure 21. In (Figures 22 and 23) show the output of detected land cover changes. In (Tables 28 and 29) details of land cover classes and land cover change for all the years are shown.

Figure 20. Land cover classes of 1972 and 1978

Figure 21. Land cover classes of 1989, 2009, and 2013

Table 28. Landuse classes and area in km²

Trees and Total Area in km² with Year Agriculture Water Forest 200 meter buffer

1972 59.51 19.95 6.54 86

1978 50.32 16.33 19.35 86

1989 56.5 24.49 5.01 86

2009 47.1 25.4 13.5 86

2013 36.29 35.3 14.41 86

Figure 22. Change detection of land cover (1972-1978 and 1978- 1989)

Figure 23. Change detection of land cover (1989-2009 and 2009-2013)

Table 29. Land cover change in km²

Percent Km² 2009-2013 Changed Trees and forest to water 0.7 0.4 Trees and forest to agriculture 3.5 1.8 Agriculture to water 13.3 7.1 Agriculture to trees and forest 4.7 2.5 Water to agriculture 3.0 1.6 Water to trees and forest 0.3 0.1 Total 25.4 13.5 1989-2009 Trees and forest to water 0.0 0.0 Trees and forest to agriculture 0.9 0.5 Agriculture to water 9.8 5.2 Agriculture to trees and forest 8.5 4.5 Water to agriculture 7.9 4.2 Water to trees and forest 1.0 0.6 Total 28.2 15.0 1978-1989 Trees and forest water 6.9 3.7 Trees and forest to agriculture 9.5 5.1 Agriculture to water 3.9 2.1 Agriculture to trees and forest 2.2 1.2 Water to agriculture 3.0 1.6 Water to trees and forest 0.0 0.0 Total 25.6 13.6 1972-1978 Trees and forest to water 0.2 0.1 Trees and forest to agriculture 5.2 2.7 Agriculture to water 3.9 2.1 Agriculture to trees and forest 12.5 6.6 Water to agriculture 2.1 1.1 Water to trees and forest 5.8 3.1 Total 29.7 15.7

The 2012 landuse patterns assessment is considered as a first initiative and base line for studying landuse patterns of Kutubdia Island using GIS. We used spatial video data for assessing

the 2012 landuse patterns were coded (see Figure 17) in Google Earth by using Contour story seller software specialized for the viewing and analyzing contour GPS spatial video data. The final results of the 2012 landuse patterns are shown in (Figure 24).

Figure 24. The 2012 landuse patterns

In Table 30 both the remote sensing and GIS based classifications of land cove and landuse classes are provided.

Table 30. Descriptions of 1972 -2013 land cover classes and the 2012 landuse patterns

Remote sensing based Land GIS Landuse Classes (2012)

Cover Classes (1972-2013)

Water swamp, water bodies (ponds and canal)

Trees and forest Homestead forest and trees, built-up area, and

embankment

Agriculture Salt, bare field, and crop land (rice and

vegetables)

All the land patterns were estimated for individual administrative units in the study area to assess the intensity of landuse practices for different purposes. As all the local administrative units of Kutubdia Island have disproportionate distribution of population and diverse agricultural practices. In Tables 31a and 31b show area of specific landuse patterns for the year of 2012 in square kilometers for the individual local administrative unit known as union. The results show in 2012 an estimated 37 percent of Kutubdia Island’s land was used for salt farming and 31 percent of land is used for crop production.

Table 31a.The 2012 landuse patterns of Kutubdia Island

Union Name Population Salt Crop Built Water Bodies

(2011) (km²) Land Area (km²)

(km²) (km²)

Uttar Dhurung 28035 6.33 6.57 0.35 0.78

DakshinDhurung 17279 2.35 2.95 0.28 0.62

Lemsikhali 19028 8.52 3.12 0.25 0.62

Kaiyarbil 12945 2.28 1.88 0.11 0.36

Baraghop 25488 1.63 3.99 0.39 0.45

Ali Akbar Deil 22504 4.16 2.88 0.25 0.28

Total 125279 25.27 21.39 1.63 3.11

Table 31b. The 2012 landuse patterns of Kutubdia Island

Union Name Bare Swamp Homestead Embankment Total Area (km²)

Field (km²) Forest (km²)

(km²) (km²)

Uttar Dhurung 0.46 0.20 2.13 0.06 16.88

DakshinDhurung 0.12 0.12 2.00 0.03 8.48

Lemsikhali 1.27 0.19 1.43 0.02 15.42

Kaiyarbil 0.40 0.13 1.23 0.04 6.43

Baraghop 1.54 0.25 2.14 0.04 10.42

Ali Akbar Deil 0.09 2.05 1.28 0.07 11.05

Total 3.88 2.94 10.21 0.26 68.68

4.7.10 Discussion

In Bangladesh frequent natural disasters and environmental change have already impacted the country’s food production and livelihoods of people. The amount of land loss over the years is an alarming matter for the people of Kutubdia Island as well as a national threat to

Bangladesh while it has a concern of food supplies to its ever-increasing population.

Land covers on Kutubdia Island between 1972 and 2013 have experienced changes between 25 percent to 30 percent (see Table 29). The major changes were land changed from agriculture to water between 2009 to 2013. Between the years of 1972 and 2013 Kutubdia Island lost an estimated 9 km² of area to the sea due to coastal erosion. According to the local officials and people in recent years much cultivable land has been converted to salt farm. Because, people of Kutubdia Island found salt farming is more profitable than producing crops because crop productions are often affected by natural disasters such as cyclones and tidal waves.

Additionally, fragile embankments and caused salt water intrusion to the cultivable land lead to crop failure. People of this island started cultivating salt on their land where previously crops and vegetables were produced. Once a land is use used for salt cultivation purpose ultimately that land may loss its soil texture and fertility for crop productions. People of Kutubdia Island did not have any landuse planning for their agricultural practices. The local crops and vegetables productions have decreased due to the increasing trend of salt farming in crop land. The farmers on Kutubdia Island do not have option to avoid salt farming because every year a huge amount of crop land is impacted by salt water intrusion. However, some families found salt farming is a lucrative economic activity as it became a source of income and small business in the area. To alleviate poverty and address food security concerns, building sea walls/embankment that can ensure that land that are used for crop production should preserve and protect from intrusion of salt water from the ocean to the inland. 99

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUDING REMARKS

People live on Kutubdia Island lack natural resources, employment opportunities, infrastructures, health care facilities, education about adaptation, mitigation, and preparedness to address the impacts of natural hazards and climate change. Fishing communities of Kutubdia

Island are more vulnerable due to their occupation compared to the people who are not involved in fishing. The fishing communities lack knowledge about the safety of their lives. The fishers who fish at deep sea and near shore often ignore the weather forecast that a radio provides and do not carry the safety equipment they needed for an emergency during their fishing activities. As a consequence to ignoring these factors many families lost their fishers and became poorer. Every year fishing communities experience death/disappearing of fishers at sea, but little attention is paid to the need of safety equipment (e.g., life jackets, radios, and lifebuoys) on fishing boats.

Only a minimal number of fishing boats carry adequate safety equipment with them while they fish at sea.

Fishing communities of Kutubdia Island, are facing multiple challenges and vulnerability in their livelihoods because of their occupational limitations as well as the place where they live.

This study was an effort to understand the perceptions within fishing communities about natural hazards, vulnerability, and their livelihoods. The survey results indicate that fishing communities provided important information regarding the environmental changes they have experienced in their place they live, challenges they face in their fishing activities, reasons behind death/missing or fishers, safety equipment issues, and consequence to the families that lost fishers. According to the survey results an estimated 109 fishers died or disappeared since 1991 to 2012. Out of that

100

109 an estimated 47 missing case of fishers were family members of households and others were reported as their relatives.

Most of the families that lost fishers face multiple socio-economic challenges and psychological shocks. Women became widows and lost their husband who used to earn money for the entire family, children face multiple shocks and frequently have trouble meeting their needs. There are no legal bindings to pay compensation to the victim’s family, so lessors often take advantage of that to avoid their responsibilities to the surviving families.

According to the focus group discussion results, ordinary fishers and lessors were criticizing each other in terms of providing the safety equipment. In case of a death/missing of a fisher, lessors mentioned that they support the victims’ family as best they can. On the other hand, fishers mentioned that they do not receive that adequate help from the lessors rather than a lump sum amount of money as compensation. Often lessors try to avoid their responsibilities for the victim’s family by saying that fisher died because of diseases (e.g., heart attacks and snake bites) which seems unreasonable to the families that lost fishers. Sometimes, lessors are helpless if they lost their entire investment at sea and became poorer.

In terms vulnerability of place, both the environmental and human activities are invariably responsible. Due to the environmental change, resource availability, frequent embankment breaching, and occupational reasons people of Kutubdia Island have been changing their occupational activities (e.g., agriculture to salt cultivation).This is creating a concern for the local agricultural production and food security in the region and for the country as a whole.

According to the survey results many fishers expressed interest to adopt salt cultivation as their primary occupation over fishing as salt farming became much popular in the region in recent years. However, when scarcities of resources prevail on some areas then people have limited or

101 no option but to adopt available economic activities to support their families. Salt production on a crop land cannot be considered as an environment friendly on Kutubdia Island where limited cultivable land is available. Increasing salinity in soil will deteriorate the soil fertility which will ultimately affect in the local crop productions and create food security concerns. Salt cultivation is considered now as an alternative source of income and employment opportunity. By conducting change detection analysis of land cover from 1972 to 2013 land and assessing the

2012 land-use patterns it was possible to provide information to assist concerned authority and policy makers to adopt sustainable land-use planning to cope with the rapidly changing land cover and landuse in the region.

5.1 Specific Recommendations

1. Government needs to provide education and awareness about safety at sea to the

fishers.

2. Develop community based initiatives that can unite the voice of fishers (e.g., union

for fishers) and provide support to the fishing communities.

3. Carrying safety equipment should be mandatory for the fishing boats (near shore and

deep sea) and all the safety equipment should be provided by the boat owners. Fishers

who own their fishing boat would have to buy their own necessary safety equipment.

4. Provide essential medicines and first aid kits for fishers during the time they go for

long fishing trip.

5. Provide interest free or low interest loans to both the boat owners and ordinary

fishers.

102

6. Provide Global Positioning System (GPS) so that fishers can navigate to their fishing

grounds and can come back to their villages.

7. Increase the coverage area of cell phone networks by establishing new tower stations

along the coast.

8. The Navy and Coast Guard should be more concerned about the safety of fishers at

sea or create a new force (sea police) who can take care of the fishers in case of pirate

attacks.

9. Establish legal obligations by the Government that can make sure the victim’s family

can get compensation by the boat owners, in case of boat owners/ lessors lost their

boat should get compensation directly from the Government.

10. To reduce local vulnerability a sustainable landuse planning through community

involvement is needed to be adapted with the environmental changes.

11. Provide housing and shelters for the families that lost their homes to the sea and live

on the embankment.

12. Secure the embankment around Kutubdia Island by reengineering the structure and

design of the embankments as it is an older model and is less durable to protect

coastal hazards.

13. Allocate money to maintain the embankment as well as need regular monitoring.

14. To ensure a sustainable development and for addressing the food security concern in

the region, community awareness and education about landuse and environmental

issues are essential.

103

Initiatives that start from community and local levels are necessary to address the vulnerability and livelihoods issues of fishing communities. At the community level increasing the awareness by proving education and training about safety issues of fishers at sea is essential.

It is necessary to improve the relationships among the ordinary fishers, lessors, and leader. To do that people need to have some windows of opportunity for sharing their stories and exchange greetings between each other and sit and meet together at some socio-cultural events (e.g., wedding ceremony). This kind of activity might be able to develop a better understanding and relationships among the ordinary fishers, lessors, and leaders families. A friendly relationship and doing well for people and community initiatives can make a big difference in terms of developing a better relationship among the fishing communities. In figure 25 summary of the above mentioned list of recommendations is presented as a model to reduce vulnerability of fishing communities. Government of Bangladesh, Non-government Organizations (NGOs),

International NGOs, and local authority may find this model useful.

104

5.1.2 Proposed Model for Reduction of Vulnerability of Fishing Communities of Kutubdia

Island

Figure 25. Vulnerability reduction model for fishing communities

5.1.3 Future Considerations

This study was an initiative to examine the fishing communities that are located in a highly vulnerable area of coastal Bangladesh. It is a micro level study. This kind of study is necessary to address vulnerability, livelihoods, and the impact of climate change locally and

105 regionally. The other coastal fishing communities may be extended to that experience multiple natural hazards that kill fishers and cause socio-economic damage that adversely impacts on their livelihoods. Broader studies that focus on all the fishing communities of coastal Bangladesh could provide a bigger picture of the country’s entire coastal fishing communities vulnerability and livelihoods scenarios. This will help to address the vulnerability and livelihoods issues and provide information useful to reduce vulnerability of fishing communities.

5.1.4 Contribution to Literature

This study ties together the environmental and social vulnerabilities of fishing communities in the tradition of human-environmental research. In recent years research on human-environmental interaction has attracted more researchers and learners from a variety of disciplines and thus interdisciplinary studies are gaining popularity for solving problems that society faces. The results of this study could be a source for researchers, educators, and other professionals that are interested in vulnerability and livelihoods, human-environment interactions, and interdisciplinary studies.

This research contributes to the literature of natural hazards and perceptions of fishing communities on Kutubdia Island, Bangladesh. This research was initiated to explore the consequence of families that experienced disappearing of their family member/members during fishing at sea. No prior literature exist that focused on the number of fishers who disappeared and the consequence to the remaining family members on Kutubdia Island, Bangladesh. Using qualitative technique such as field notes, informal conversations with local residents, and focus group discussion provide more in-depth information that may not be possible to extract by using quantitative analysis. However, in this research both the qualitative and quantitative techniques

106 were applied to examine the environmental and social vulnerability and livelihoods of fishing communities. This research revealed the nature of relationships between the ordinary fishers and the boat owners. For example, the boat owners provided information about safety equipment on board is contradictory to the ordinary fishers. Based upon the findings through questionnaire surveys, field visits, and focus group discussion, this research has provided a significant contribution to the literature of fishing communities and their livelihoods.

Utilization of Geographic Information Systems (GIS), Global Positioning System (GPS), and Remote Sensing tools have been very useful for addressing environmental and social issues that people face in their environment. Kutubdia Island experienced a land loss and land cover changes over the years due to the continuous threats by natural hazards and population growth.

Geospatial tools were used at the same time while this study was conducted to examine change of land cover for 41 years period, and land user pattern of the year 2012. The results of the geospatial analysis is important for the Government of Bangladesh to adopt adaptive measures for addressing deterioration of farm land due to coastal erosion and soil salinity, and to protect the island by building sea walls and reengineering the embankments around Kutubdia Island.

Using Contour GPS spatial videos of Kutubdia Island has been collected in 2012. This spatial videos are stored in my personal archive for future study associated with the environment and people of Kutubdia Island.

Finally, I would like to mention that this study is a base line for moving forward for community based vulnerability and livelihoods research along with the application of Geospatial tools. Obviously there is a lot more to explore and learn about the coastal communities in

Bangladesh.

107

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adger, W.N. 2006: Vulnerability. Global Environmental Change, 16(3): 268-281.

Ahmad, Q.K. 2003: Regional cooperation in flood management in the Ganges- Brahmaputra-Meghna region: Bangladesh perspective. Natural Hazards, 28(1): 191-198.

Ahmed, A.U., and S. Neelormi. 2008: The impacts of climate change on marine socio-ecological systems: The plight of coastal fisher folk communities in Bangladesh. Article Presented at, Coping with Global Change in Marine Social-Ecological Systems: 8- 11. Rome: FAO.

Ahmed, M.K., S. Halim, and S. Sultana. 2012: Participation of women in aquaculture in three coastal districts of Bangladesh: Approaches toward sustainable livelihood. World Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 8(3): 253-268.

Alam, E., and A.E. Collins. 2010: Cyclone Disaster Vulnerability and Response Experiences in Coastal Bangladesh. Disasters, 34(4): 931-954.

Ali, A. 1996: Vulnerability of Bangladesh to climate change and sea level rise through tropical cyclones and storm surges. Water, Air, & Soil Pollution, 92(1): 171-179.

Allison, E.H., A.L. Perry, M. C. Badjeck, W. Neil Adger, K. Brown, D. Conway, A. S. Halls, G. M. Pilling, J. D. Reynolds, and N. L. Andrew. 2009. Vulnerability of national economies to the impacts of climate change on fisheries. Fish and Fisheries, 10(2): 173-196.

BBS (Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics). 2011: Bangladesh Population and Housing Census 2011. Dhaka: Ministry of Planning. Accessed on 23 October 2012 at: http://www.bbs.gov.bd/PageWebMenuContent.aspx?MenuKey=430

Bene, C. 2003: When fishery rhymes with poverty: a first step beyond the old paradigm on poverty in small-scale fisheries. World Development, 31: 949–975.

Bene, C. 2009: Are fishers poor or vulnerable? Assessing economic vulnerability in small-scale fishing communities. The Journal of Development Studies, 45(6): 911-933.

108

Bene, C., B. Hersoug, and E.H. Allison. 2010: Not by rent alone: Analysing the pro‐poor functions of small‐Scale fisheries in developing countries. Development Policy Review, 28(3): 325-358.

Blaikie, P., T. Cannon, I. Davis, and B. Wisner. 1994: At Risk: Natural Hazards, People’s Vulnerability and Disasters. Routledge: London.

Brouwer, R., S. Akter, L. Brander, and E. Haque.2007: Socioeconomic vulnerability and adaptation to environmental risk: A case study of climate change and flooding in Bangladesh. Risk Analysis, 27(2): 313-326.

BOBLME. 2010: Status of hilsa (Tenualosailisha) management in the Bay of Bengal. BOBLME-2010-Ecology-01. Accessed on 30 March 2013 at: http://www.boblme.org/documentRepository/BOBLME-2010-Ecology-01.pdf

Burton, I. and R.W. Kates. 1964: The perception of natural hazards in resource management. Natural Resources Journal, (3): 412-441.

Carney, D. 1998: Implementing the sustainable rural livelihoods approach. Chapter 1.Sustainable rural livelihoods: What contribution can we make? Department for International Development, London, UK. Accessed 21 January 2013 at: http://www.phuhlisani.com/oid%5Cdownloads%5CCh1.pdf

Chowdhury, M.T.H., Z.P. Sukhan, and M.A. Hannan. 2010: Climate change and its impact on fisheries resources in Bangladesh. Proc. of International Conference on Environmental Aspects of Bangladesh (ICEAB10), Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.Iceab10. Accessed 10 October 2012 at: http://benjapan.org/iceab10/22.pdf

Chowdhury, S.R., M.S. Hossain, M. Shamsuddoha, and S. Khan. 2012: Coastal fishers’ livelihood in peril: Sea surface temperature and tropical cyclones in Bangladesh. Center for Participatory Research and Development (CPD), British High Commission.1-55. Dhaka, Bangladesh. India environment portal. Accessed 22 October 2012 at: http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/reports-documents/coastal-fishers%E2%80%99- livelihood-peril-sea-surface-temperature-and-tropical-cyclones

Curtis, A., and J.W. Mills. 2012: Spatial video data collection in a post-disaster

109

landscape: The Tuscaloosa Tornado of April 27th 2011. Applied Geography, 32(2): 393- 400.

Curtis, A., J.K. Blackburn, J.M. Widmer, and G. Morris. 2013: A ubiquitous method for street scale spatial data collection and analysis in challenging urban environments: mapping health risks using spatial video in Petit-Goave, Haiti. International Journal of Health Geographics, 12(1): 21.

Cutter, S.L. 2003:The vulnerability of science and the science of vulnerability. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 93(1): 1-12.

Cutter, S.L.1996: Vulnerability to environmental hazards. Progress in Human Geography, 20(4): 529-539.

Daily Star .2011: Water salinity and maternal health. Accessed 25 May 2013 at: http://archive.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=188591

Dasgupta, S., B. Laplante, S. Murray, and D. Wheeler. 2009: Sea-level rise and storm surges: A comparative analysis of impacts in developing countries. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper Series, Vol (2009).The World Bank.

Dasgupta, S., M. Huq, Z.H. Khan, M.M.Z. Ahmed, N. Mukherjee, M. Khan, and K. Pandey. 2010: Vulnerability of Bangladesh to cyclones in a changing climate: Potential damages and adaptation cost. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper Series, Vol (2010).The World Bank.

Deb AK, and C.E. Haque. 2011: ‘Sufferings Start from the Mother’s Womb’: Vulnerabilities and livelihood war of the small-scale fishers of Bangladesh. Sustainability, 3(12): 2500-2517.

Dewan, A.M., Y.Yamaguchi, and M.Z. Rahman. 2012: Dynamics of land use/cover changes and the analysis of landscape fragmentation in Dhaka Metropolitan, Bangladesh. Geo Journal, 77(3): 315-330.

DFID (undated) Fisheries Management Science Programme (FMSP) and Marine Resources Assessment Group (MRAG) Ltd. UK.Policy Brief 4 (MARG and DFID). Accessed 10 March 2012 at: www.mrag.co.uk/Documents/PolicyBrief4_Livelihoods.pdf

110

DoDM (Department of Disaster Management). 2012: Ministry of Disaster Management and Relief. Peoples Republic of Bangladesh. Dhaka, Bangladesh. Accessed 25 May 2013 at: http://www.ddm.gov.bd/salinityinstrusion.php

DoF (Department of Fisheries). 2011: Jatiyo Matsya Soptaho Sonkolon. Department of Fisheries, Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock. The Government of Peoples Republic of Bangladesh, Dhaka.

EGIS/WARPO. 1996: Datum and map projections for GIS and GPS applications in Bangladesh (Technical Note 10). Dhaka: Water Resources Planning Organization, Government of Bangladesh.

Ericson, J.P., C.J. Vörösmarty, S.L. Dingman, L.G. Ward, and M. Meybeck. 2006: Effective sea-level rise and deltas: Causes of change and human dimension implications. Global and Planetary Change, 50(1): 63-82.

Hossain, A.M., M.I. Reza, S. Rahman, and I. Kayes. 2012: Climate change and its impacts on the livelihoods of the vulnerable people in the southwestern coastal zone in Bangladesh. Climate Change and the Sustainable use of Water Resources, 237-259.

Hossain, M.M. 2012: Storm surges and coastal erosion in Bangladesh-state of the system, climate change impacts and 'low regret' adaptation measures. MA Thesis., Leibniz Universität Hannover, Hannover, Germany. World Meteorological Organization. Accessed 30 October 2012 at: http://library.wmo.int/pmb_ged/thesis/bangladesh_mahtab-hossain.pdf

Hussain, M.G. and Hoq, M.E. (eds.). 2010: Sustainable Management of Fisheries Resources of the Bay of Bengal- Compilation of national and regional workshop reports. Support to Sustainable Management of the BOBLME Project, Bangladesh Fisheries Research Institute. SBOBLMEP Pub./Rep. 2. 122 p. Bay of Bengal Large Marine Ecosystem Project. Accessed 30 October 2012 at: http://www.boblme.org/documentRepository/BOB%20Bangladesh%20Report.pdf

Hutton, D., and C.E. Haque. 2003: Patterns of coping and adaptation among erosion-induced displacees in Bangladesh: implications for hazard analysis and mitigation. Natural Hazards, 29(3): 405-421.

IPCC. 2007: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. IPCC: New York.

111

Islam, M.A. 1974: Tropical Cyclones: Coastal Bangladesh. In Gilbert White (E.d.).Natural Hazards: Local, national, global. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 19-25.

———. (1980): Agricultural adjustments to flooding in Bangladesh: A preliminary report. National Geographical Journal of India, 26: 50-59.

Islam, M.M., and J. Herbeck. 2013: Migration and Translocal Livelihoods of Coastal Small-scale Fishers in Bangladesh. The Journal of Development Studies, (ahead-of-print), 1-14.

Islam, S. 2012: Bangladesh launches community insurance for 2 million fishermen. In Thomson Reuters Foundation, Published on 18 Dec 2012. Accessed 20 January 2013 at: http://www.trust.org/item/?map=bangladesh-launches-community-insurance-for-2- million-fishermen

Islam, M.M. 2011: Living on the margin: The poverty-vulnerability nexus in the small-scale fisheries of Bangladesh. In S. Jentoft & A. Eide. Poverty Mosaics: Realities and Prospects in Small-scale Fisheries, 71-95.

Islam, M.R. 2004: Where land meets the sea: A profile of the coastal zone of Bangladesh Published for Program Development Office for Integrated Coastal Zone Management Plan (PDO-ICZMP), Water Resources Planning Organization (WARPO), University Press, Dhaka, Bangladesh.

———.2008: ICZM Initiatives and practices in Bangladesh. In: Integrated Coastal Zone Management, eds. Krishnamurthy R.R., Andreas Kannen, A. L. Ramanathan, Stefano Tinti, Bruce C. Glavovic, David R. Green, Zengcui Han, and Tundi S. Agardy, Research Publishing Services, 81–82, Singapore.

Jentoft, S., P. Onyango, and M.M. Islam. (2010): Freedom and poverty in the fishery commons. International Journal of the Commons, 4(1): 345-366.

Kabir, K.R., R.K.Adhikary, M.B. Hossain, and M.H. Minar. 2012. Livelihood Status of Fishermen of the Old Brahmaputra River, Bangladesh. World Applied Sciences Journal, 16(6): 869-873.

112

Khan, T.M.A., O.P. Singh, and M.D.S. Rahman. 2000: Recent sea level and sea surface temperature trends along the Bangladesh coast in relation to the frequency of intense cyclones. Marine Geodesy, 23(2): 103-116.

Kolios, S., andStylios, C. D. 2013: Identification of land cover/land use changes in the greaterarea of the Preveza peninsula in Greece using Landsat satellite data. Applied Geography, 40: 150-160.

Kumar,U., M.A. Baten, A.A. Masud, K.S. Osman, and M.M. Rahman. 2010: Cyclone Aila: One Yearon Natural Disaster to Human Sufferings, Unnayan Onneshan, Dhaka, Bangladesh. Unnayan Onneshan. Accessed 24 October 2012 at: http://www.unnayan.org/reports/climate/ailareport_final.pdf

Kumar, L., and M.K. Ghosh.2012: Land cover change detection of Hatiya island, Bangladesh, using remote sensing techniques. Journal of Applied Remote Sensing, 6(1): 063608.

Lein, H. 2009: The poorest and most vulnerable? On hazards, livelihoods and labelling of riverine communities in Bangladesh. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography, 30(1): 98–113.

Mallick, B., K.R. Rahaman, and J. Vogt. 2011: Coastal livelihood and physical infrastructure in Bangladesh after cyclone Aila. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 16(6): 629-648.

Mallick, B., and J. Vogt. 2012: Cyclone, coastal society and migration: Empirical evidence from Bangladesh. International Development Planning Review, 34(3): 217- 240.

—and —. 2009: Analysis of disaster vulnerability for sustainable coastal zone management: A case of cyclone Sidr 2007 in Bangladesh. Paper presented at IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science.

Miah, G., N. Bari, and A. Rahman. 2010: Resource degradation and livelihood in the coastal region of Bangladesh. Frontiers of Earth Science in China, 4(4): 427-437.

Mills, J.W., A. Curtis, B. Kennedy, S.W. Kennedy, and J.D.Edwards. 2010:

113

Geospatial video for field data collection. Applied Geography, 30(4): 533-547.

MoEF (Ministry of Environment and Forests). 2008: Bangladesh Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan.Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, Dhaka, Bangladesh. USAID: Bangladesh Climate Change Strategy. (Accessed 21 October 2012 at: http://transition.usaid.gov/bd/files/04.BangladeshClimateChangeStrategy.pdf

———. 2007. Bangladesh: National Programme of Action for Protection of the Coastal and Marine Environment from Land-Based Activities. Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, Dhaka, Bangladesh. Department of Environment. Accessed 31 October 2012 at: http://www.doe-bd.org/npa_draft.pdf

MoWR (Ministry of Water Resources).2005: Coastal zone policy. Ministry of Water Resources, Government of People’s Republic of Bangladesh. Dhaka, Bangladesh. Prime Minister's Office Library. Accessed12 October 2012 at: http://lib.pmo.gov.bd/legalms/pdf/Costal-Zone-Policy-2005.pdf

Oliver-Smith, A.2004: Theorizing vulnerability in a globalized world: a political Ecological perspective. In Mapping Vulnerability: Disasters, Development and People (eds G. Bankoff et al.). Sterling, VA: Earthscan pp. 10-24.

Ono, Y., and T.W. Schmidlin. 2011: Design and adoption of household tornado shelters for Bangladesh. Natural Hazards, 56(1): 321-330.

Parenti, C. 2011: Tropic of chaos: Climate change and the new geography of violence. New York: Nation Books.

Parvin, G.A., F. Takahashi, and R. Shaw. 2008: Coastal hazards and community- coping methods in Bangladesh. Journal of Coastal Conservation, 12(4): 181-193.

Parry, M.L., O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden, and C.E. Hanson. 2007: Climate change 2007: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Paul, B.K. 2011: Environmental hazards and disasters: Contexts, Perspectives and

114

Management. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.

———. 2009: Why relatively fewer people died? The case of Bangladesh’s Cyclone Sidr. Natural Hazards, 50(2): 289-304.

———. 1997. Flood Research in Bangladesh in Retrospect and Prospect: A Review. Geoforum, 28(2): 121-131.

Paul, S.K., and J.K. Routray. 2009: Flood Proneness and Coping Strategies: The Experiences of Two Villages in Bangladesh. Disasters, 34(2): 489-508.

Penning- Rowsell, E.C., P. Sultana, and P.M. Thompson. 2012: The ‘last resort’? Population movement in response to climate-related hazards in Bangladesh. Environmental Science & Policy, 27: 44-59.

Rabbani, G., S.H. Rahman, and L. Faulkner. 2013: Impacts of Climatic Hazards on the Small Wetland Ecosystems (ponds): Evidence from Some Selected Areas of Coastal Bangladesh. Sustainability, 5(4): 1510-1521.

Rabbani, M.G., A.A. Rahman, and N. Islam. 2010: Climate Change and Sea Level Rise: Issues and Challenges for Coastal Communities in the Indian Ocean Region. In Coastal Zones and Climate Change, eds. Michael, D., and A. Pandya.The Henry L. Stimson Centre: Washington, DC, USA,pp. 17–29.

Rahman, M. H, M. A. Noor, and A. Ahmed. 2011: Climate change impacts and adaptation strategies for Bangladesh. In Climate Change and Growth in Asia, eds. Hossain, M. and E. Selevanathan, 129-146. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Rahman, M., M.F. Tazim, S.C. Dey, A.K.M.S. Azam, and M.R.Islam. 2012: Alternative livelihood options of fishermen of nijhumdwip under Hatiya Upazila of Noakhali District in Bangladesh. Asian J. Rural Development, 2(2): 24-31.

Rashed–Un–Nabi, M., M.A. Hoque, R.A. Rahman, S. Mustafa, and M.A. Kader. 2007: Vulnerability context of the estuarine set bag net fishermen community in Bangladesh. International Journal of Rural Management, 3(2): 213-227.

115

Rawlani, A.K., and B.K. Sovacool. 2011: Building responsiveness to climate change through community based adaptation in Bangladesh. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 16 (8): 845-863.

Rozenstein, O., and A.Karnieli. 2011: Comparison of methods for land-use classification incorporating remote sensing and GIS inputs. Applied Geography, 31(2): 533- 544.

Saroar, M.M., and J.K. Routray. 2010: In situ adaptation against sea level rise (SLR) in Bangladesh: Does awareness matter? International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management, 2(3): 321-345.

Shamsuddoha, M., and R.K.Chowdhury. 2007: Climate change impact and disaster vulnerabilities in the coastal areas of Bangladesh. Dhaka :Coast Trust, UNISDR. Accessed 12 November 2012 at: http://www.unisdr.org/files/4032_DisasterBD.pdf

Singh, A.1989: Review Article Digital change detection techniques using remotely- Sensed data. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 10(6): 989-1003.

Singh, O.P., T.M.A. Khan, and M.S. Rahman. 2001: Has the frequency of intense tropical cyclones increased in the north Indian Ocean? Current Science-Bangalore, 80(4): 575-580.

Torresan, S., A. Critto, M. Dalla Valle, N. Harvey, and A. Marcomini.2008: Assessing Coastal vulnerability to climate change: comparing segmentation at global and regional scales. Sustainability Science, 3(1): 45-65.

Torresan, S., A. Critto, J. Rizzi, and A. Marcomini. 2012: Assessment of coastal vulnerability to climate change hazards at the regional scale: The case study of the north Adriatic sea. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst.Sci, 12(7): 2347-2368.

Vidal, J. 2013: Sea change: the Bay of Bengal’s vanishing islands. The Guardian, January 29. Accessed 3rd February 2013 at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/2013/jan/29/sea-change-bay-bengal- vanishing-islands

Wahab, M.A., S. Ahmad‐Al‐Nahid, N. Ahmed, M.M. Haque, and M. Karim.

116

2012: Current status and prospects of farming the giant river prawn Macrobrachium Rosenbergii (De Man) in Bangladesh. Aquaculture Research, 43(7): 970-983.

WCED.1987. Food 2000 : Global policies for sustainable agriculture : A report of the Advisory Panel on Food Security, Agriculture, Forestry, and Environment to the World Commission on Environment and Development. Zed Books: London; New Jersey.

Wentz, E. A., Stefanov, W. L., Gries, C., and Hope, D. 2006: Land use and land cover mapping from diverse data sources for an arid urban environments. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 30(3), 320-346.

White, G.F. 1945: Human Adjustment to Floods. Department of Geography Research Paper no. 29. Chicago: The University of Chicago.

White, G.F. (ed.). 1974: Natural Hazard: Local, National, Global. New York: OX- ford University Press.

Whittingham, E., J. Campbell, and P. Townsley. 2003: Poverty and reefs. Vol-1, IMM Ltd, Exeter,UK. Accessed 10 November 2012 at: http://www.jodc.go.jp/info/ioc_doc/Other/131839e.pdf

Wisner, B., P. Blaikie, T. Cannon, and I. Davis. 2004: At risk: natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters. London: Routledge.

World-risk-report.2012: Alliance Development Works; Institute of Environment and Security and United Nations University. Alliance Development Works, October 14, 2012. Accessed 14 October 2012 at: http://www.nature.org/ourinitiatives/habitats/oceanscoasts/howwework/world-risk-report- 2012-pdf.pdf

World Bank. 2010: Bangladesh - Additional Financing for the Emergency 2007 Cyclone Recovery and Restoration Project. The World Bank: Washington D.C.

Yardley, J. 2012: Export powerhouse feels pangs of labor strife. New York Times, February 10, 2013. Accessed 10 February 2013 at: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/24/world/asia/as-bangladesh-becomes-export- powerhouse-labor-strife-erupts.html?pagewanted=all

117

Zaman, M.Q. 1989: The social and political context of adjustment to riverbank erosion hazard and population resettlement in Bangladesh. Human Organization, 48(3): 196-205.

118

APPENDIX A

Questionnaire

1. How many members of your household currently involved in fishing? Number of people______

2. Do you use your own fishing boats/nets/and materials for fishing? a. Yes b. No

3. If the answer is no, then who provides you the fishing materials? (please provide the details): ______4. What are conditions to get your fishing equipment from lessors? (please provide the details): ______5. Do you go to deep sea for fishing? a. Yes b. No

6. How often you go to deep sea for fishing per year? ______times.

7. How long do you stay on average for a single trip? ______days.

8. Do you experience any /difficulties during fishing activities? a. Yes b. No

9. What are the difficulties you face during your fishing? Please, Specify details: ______10. Did any of your household members drown/ missing during fishing since 1990s? a. Yes (If the answer is yes then, number of people drown______). b. No

11. Did any of your relative drown/ missing during fishing since 1990s? a. Yes (If the answer is yes then, number of people drown______). b. No 12. How many relatives / not your household members are still missing who were involved in fishing? Number of people______

119

13. What time of the year the fishers/ fisher drowned/ missing? a. January to March b. April to June c. July to September d. October to December

14. How did they die? Please, Specify the reason/ reasons: a. ______.b______c. ______d. ______

15. Did you find the dead body of missing fisher/fishers? a. Yes b. No ( please, specify the reason) ______16. Do you have any training before you go on board for fishing? a. Yes b. No

17. If yes, then what are they? ______18. What happen when someone drowns and his remaining family, wife and kids? (Please provide your details): ______19. Do you prefer to quit fishing as a profession? a. Yes b. No 20. What are the other alternative profession/ professions that you prefer? a. Salt cultivation b. Small business c. Day labor d. Cultivation of rice or vegetables e. Others, please specify______

21. Do you think you have all safety equipment (e.g. life Jackets) on board while you go for fishing? a. Yes b. No (If the answer is yes, then please skip question no. 22).

22. If the answer is no, then please specify what are the essential tools and equipment that you need on board to make sure your safety at sea? a. ______b. ______c. ______d.______e.______

120

23. Do you think your company/ boat owner provides all safety materials what you need for your safety on board? a. Yes b. No (If the answer is no, then please provide what are the limitations). ______24. Do you carry radio on board during fishing? a. Yes b. No

25. Do you carry compass on board during fishing? a. Yes b. No

26. Do you follow the signals and forecast that radio provides you during fishing at sea? a. Yes b. No

27. If the answer is no then what makes you ignoring the radio forecast for bad weather? (Please specify details): ______28. Do you carry cell phone during your fishing trip at sea? a. Yes b. No

29. Did you experience any sickness during your fishing trips? a. Yes b. No 30. If the answer is yes, then what are they? a. Vomiting b. Dizziness c. Diarrhea d. Others ______31. Do you have experience that some of your peer fishermen faced health related problems or sickness on board? a. Yes b. No 32. If the answer is yes, then what are they? a.Vomiting b. Dizziness c. Diarrhea d. Others ______

33. Do you carry first aid box that has primary medicines for any emergency? a. Yes b. No

34. How do you manage when a person get sick on board: ______35. What precautionary measures you take if the weather is bad during fishing? a. Stop fishing and go to safer place b. Come back to shore c. Continue fishing d. Others______

121

36. Who decides whether you should continue fishing or not during rough weather? ______

37. What do you consider as a first priority during your fishing operation? a. Safety of your life b. Boat, nets/ and other valuables things on board c. Number of fish you catch? d. Others please, specify______38. Did you notice any changes of the Island in terms of environmental changes over time? a. Yes b. No (If the answer is no please, skip question no. 39).

39. What are the changes? ______

40. Do you think that natural disaster events like floods, cyclones, and storm surges have changed in the last 20 / or more years? a. Yes b. No ( If the answer is no then, skip Question no. 41) 41. How they have changed?

No Not Name of disasters Decreased Increased change sure A. Coastal erosion 1 2 3 4 B. Coastal floods 1 2 3 4 C. Cyclones 1 2 3 4 D. Storm surges 1 2 3 4 E. Tidal waves 1 2 3 4

42. Do you think environmental change influenced on your fishing activities and livelihoods? a. Yes b. No 43. Do you think environmental changes over time impacted on production of fish and your catch? a. Yes b. No

44. Do you see any species of fish is no more available that you used to catch them before? a. Yes b. No

122

45. Please, specify the name and number of fish species that is scarce now at sea? a. Name/names______b. Number______

46. In your opinion what are the reasons behind losing fish species? Please, specify-

a. ______b. ______c. ______d. ______

47. What is your overall experience about environmental change over time in this Island that influence on your livelihoods? ______

48. Have you changed your living place in the last 20 or so years? a. Yes ( If the answer is yes then why you had to move or relocate): ______b. No ( If the answer is No then skip Question no 49)

49. If the answer is yes, then how far you had to move? ______

50. Did you buy that land to move your home? a. Yes b. No

51. If the answer is no how did you access to that land? ______

52. Housing type /building materials? a. Roof______b. Wall______c. Floor______

53. What is the highest level of education of your household members age over 18 years? a. Primary (1-5 level) b. High school (5- 10 level) c. College (12+) d. Illiterate

54. What is your education level? (a) Primary (1-5 level) (b) High school (5- 10 level) (c) College (12+) (d) Illiterate

123

55. What is your household size now? Number of people______

56. What are the current income sources and monthly incomes of your family? Source Names Monthly income in Taka a. Primary ( ) - ______b. Secondary ( ) - ______c. Tertiary ( ) - ______

57. Do you have debt from Banks/NGO’s/Companies or Lessees? a. Yes b. No 58. If you have debt the, how much? Amount ______in Taka/USD. 59. What is your age? ___years old.

124

APPENDIX B

IRB Approval

From: KIEHL, LAURIE Date: Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 2:59 PM Subject: IRB approval for Protocol application #12-019 - please retain this email for your records To: "[email protected]" Cc: "SCHMIDLIN, THOMAS"

RE: Protocol #12-019 entitled “Environmental and Social Vulnerability and Livelihoods of Fishing Communities in Kutubdia Island, Bangladesh”

I am pleased to inform you that the Kent State University Institutional Review Board has reviewed and approved your Application for Approval to Use Human Research Participants as Level I/Exempt research. This application was approved on February 7, 2012. Your research project involves minimal risk to human subjects and meets the criteria for the following category of exemption under federal regulations:

Exemption 2: Research involving the use of educational tests, surveys, interviews, or observation of public behavior.

Exemption 3: Research involving the use of educational tests, surveys, interview procedures, or observation of public behavior not exempt under category 2, but subjects are elected or appointed public officials or candidates for public office.

***Submission of annual review reports is not required for Level 1/Exempt projects.

125

If any modifications are made in research design, methodology, or procedures that increase the risks to subjects or includes activities that do not fall within the approved exemption category, those modifications must be submitted to and approved by the IRB before implementation. Please contact the IRB administrator to discuss the changes and whether a new application must be submitted. It is important for you to also keep an unstamped text copy (i.e., Microsoft Word version) of your consent form for subsequent submissions.

Kent State University has a Federal Wide Assurance on file with the Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP); FWA Number 00001853.

If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me by phone at 330-672-2704 or by email at [email protected].

126