| || || Veitayaki, Joeli.|
| || || Village-level fishing in Fiji : a case study of Qoma Island|
Institution: University of the South Pacific.
Subject: Fisheries -- Fiji, Fisheries -- Fiji -- Qoma
Call No.: pac SH 319 .F5 V45
Copyright:Under 10% of this thesis may be copied without the authors written permission
Abstract: Fiji has an agriculture-based economy with the sugar industry employing a large proportion of the labour force and providing the largest component of the nation's total export earnings. Such over-dependence on a single commodity makes Fiji extremely vulnerable to economic and natural factors beyond its immediate control and underlines the need to diversify the economy. The government's commitment to economic diversification has led to attempts to broaden the agricultural base with crops such as rice, ginger, citrus and cocoa, to rehabilitate the traditionally important copra industry, and to develop other sectors such as tourism, forestry, and fisheries to allow the nation reasonable independence and stability. Fisheries, a resource base whose contribution and significance has long been ignored despite its potential importance and ready availability, is now regarded and treated as one of the most promising sectors for development, with capital, infrastructure, training, technical support and other assistance being provided to stimulate its development. This study looks at fisheries development in Fiji, with particular emphasis on village-level fisherfolk, an area often neglected in modern fisheries development which commonly focuses on large-scale commercial or industrial fisheries development for overseas export (Christy, 1986:119). According to Brandt (1984) and Christy (1986), small-scale fisherfolk have always been considered poor. In this study, which focuses specifically on the fisherfolk of Qonia Village in Tailevu Province, Fiji, I hope to explore if they are poor and, if so, the underlying reasons for their poverty. I will also show the vital role they play, in the development of rural areas and nations. I agree with Meltzoff and LiPuma (1986:61) that "national elites and development planners can only guide the trajectory of a social economy already in motion, already animated by logic and interest of its own, but can never successfully super-impose a development scheme to re-organise the economy, whatever its technical and economic merits may be.