assessing vulnerability to climate change and variability
TRANSCRIPT
CERMES Technical Report No. 83
Assessing vulnerability to climate change and
variability at Six Men’s Bay fishing community
CHARLETTE K. ALLEYNE-GREENE
Centre for Resource Management and Environmental Studies
Faculty of Science and Technology
The University of the West Indies
Cave Hill Campus
2016
i
ABSTRACT
Assessing vulnerability to climate change and variability
at Six Men’s Bay fishing community
Charlette K. Alleyne-Greene
Projections for Barbados reveal an anticipated increase in climate variability and extremes.
For instance, higher sea surface temperatures leading to high mortality rates of corals and
reef habitat degradation due to coral bleaching, less annual precipitation causing frequent
drought, and more intense storms and hurricanes. Climate change and variability affect
everyone who depends on the fishing industry, not only the fishers, but the entire fisheries
value chain. The fishing industry of Barbados is extremely vulnerable to climate change and
variability; since it has limited social, economic, physical and environmental resources. In
any effort to build the adaptive capacity and resilience of a fishing community, it is
imperative first to comprehend the main elements of vulnerability: the exposure, sensitivity
and impact. The overall aim of this research project was to investigate the vulnerability of a
community-based landing site and households to climate change and variability via an
assessment at Six Men’s Bay fishing community; in order to inform national planning for
climate adaptation along the entire fisheries value chain. Both climate and non-climate
stressors can affect coastal communities. The methodology integrated Socio-economic
Monitoring for Coastal Management (SocMon) climate change variables and the
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRCRCS) Vulnerability
and Capacity Assessment (VCA). By using an integrated participatory methodology to assess
vulnerability, the Six Men’s Bay fishing community and households identified critical
climate and non-climate factors to evaluate their capacity and reduce vulnerability.
The results revealed that the community members and fishery households are highly
vulnerable to climate change and variability, and in most cases they have a low adaptive
capacity. The community members identified various exposures to climate and non-climate
hazards. These stemmed from coastal erosion, marine inundation, reef mortality, traffic, fire,
land-based pollution, among others. Consequently, appropriate adaptation strategies were
proposed to build resilience of the fishing community and fishery households of Six Men’s
Bay. Among the proposed adaptation strategies included:
Public awareness,
Community climate adaptation committee,
Fisherfolk organisation and fishing vessel insurance,
Diversification of livelihoods and alternative livelihoods training,
Coral restoration and coral defence infrastructure at Six Men’s Bay,
Road caution signage for public safety,
Solid waste management and drainage monitoring,
Fire hazard reduction,
Unification of disaster risk management and climate adaptation.
Keywords: adaptation, Barbados, climate change, fisheries, resilience, variability,
vulnerability
ii
DEDICATION
The research paper on which this Technical Report is based was dedicated to my family for
their unconditional love and support. I also dedicated it to the memory of my father and best
friend, who would have been happy to see me achieve my MSc. in Natural Resource and
Environmental Management.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
It has been a challenging task preparing this report. I could not have successfully completed
it without the assistance and encouragement of a number of persons. At this point, I would
like to take this opportunity to thank those individuals.
I would like to express my indebtedness to my supervisor, Dr. Patrick McConney, for his
continuous support, guidance, and motivation throughout this research project. Honestly, I
have to admit that Dr. McConney has helped tremendously with my development throughout
this Master of Science programme. I could not imagine having a better supervisor for my
MSc. Research Paper.
Gratitude is also extended to the staff of the University of the West Indies, Centre for
Resource Management and Environmental Studies for assisting in shaping this research
project; for instance, Maria Pena and Jehroum Wood. Furthermore, special thanks to Ms.
Neetha Selliah for her encouragement through it all.
Special thanks are extended to the staff of the Coastal Zone Management Unit, of the
Ministry of Environment; The Fisheries Division of the Ministry of Agriculture, the
Barbados Meteorological Office, Red Cross Caribbean Disaster Risk Management Centre,
the Caribbean Meteorology and Hydrology Institute, CARIBSAVE, G.B. GeoEngineering
Inc., the Barbados Statistical Service, Barbados National Union of Fisherfolk Organisations,
and the Barbados Land and Surveys Department, of the Ministry of Housing and Lands.
This research paper would not have been accomplished without the assistance and
participation of the fisherfolk community members of Six Men’s Bay, St. Peter; special
thanks to all of them. In particular, to Mr. Anthony Small, who assumed the role of liaison
officer - I thank you.
Special thanks to my family and friends, for their continuous and unwavering support during
this onerous process. Special thanks are extended to my VCA team; my sister Mrs. Annette
Jones, along with my friends Mr. Lenno Headley, Mr. Peterson Yearwood and Mr. Simon
Alleyne for their assistance during the community workshop and scoping exercise.
Most important, I owe a special debt of gratitude to God since he too guided me through the
arduous process of preparing this research project.
iv
LIST OF ACRONYMS
AR5 Fifth Assessment Report
BARNUFO Barbados National Union of Fisherfolk Organisations
CADRIM Red Cross Caribbean Disaster Risk Management Centre
CARICOM Caribbean Community
CCA Climate Change Adaptation
CCCCC Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre
CCDRMF Canada Caribbean Disaster Risk Management Fund
CDEMA Caribbean Disaster Emergency Management Agency
CERMES Centre for Resource Management and Environmental Studies
CIMH Caribbean Institute for Meteorology and Hydrology
CPACC Caribbean Planning for Adaptation to Global Climate Change Project
CRFM Caribbean Regional Fisheries Mechanism
CZMU Coastal Zone Management Unit
DEM Department of Emergency Management
DEO Disaster Emergency Organization
DRM Disaster Relief Management
EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone
FAO Food and Agriculture Organisation
GEF-SGP Global Environment Facility Small Grant Programme
GOB Government of Barbados
GPS Global Positioning System
IFRCRCS International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
IISD International Institute for Sustainable Development
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
NFD Northern Fisheries Development
SIDS Small Island Developing States
SocMon Socio-economic Monitoring for Coastal Management
SST Sea Surface Temperature
TCDPO Town and Country Development Planning Office
UNEP United Nations Environment Programme
UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
USAID United States Agency for International Development
VCA Vulnerability Capacity Assessment
WMO World Meteorological Organization
v
Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Research rationale ...................................................................................................... 2
1.2 Research aim and objectives ...................................................................................... 4
1.3 Organisation of report ................................................................................................ 4
2. LITERATURE REVIEW .............................................................................................. 5
2.1 Climate change and climate variability ...................................................................... 5
2.2 Vulnerability framework concepts ............................................................................. 5
2.2.1 Vulnerability ....................................................................................................... 5
2.2.2 Exposure and sensitivity ..................................................................................... 6
2.2.3 Adaptive capacity, and resilience ....................................................................... 6
2.2.4 Adaptation ........................................................................................................... 7
2.3 Vulnerability assessments .......................................................................................... 7
2.4 Vulnerability to climate change ................................................................................. 8
2.5 Vulnerability of livelihoods ....................................................................................... 9
2.6 Adaptation strategies ................................................................................................ 10
3. METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................................... 10
3.1 Study area ................................................................................................................. 11
3.2 Scoping ..................................................................................................................... 12
3.3 Secondary data collection......................................................................................... 12
3.4 Interviews with key informants ................................................................................ 13
3.5 Vulnerability capacity assessment and SocMon climate change variables .............. 13
3.5.1 Direct observation ............................................................................................. 14
3.5.2 Stakeholders’ participatory workshop .............................................................. 15
3.5.2.1 Historical profile ........................................................................................ 15
3.5.2.2 Seasonal calendar ...................................................................................... 15
3.5.2.3 Capacities list ............................................................................................. 16
3.5.2.4 Transect walk ............................................................................................. 16
3.5.2.5 Community-based hazard mapping ........................................................... 16
3.5.3 SocMon fishery households survey .................................................................. 17
3.6 Limitations ............................................................................................................... 17
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ................................................................................... 19
4.1 Situation analysis...................................................................................................... 19
4.2 Exposure ................................................................................................................... 25
4.2.1 Climate projections for Barbados ..................................................................... 25
4.2.2 Meteorological data results for Barbados ......................................................... 27
4.2.2.1 Temperatures over a 15 year period in Barbados ...................................... 27
vi
4.2.2.2 Precipitation over a 15 year period in Barbados ........................................ 28
4.2.3 Vulnerability to climate and non-climate hazards ............................................ 30
4.2.3.1 Reef mortality at Six Men’s Bay ............................................................... 33
4.2.3.2 Coastal erosion at Six Men’s Bay.............................................................. 35
4.2.3.3 Inundation .................................................................................................. 37
4.2.3.4 Land pollution............................................................................................ 38
4.2.3.5 Traffic hazard ............................................................................................ 39
4.2.3.6 Fire hazard ................................................................................................. 39
4.2.3.7 Flood hazard .............................................................................................. 39
4.2.4 Demographically vulnerable groups ................................................................. 40
4.2.4.1 Educational background ............................................................................ 40
4.2.4.2 Gender roles ............................................................................................... 41
4.3 Sensitivity ................................................................................................................. 43
4.3.1 Dependence on resources and services vulnerable to climate change .............. 43
4.4 Adaptive Capacity .................................................................................................... 45
4.4.1 Dependence on vulnerable resources and income diversification .................... 45
4.4.2 Perceived alternative and supplementary livelihoods ....................................... 50
4.4.3 Awareness of household vulnerability to climate hazards ................................ 51
4.4.4 Access to and use of climate-related knowledge .............................................. 52
4.4.5 Networks supporting climate hazard reduction and adaptation ........................ 53
4.4.6 Ability of community to reorganise .................................................................. 53
4.4.7 Governance and leadership ............................................................................... 54
4.4.8 Equitable access to resources ............................................................................ 55
4.5 Adaptation community consultation meeting .......................................................... 57
5. ADAPTATION STRATEGIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS.............................. 57
5.1 Public awareness and education ............................................................................... 57
5.2 Community climate adaptation committee .............................................................. 58
5.3 Fisherfolk Organisation and fishing vessel insurance .............................................. 59
5.3.1 Fisherfolk organisation ..................................................................................... 59
5.3.2 Group insurance for fishing vessels .................................................................. 59
5.4 Diversification of livelihoods and alternative livelihoods training .......................... 60
5.4.1 Diversification of livelihoods ........................................................................... 60
5.4.2 Training for alternative livelihoods .................................................................. 60
5.5 Coral restoration and coastal defence infrastructure at Six Men’s Bay ................... 60
5.5.1 Coral restoration................................................................................................ 60
5.5.2 Coastal defence infrastructure........................................................................... 61
5.6 Road caution signage for public safety .................................................................... 61
vii
5.7 Solid waste management and drainage monitoring.................................................. 61
5.8 Fire hazard reduction ................................................................................................ 61
5.9 Unification of disaster risk management and climate adaptation ............................ 62
6. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................. 62
7. REFERENCES .............................................................................................................. 62
7.1 Personal Communications ........................................................................................ 67
8. APPENDIX .................................................................................................................... 68
SocMon Fishery Household Survey Instrument ................................................................. 68
Citation:
Alleyne-Greene, C. K. 2016. Assessing vulnerability to climate change and variability at Six
Men’s Bay fishing community. Centre for Resource Management and Environmental
Studies, The University of the West Indies, Cave Hill Campus, Barbados. CERMES
Technical Report No. 83. 77pp.
viii
List of Figures
Figure 1: The study site and other fish landing sites around Barbados. ................................... 3
Figure 2: Vulnerability and resilience schematic diagram. ...................................................... 7
Figure 3: Schematic diagram of the methodologies used in this study................................... 11
Figure 4: 2012 satellite image of Six Men's Bay, St. Peter. ................................................... 12
Figure 5: Proposed 10 indicators to address climate social vulnerability framework. ........... 14
Figure 6: Community-based hazard mapping exercise. .......................................................... 17
Figure 7: Google satellite image of the locations of Six Men's Bay and Half Moon Fort fish
landing sites in Barbados. .............................................................................................. 18
Figure 8: Relative proportion of fishing vessels type in the registered fishing fleet of Six
Men's Bay and their fish landing sites. .......................................................................... 20
Figure 9: Photographs of Six Men's Bay main highway facing north in 1969 and 2015. ...... 23
Figure 10: Schematic diagram of the effects of climate change and variability on the fisheries
value chain at Six Men’s Bay. ....................................................................................... 24
Figure 11: Annual mean maximum temperatures in Barbados (2000-2014). ........................ 27
Figure 12: The mean precipitation of Barbados from 2000 to 2014....................................... 28
Figure 13: Monthly comparison of daytime SST in the Lesser Antilles in 2010 and 2013. .. 30
Figure 14: 2013 satellite image illustrating transect walk path (orange line). ........................ 33
Figure 15: Community-based hazard map of Six Men's Bay. ................................................ 33
Figure 16: Fishing with a seine net nearshore at Six Men's Bay in 1969. .............................. 34
Figure 17: Map of the coastline of Six Men's Bay illustrating erosion since the 1970s (red
line). ............................................................................................................................... 35
Figure 18: A five-year period of Six Men's Bay beach profile data. ...................................... 36
Figure 19: The effect of a northerly swell to the shoreline of Six Men's Bay. ....................... 36
Figure 20: Photograph illustrates the narrow stretch of beach and the highway that becomes
inundated due to climatic events. .................................................................................. 37
Figure 21: 1 in 100-year storm surge flood hazard map of Six Men's Bay. ........................... 38
Figure 22: The highest educational institution for the population of Six Men's Bay. ............ 40
Figure 23: Livelihoods activities by gender (M=Male F=Female) and level of education. ... 41
Figure 24: Schematic diagram of the fish marketing channels reported by the fisherfolk of
Six Men's Bay. ............................................................................................................... 42
Figure 25: Fishery households’ family access to lifelines. ..................................................... 43
Figure 26: Usage of man-made infrastructure at Six Men's Bay. ........................................... 45
Figure 27: Flyingfish, other offshore pelagics and total recorded landings in Six Men's Bay
and Half Moon Fort (1997-2014, excluding 2012). ...................................................... 46
Figure 28: Inshore pelagics and demersal landings in Six Men's Bay and Half Moon Fort
(1997 -2014, excluding 2012). ...................................................................................... 47
ix
Figure 29: Fish pots on the shore of Six Men's Bay in 1969. ................................................. 47
Figure 30: Main livelihood sources for household cash generation and household use. ........ 49
Figure 31: Perceived alternative and supplemental livelihoods. ............................................ 50
Figure 32: Fishery households’ sources of climate-related knowledge .................................. 52
List of Tables
Table 1: Summary of IPCC Climate Change projections for the Caribbean by 2080-2099..... 2
Table 2: Historical Profile produced by the participants at the Six Men’s Bay’s community
workshop 9 August 2015 .............................................................................................. 21
Table 3: List of present reported species caught by registered fishing vessels at Six Men's
Bay. ................................................................................................................................ 24
Table 4: Recorded fish species landed at Six Men's Bay (1997-2004). ................................. 25
Table 5: Climate Change modelling projections for Barbados ............................................... 26
Table 6: Saffir Simpson hurricane scale with Central Barometric Pressure Ranges .............. 26
Table 7: Damage associated with different categories of hurricanes ..................................... 26
Table 8: Direct observation exercise results. .......................................................................... 31
Table 9: Seasonal calendar...................................................................................................... 32
Table 10: Capacities list, inclusive of livelihoods and gender role lists, partly produced by the
participants at the Six Men’s Bay’s community workshop 9 August 2015. ................. 38
Table 11: Responses to the ability of community to reorganize statements. .......................... 54
Table 12: Responses to governance and leadership statements .............................................. 55
Table 13: Responses to equitable access to resources statements .......................................... 56
1
1. INTRODUCTION
The fishing industries in Caribbean Small Island Developing States (SIDS) play a crucial role
in the lives of the local populations. The fisheries are socially and culturally important, offer
livelihood opportunities in rural coastal areas, and can contribute significantly to food
security and poverty alleviation (CRFM 2013). However, the geographic location and size of
Caribbean SIDS make them vulnerable to climatic change, variation and extreme events.
This research project assessed vulnerability to climate change and variability of a
representative community of the Barbados fishing industry. Six Men’s Bay was chosen as the
research site since it is publicly known, via the media, to be vulnerable to impacts such as
erosion that can be caused or exacerbated by climate change. In addition, the community has
fisheries livelihoods that can be negatively impacted by climate change and variability such
as the work of boat builders, fishers, vendors and processors.
Barbados is located 13o 10’N and 59o 32’W in the Atlantic Ocean, and the total land area is
430 square kilometres. As a result, of generally low coastal relief the island’s fishing
communities are susceptible to the potential impacts of climate change and climate
variability, such as an increase in the frequency and intensity of hurricanes and rising sea
level. Severe hurricanes and storms can significantly damage fisheries infrastructure.
Hurricane Allen (1980) destroyed 28 Barbadian fishing vessels, and 92 were damaged
(Hurricane City 2014). Sea level rise may increase the erosion and inundation of the
shoreline space for fishing vessel boatyards and haul-up that is very limited in Barbados
(GOB 2001).
Not only are the island’s landing sites and fishing communities susceptible to the potential
impacts of climate change and variability, such as hydro-meteorological hazards (e.g. floods,
storm surge and hurricanes), but also to geological hazards such as earthquakes and tsunamis.
In 2014 and 2015 the island experienced several seismic events. Geological hazards can have
significant impacts on the fisheries infrastructure, which in turn can negatively affect the
livelihoods within the fishing industry.
In adapting to natural hazards and trying to manage disasters, several variables influence the
vulnerability of the Barbados fishing industry such as education, fisheries resources, the level
of skills, gender, age, income and others. Vulnerabilities are evident in various aspects of any
fishing industry - fisheries infrastructure, fishing vessels and livelihoods - yet remain a
neglected area in fisheries governance or development planning (Mahon 2002; Badjeck et al.
2010; CRFM 2013).
Climate change and climate variability affect the entire fisheries value chain. The fisheries
value chain includes fishers, fish processors, fish vendors and fish buyers. The latter includes
individual locals and tourists as well as institutional purchasers (e.g. hotels, restaurants and
supermarkets). To reduce impacts along the fisheries value chain, risk reduction and
management measures such as mitigation, and/or adaptation strategies should be in place to
address climate change and variability.
Instruments, such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCCC) and bodies such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), have
globally addressed increased human vulnerability to climate extremes (Abramovitz et al.
2002). The IPCC maintains that climate change will have “negative effects especially on the
socio-economic and bio-physical resources” of small islands (IPCC 2014:3). The IPCC has
2
projected significant changes in temperature and precipitation in the Caribbean by 2080-2099
that can have adverse impacts on SIDS (Table 1).
Table 1: Summary of IPCC Climate Change projections for the Caribbean by 2080-2099
Parameter Impact
Temperature All Caribbean islands are very likely to warm during this century. The
warming is likely to be somewhat less than the global annual mean warming
in all seasons.
Precipitation Summer rainfall in the Caribbean is very likely to decrease in the vicinity of
the Greater Antilles, but changes elsewhere and in winter are uncertain.
Short-term variability in rainfall patterns (e.g. as caused by ENSO events) will
likely continue.
Sea level Rise (SLR) SLR is likely to continue on average during the century around the small
islands of the Caribbean Sea. Models indicate that the rise will not be
geographically uniform and large deviations between models make regional
estimates across the Caribbean uncertain. The increase will probably follow
the global average.
Hurricanes and extreme
events
It is likely that intense tropical cyclone activity will increase (but tracks and
the global distribution are uncertain). In general, climate change will produce
a warmer, dryer (in the mean) region with more intense hurricanes and
possibly more variability.
(Source: McConney et al. 2015)
The regional framework that focuses on Caribbean climate change issues is the Caribbean
Community Climate Change Centre (CCCCC). The CCCCC conciliates the Caribbean
region’s response to climate change and provides the Caribbean Community (CARICOM)
member states with climate change related policy advice and guidelines (Caribbean
Community Secretariat 2015).
The distinction between climate change and climate variability is not trivial. Climate change
is a change in the climate that continues over extensive periods of time, such as decades or
longer (IPCC 2014a). On the other hand, climate variability refers to changes that occur in
the climate for shorter periods of time (WMO 2015). Both need to be taken into account.
While components of climate change may be sufficiently slow onset to allow planning for
mitigation and adaptation, climate variability tends to be less predictable, often extreme and
calls for rapid response via diversified adaptive capacity to reduce vulnerability and build
resilience along the entire fisheries value chain.
1.1 Research rationale
In Barbados, some fishing communities are more vulnerable than others due to their location
and other factors. Here the term “fishing community” refers to a fish landing site (Figure 1)
and the associated fishing enterprises plus infrastructure. Fish landing sites are categorised as
primary (markets), secondary (sheds and slabs for cutting fish) and tertiary (lack of physical
infrastructure, boats moored or beached and fish landed) (Fisheries Marketing and Statistics,
2015). Ideally, the surrounding settlement is highly dependent on fisheries, but this is not the
case around many landing sites in Barbados. A location that satisfies the classic definition is
Six Men’s Bay. Six Men’s Bay is classified as a tertiary fish landing site due to the lack of
3
critical physical infrastructure; such as a jetty, ice storage, diesel supply, among others. This
fish landing site, where many households depend on fisheries, is located on a narrow beach
adjacent to two watercourses, and is particularly vulnerable to both high wave energy due to
northerly swells and flash floods due to tropical storms.
Figure 1: The study site and other fish landing sites around Barbados.
(Source: Fisheries Marketing and Statistics, 2015)
Fishing communities in Barbados are exposed to and sensitive to inter-related socio-
economic and environmental conditions. They address vulnerability through building
adaptive capacity. However, some coping strategies may be utilized, which are means of
countering to an experienced short term impact; for example, hurricane season (IRIN 2016).
Thus, short-term coping strategies employed by some of the fisherfolk to deal with changing
conditions should also be assessed, along with factors that facilitate or restrict building longer
term adaptive capacity within fishing communities. Reducing the vulnerability of the
communities entails a combination of both local knowledge and scientific knowledge to
comprehend the changing conditions and design best responses.
The impacts of climate change and variability on Barbadian fisheries are likely to be highly
adverse. Climate change and variability are anticipated to negatively alter habitats causing
great loss, decrease abundance and diversity, along with shifts in distribution (Nurse 2011).
The aforementioned climatic impacts on fisheries will in turn negatively affect fisherfolk
livelihoods. At present Barbados lacks an adaptation plan for the fishing industry. The
Fisheries Division of the Ministry of Agriculture has a Hurricane Preparedness Plan, or
response plan, to be used as the only measure to assist with protecting the fishermen’s
livelihood where climate variation or events are concerned. The Hurricane Preparedness Plan
4
includes the issuing of advisory and warning notices to the fishermen as the following
weather systems approach the island: hurricanes, storms, depressions or other rough sea
events. In addition, the Hurricane Preparedness Plan makes provision of haul-up facilities for
storage of the fishermen’s vessels during the passage of the mentioned weather systems
(GOB 2013). However, to reduce the vulnerability of the fishing industry it is critical that a
comprehensive adaptation plan is implemented as a component of development planning in
order to sustain livelihoods (Mirza 2003), as appreciated by local fisheries and coastal
managers (C. Taylor pers. comm. 2014 and F. Hinds pers. comm. 2014).
In order to build the adaptive capacity and resilience of any fishing community, it is critical
first to comprehend the existing elements of vulnerability; the exposure, sensitivity and
impact risks aspects. Subsequently, a community-based vulnerability assessment should be
conducted to inform policies of developed adaptation strategies that reduce sensitive climate
risks (Fussel and Klein 2006; Barsley 2013). Thus, vulnerability assessment should ideally be
at the community or site level as well as the fisheries household level.
1.2 Research aim and objectives
This research project aimed to investigate the susceptibility of a fish landing site and fishing
households to climate change and variability through a vulnerability assessment at Six Men’s
Bay fishing community. It also sought to recommend strategies to inform local level planning
for climate adaptation along the entire fisheries value chain.
The research aim was accomplished through the following objectives for this study:
To identify the ecological, social, economic and environmental factors and processes
that influence the vulnerability of the Six Men’s Bay fishing community to climate
change and variability.
To identify if the existing landing site and household level coping strategies are likely
to address the factors and processes to reduce vulnerability.
To determine how, if necessary, adaptive capacity should be built to reduce further
the fishing community and household vulnerability to climate change and variability.
1.3 Organisation of report
Chapter 2 is a brief review of the key literature on climate change and variability,
vulnerability framework concepts, the various components of a vulnerability assessment,
vulnerability of livelihoods and adaptation strategies. Chapter 3 describes the methodology
used in this study, in which both secondary and primary data collection were used. Chapter 4
gives a detailed analysis of the situation, reveals the indicators of vulnerability, discusses the
findings as they relate to the individual indicators, and explains the results of an adaptation
community consultation meeting. Chapter 5 consists of proposed adaptation strategies and
recommendations for Six Men’s Bay fishing community and households, which can inform
development policy. Chapter 6 concludes and reveals that the research objectives were
identified. Chapter 7 references the literature cited in this study. Finally, an annex contains
the Socio-economic Monitoring for Coastal Management (SocMon) survey instrument used
for this study.
5
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
To ensure that an efficient vulnerability assessment is conducted and that resilience is built,
an understanding of the associated concepts is of paramount importance. This chapter defines
concepts related to the research aim such as climate change, climate variability, vulnerability,
vulnerability assessments, livelihoods and adaptation strategies. The review of the literature
guided the vulnerability assessments at Six Men’s Bay landing site and in fishery households.
2.1 Climate change and climate variability
The 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) defines
climate change in Article I as “a change of climate that is attributed directly or indirectly to
human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and that is in addition to
natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods” (UN 1992:7). The IPCC
AR5 further refers to climate change as “a statistically significant variation in either the mean
state of the climate or the variability of its properties, persisting for an extended period,
typically decades or longer” (2014a:5). In addition, the World Meteorological Organization
(WMO) explains the differences between climate change and variability as “climate
variability looks at change that occurs within smaller time frames as a month, a season or a
year, and climate change considers changes that occur over a longer period of time, typically
over decades or longer” (WMO 2015).
2.2 Vulnerability framework concepts
The concepts of vulnerability, exposure, sensitivity, adaptation, adaptive capacity and
resilience are interrelated and have broad application to climate change. It is imperative to
comprehend each of these concepts in order to facilitate capacity building of a system. The
vulnerability assessment analyses can range in scale from the vulnerability and adaptation of
an individual to particular environmental stress, through the vulnerability and adaptation of a
community to multiple stresses (Smit and Wandel 2006; FAO 2015).
2.2.1 Vulnerability
The AR5 glossary defines vulnerability as “the propensity or predisposition to be adversely
affected” (2014:128). Further vulnerability incorporates other concepts such as sensitivity
and the dearth of the capacity to adapt (IPCC 2014). Similarly, Yamin et al. (2005) define
vulnerability as defencelessness, insecurity and exposure to risk, shocks and stress. Smit et
al. (2008:4) refer to vulnerability as, “the manner and degree in which a community is
susceptible to conditions that directly and indirectly affect the well-being or sustainability of
a community.” Fussel and Klein (2006) define vulnerability as an integrated measure of the
expected magnitude of adverse effects to a system caused by a given level of particular
external stressors. Kelly et al. (2000) further define vulnerability as the extent to which
climate change may damage or harm a system; it depends not only on a system’s sensitivity
but also on its ability to adapt to new climatic conditions. Vulnerability to impacts is a
multidimensional concept that encompasses bio-geophysical, economic, institutional and
sociocultural factors. As aforementioned, it is critical that the components of vulnerability be
understood since adaptation strategies cannot be formulated for a community or individual
households without knowing the vulnerable indicators.
6
2.2.2 Exposure and sensitivity
Exposure is “the presence of people, livelihoods, species or ecosystems, environmental
services and resources, infrastructure, or economic, social, or cultural assets in places that
could be adversely affected” (IPCC 2014:123). Monnereau et al. (2013) refer to exposure as
the nature and degree to which a country or community is unprotected from predicted climate
change. Sensitivity is the extent to which a community will respond to or be affected by a
change in climatic conditions (Kelly et al. 2000). A community’s level of dependence on
natural resources reveals how sensitive they are (Cinner et al. 2012). Smith et al. (2008:4)
further state that, “exposure-sensitivity is related to the susceptibility of people or livelihoods
to a stimulus, the dynamics of the potential stimulus or stress, and the community's physical
location, social and economic situation, governance and political systems.” In other words,
various characteristics determine the exposure and sensitivity of a system, which in turn
cause it to be vulnerable to environmental stressors.
2.2.3 Adaptive capacity, and resilience
Adaptive capacity and resilience are closely related and refer to the ability of a system to
cope with, or adjust to climate variability and extremes, to moderate potential damages, and
to take advantage of opportunities (Figure 2; Fussel and Klein 2006). Adaptive capacity is
defined by the conditions that a system can deal with, accommodate, adapt to, and recover
from (Smit and Wandel 2006). The IPCC AR5 glossary (2014:118) refers to adaptive
capacity as “the ability of systems, institutions, humans and other organisms to adjust to
potential damage, to take advantage of opportunities, or to respond to consequences..
Resilience is “the capacity of systems, communities, households or individuals to prevent,
mitigate or cope with risk and recover from shocks” (Gitz and Meybeck 2012:29). Folke et
al. (2002) define resilience as the ability of social-ecological systems to absorb shocks and be
able to retain its functions and structure. Further resilience is the extent to which a system is
capable of self-organisation, build capacity for learning and adaptation (Folke et al. 2002;
IPCC 2014).
7
Figure 2: Vulnerability and resilience schematic diagram.
(Source: Gitz and Meybeck, 2012).
2.2.4 Adaptation
Adaptation refers to the adjustment of ecological, socio-economic systems in response to
actual or expected climatic stimuli or their impacts (Pielke 1998; McConney et al. 2013).
Adaptation is accomplished at “the local level due to managerial ability, access to financial
resources, technological and information resources, infrastructure, the institutional
environment within which adaptation occur, political influence, kinship networks, among
others” (Smit and Wandel 2006:287). In other words, adaptation is achieved through the use
of various mechanisms to reduce vulnerability; for instance, mitigation activities,
preparedness activities, response activities and recovery activities (Abramovitz et al. 2002).
2.3 Vulnerability assessments
Vulnerability assessments are conducted for various reasons ranging from identifying
worldwide mitigation targets to selecting local adaptation strategies (Fussel and Klein 2006;
Smit and Wandel 2006; FAO 2015). Assessments of vulnerability to climate change and
variability are geared towards advising the development of policies that reduce the risks
related to climate change (Fussel and Klein 2006). In addition, assessing and mapping the
vulnerability of fisherfolk and regions to the impact of climate change will allow governing
bodies to channel climate change responses where they are needed (Agostini et al. 2014).
Comprehensive vulnerability assessments not only inform development policy and plans but
can also manage conflicts over the resources and build the resilience of a community (Taves
2015). Hence assessing village or country vulnerability to climate change and variability is
the potent step towards risk reduction and advocates a culture of disaster resilience (Lummen
et al. 2012).
Vulnerability assessment methodology must be selected according to the assessment’s
objective, and care should be taken when analysing the results of the methodology used.
Stakeholders’ values and perceptions of vulnerability should also be taken into consideration
(FAO 2015). Different factors are likely to influence vulnerability to a variety of hazards in
8
different geographic and socio-political contexts. A village’s access to food, clean potable
water, land-use and other resources is a critical determinant of its vulnerability to climate
change and variability. A combination of factors causes populations inhabiting coastal zones
and small islands to become highly vulnerable (UNEP 2011). Assessing coastal vulnerability
is vital in an effort to identify the areas of high risk, factors contributing to the risk and the
means to reduce the risk (Salim et al. 2014).
SIDS are susceptible to climate change impacts such as hurricanes, tropical storms, sea
surface temperature increase and sea level rise, among others. SIDS are typically dependent
on fisheries for food security, livelihoods, foreign exchange earnings, and have limited
resources and vulnerable coastlines making their marine fisheries sensitive to climate change
impacts (Monnereau et al. 2013) due to low adaptive capacity (Nurse 2011; Guillotreau et al.
2012). The most significant climate change impacts on marine fisheries include changes in
water temperature, direct and indirect effects of ocean acidification, sea level rise and
continuous changes in habitat, and frequency of extreme events (Salim et al. 2014;
Guillotreau et al. 2012; IPCC 2014). Climate change vulnerability assessments of fishing
communities and at country levels can allow decision makers to target climate change
responses where they are needed (Allison et al. 2009; Agostini et al. 2014).
2.4 Vulnerability to climate change
Vulnerability to climate change has been defined as “the degree of incapability to cope with
the consequences of climate change and accelerated sea-level rise” (CPACC 1999).
Similarly, the IPCC defines vulnerability to climate change as “the degree to which a natural
system is susceptible to or unable to cope with the effects of climate change, including
climate variability and climate extremes” (IPCC 2001b:21). The latter definition was used for
this study. However, both definitions reveal a community’s incapacity to manage due to
climate change and variability factors only. Both climate change and non-climate change
factors can cause rapid adverse socio-economic, physical and environmental changes within
a coastal area. Some coastal vulnerability assessments tend to concentrate mainly on sea-
level rise and neglect to consider other climate change and non-climate change factors
(Nicholls et al. 2008; 2011). When examining the intensity and frequency of projected
hazards the social, economic, physical and environmental factors of a community should be
assessed to create coping and adaptation strategies (Fernandez 2011). In other words in order
to inform and support development policy relating to climate change and coastal
management more integrated assessments of climatic change and non-climate change in
coastal zones are required (Nicholls et al. 2008; 2011). Integrated assessments are
interdisciplinary, holistic and participatory processes that enable a better understanding of the
existing vulnerabilities. In turn, these evaluations allow the stakeholders views to be
incorporated into the formulation of relevant adaptation strategies (Wongbusarakum and
Loper 2011).
To assess the vulnerability of Six Men’s Bay fishing community and households to climate
change and variability, and to non-climate factors, an integrated assessment process was
taken. The integrated assessment approach was created by combining the use of Socio-
economic Monitoring for Coastal Management (SocMon) ten climate change variables
(Wongbusarakum and Loper 2011) and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red
Crescent Societies (IFRCRCS) Vulnerability and Capacities Assessment (VCA) (IFRCRCS
2007). Both assessment methodologies cover the three central concepts of vulnerability
discussed earlier; that is, exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity. However, SocMon
climate change variables mainly assess socio-economic vulnerability and adaptive capacity,
9
whereas the IFRCRCS VCA primarialy assesses the physical and environmental
vulnerabilities. Together they can be useful for determining the level of vulnerability to
climate change and variability impacts, and non-climate factors that exist within the Six
Men’s fishing community and households. Also, the two methodologies assessed the
community’s and households’ ability to cope and recover from hazardous events. The
SocMon ten climate change variables aim at identifying aspects that contribute to socio-
economic vulnerability and adaptive capacity at household-level at the research site. The
IFRCRCS VCA aims at building the capacity of the Six Men’s Bay community by taking a
stakeholder participation approach. The VCA is a participatory process that enables the
stakeholders to aim at achieving sustainable adaptation. The stakeholders were informed
about the project and were very willing to contribute. The VCA allowed for a participatory
approach that integrated local knowledge of the stakeholders with scientific data that
mutually benefitted the results and the recommended adaptation strategies.
2.5 Vulnerability of livelihoods
Livelihoods are defined as “the capabilities, assets (stores, resources, claims and access) and
activities required for a means of living” (Chambers and Conway 1992:6). Consequently, to
assess the vulnerability of fishery livelihoods, it is vital to comprehend how the elements of
vulnerability and fishery-based livelihoods interact (Islam et al. 2014).
In the Caribbean, many persons depend heavily on fisheries’ livelihoods to generate income.
“Approximately 182,000 persons are employed either directly or indirectly in the fishing
industry, with the majority from rural coastal communities” (CRFM 2013:1). Livelihoods in
fishing communities are extremely vulnerable since they are located in areas that are prone to
climate change and variability (Mendoza et al. 2014). Livelihoods in small-scale fisheries are
vulnerable to high exposure to climate stresses and extreme events such as hurricanes, floods,
earthquakes, tsunamis, temperature, sea level rise, rainfall fluctuation, coastal erosion and
disease outbreaks (Mendoza et al. 2014; Islam et al. 2014; CRFM 2013).
Livelihoods that are highly dependent on a natural resource, such as fisheries, can be
vulnerable when that resource becomes depleted (Pomeroy et al. 2006). Most of the
fisherfolk at Six Men’s Bay are highly dependent on fisheries, and very few of them have a
supplementary livelihood, which makes them vulnerable socially and economically.
Moreover, small-scale fishing communities have “limited physical infrastructure and often
lack access to essential services such as education, health care, water, credit and insurance”
(Islam et al. 2014:282). However, livelihood vulnerability is a combination of inequitable
factors of bio-physical and socio-economic characteristics of communities and households
(Islam et al. 2014).
The International Institute on Sustainable Development (IISD) highlights that a livelihood is
sustainable when, “it can cope with and recover from stresses and shocks and maintain or
enhance its capabilities and assets both now and in the future, while not undermining the
natural resource base” (2003:12). The assets in this context refer to the basis on which a
livelihood is created (IISD 2003). The assets - human, physical, natural, financial, and social
capital - also reduce vulnerability (Islam et al. 2014). Furthermore, the more varied the asset
it means, the more resistant the level of sustainability and safety of livelihoods (IISD 2003).
Hence, fishing communities would have to build their livelihood assets to achieve resilience
to climate change and variability and to non-climate change factors.
In an effort to reduce the exposure of fisherfolk livelihoods to stressors, there should be the
10
creation of alternative or supplementary livelihoods (Taves 2015; Simpson et al. 2012). For
example, aquaculture and mariculture are alternative livelihoods (e.g. seamoss farming) that
can generate incomes for fisherfolk households in the Caribbean. Hence, vulnerability
assessments are conducted to develop adaptation plans and mitigation strategies for the
vulnerable community in an effort to sustain livelihoods.
2.6 Adaptation strategies
According to the IISD, the primary aim of adaptation strategies is “to reduce vulnerability to
climate-induced change and to sustain and enhance the livelihoods of poor people” (IISD,
2003:12). The adaptation strategies need to be established based on comprehending how the
vulnerable secure their livelihoods, the function of physical resources in livelihood activities
and the extent of adaptation activities that decrease vulnerabilities and build the resilience of
poverty stricken people (IISD 2003).
Adaptation strategies should be flexible and adaptive in themselves in order to cater to
changing circumstances of people’s livelihoods (IISD 2003). The most vulnerable are the
ones to benefit most from adaptation measures. However, they are the ones with limited
assets; hence adaptation strategies need agencies to assist in developing the assets of the poor
and vulnerable (IISD 2003).
The household strategy should be focused on in its entirety to achieve adaptation and not
only the person who engages in the resource (Pomeroy et al. 2006). The household strategy
can only work depending on the relationships among the members. However, there are a
number of areas that “the household livelihood strategy mix depends on - season, access to a
resource, access to capital, skill base, education and risk preference” (Pomeroy et al.
2006:787). Consequently, once there is full access to the mentioned areas, a community is
able to build their adaptive capacity and achieve sustainable outcomes.
To effectively achieve adaptation via fisheries management plans there should be
collaboration among the agencies that deal with disaster risk management (DRM) and
climate change adaptation (CCA) and sectoral agencies, including fisheries authorities. The
vulnerability of small-scale fishing communities’ livelihoods is dynamic. In light of this
fishery administrations need to have the mandate, capacity and resources to be flexible.
Unfortunately, there is a dearth of integration of DRM and CCA into fisheries sectors and of
fisheries into DRM and CCA. Hence, the needs of fishing communities are often not
adequately addressed where disasters and climate change is concern (CFRM 2013).
3. METHODOLOGY
In an effort to achieve the aims and objectives of this study, the methodology consisted of
both secondary and primary data collection of which the latter included stakeholder
participation. See Figure 3 for a schematic diagram of the methodology used in this study.
After a review of the literature, secondary data collection was utilised to comprehend the
impacts and threats to the resources at the research site. Then, key informant interviews were
conducted to identify aspects of vulnerability and, at the same time, to generate ideas and
options for suitable adaptation strategies. Further, as aforementioned, the integrated use of
IFRCRCS VCA and SocMon’s ten climate variables was selected for this comprehensive
research. The two methodologies covered the central concepts of vulnerability which in turn
assisted in identifying the social, economic, physical and environmental factors that are
vulnerable in the study area. As a result, the researcher sought IFCRCS VCA training, from
11
Barbados Red Cross CADRIM, to effectively implement the VCA. Various tools and
processes were used with the VCA; for instance, direct observation, semi-structured
interviews, timeline, seasonal calendar, transect walk, hazard mapping and capacities list.
The climate change variables were used in a survey questionnaire. Hence, the integrated
process was utilised to determine the level of vulnerability and to devise adaptation
strategies.
Figure 3: Schematic diagram of the methodologies used in this study.
3.1 Study area
The study area, Six Men’s Bay, is located in the northwest of Barbados in the parish of St.
Peter. See Figure 4 for the study area. Speightstown is to the south of Six Men’s Bay, in the
same parish, and to the north is Shermans in the parish of St. Lucy. The area is classified as a
tertiary fish landing site due to the minimal state-provided physical infrastructure (review
Figure 1) but is similar in size to the secondary landing sites. It is a rural fishing community
in which most of the fisherfolk live nearby. Along the seaward side of Six Men’s main road
are boat building activities, a recreational fishing community ‘shed’, a bar, fruit and
vegetable vending stall and fish processing/vending stalls, some of which were supplied by
the Market Division. Fish processing is done on a small to medium scale. Small-scale fish
processing is the deboning and cleaning of a few hundred fish while the medium scale is
where persons are employed, and fish is sold in moderate bulk. There are no large-scale
purpose-built fish processing plants.
Along the landward side of Six Men’s main road, are two shops, a guest house, a church and
12
approximately 20 houses which may also be vulnerable to climate change and variability.
Furthermore, there has been recent high-end tourism and residential construction in the south
of Six Men’s due to the development of the Port Ferdinand Marina, which started
construction on the landward side in 2011. Port Ferdinand is the sister luxury marina to Port
St. Charles, which is further south in Heywoods, St. Peter. See Figure 4 of the study area.
The sea access to both Port St. Charles and Port Ferdinand luxury marinas is adjacent to Six
Men’s Bay on the seaward side. Tourism activity is also to the north of Six Men’s Bay with
the Fish Pot restaurant and Little Good Harbour luxury small hotel in Shermans St. Lucy.
Figure 4: 2012 satellite image of Six Men's Bay, St. Peter.
(Source: base map GB GeoEngineering Inc., 2015)
3.2 Scoping
A scoping exercise was conducted at Six Men’s Bay on Saturday 14 June 2014. This exercise
was used to identify the main issues affecting Six Men’s Bay. Thus, the surroundings were
observed, and semi-structured interviews were conducted with some of the fisherfolk in order
to recognize and understand the activities and resources at Six Men’s Bay. The results of the
scoping exercise were used to determine the scope and depth of the research needed.
3.3 Secondary data collection
Scientific data were sought from a variety of secondary sources to inform the researcher, and
the primary stakeholders, in turn, about the climate change and variability impacts and
threats to local resources of the Six Men’s Bay, the study site. This gave the researcher an
idea of the hazards and climate impacts that had affected the research area. It also assisted in
designing the primary data collection methods used.
Secondary data were collected from governmental and non-governmental sources such as:
13
Climate projections for Barbados from CARIBSAVE.
Precipitation and temperature outlook data from the months of July to December
2015 for Barbados from the Caribbean Institute of Meteorology and Hydrology
(CIMH).
Mean monthly temperature and mean month precipitation datasets, for the period
2000 to 2014, was collected from the Barbados Meteorological Office, Grantley
Adams International Airport.
Climate impacts from Barbados national inventory data, coral reef monitoring data,
Esri ArcGIS shapefile of 100 years storm surge flood impact and beach profile data
were obtained from the Coastal Zone Management Unit (CZMU), Ministry of
Environment.
Large and small road maps of Six Men’s St. Peter from the Barbados Land and
Survey Department, Ministry of Housing and Lands.
Photographs of beach erosion at Six Men’s Bay, access to the Environmental Impact
Assessment of the Northern Fisheries Complex and Retreat Marina Volume II, The
Fisheries Division Response Plan 2013, registered vessels data, pamphlets of fishing
vessels information, and fish landing site data from the Ministry of Agriculture,
Fisheries Division.
Six Men’s Bay population census 2010 from the Statistical Department, Barbados
Statistical Service.
2012 Satellite imagery of Six Men’s St. Peter from G.B. GeoEngineering Inc.
3.4 Interviews with key informants
Semi-structured interviews were conducted to identify the climate and non-climate factors
that the community is exposed to and to help with formulating adaptation strategies.
Interviews were held with key personnel from the Fisheries Division, president of the
Barbados National Union of Fisherfolk Organisations (BARNUFO), CIMH, CZMU, the
Disaster Emergency Organisation (DEO) chairman for St. Peter, senior health environmental
officer for the area and some of the fisherfolk of Six Men’s Bay. This type of qualitative
research method was quite beneficial to the researcher in releasing vital information in
addition to the survey questioning. This method was chosen since it is known to release
pertinent information that may be overlooked with the use of a structured interview (Smit et
al. 2008). It is an initial phase of the SocMon methodology.
3.5 Vulnerability capacity assessment and SocMon climate change variables
As communities may be vulnerable to climate and non-climate impacts, an integrated
vulnerability assessment should be implemented. Integration of IFRCRC VCA methodology
and SocMon climate change variables methodology allow the researcher to thoroughly assess
vulnerability to climate change and variability and non-climate factors of the Six Men’s Bay
landing site and households. The IFRCRC VCA methodology was utilised to assess the bio-
physical vulnerability of the community-based landing site and SocMon climate change
variables were used as the basis for the fishery household survey form which assessed the
14
socio-economic vulnerability. A small sample of the fisherfolk population was used to
conduct a fishery household survey. The fishery households sample was purposively chosen
to participate in the survey. An attendance name list was compiled during the community-
based workshop. The workshop’s participant list was used to select six fishery households as
the sample for the household survey.
The SocMon ten climate change variables were employed in a survey, and the key informant
interviews to assess the socio-economic vulnerability of fishery households of Six Men’s
Bay, and at the same time, done in an effort to achieve adaptation. See Figure 5 for proposed
variables to examine the climate social and economic vulnerability of the fishery households
of Six Men’s Bay. The ten variables represent the three main components of vulnerability:
exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity (see Appendix 1). As mentioned earlier, the
IFRCRC VCA consisted of a number of tools that were implemented in the VCA process at
Six Men’s Bay; among the tools used were direct observation, transect walk, seasonal
calendar, historical profile, and community-based hazard mapping.
Figure 5: Proposed 10 variables to assess the climate social and economic vulnerability of the fishery
households at Six Men’s Bay.
(Source: Wongbusarakum and Loper, 2011)
In an effort to effectively implement a comprehensive and viable VCA at Six Men’s, the
researcher underwent the IFRCRCS VCA training. This training was facilitated by the
Barbados Red Cross CADRIM. The training involved being a part of the VCA team that
conducted a VCA of Holetown St. James from July to August 2015. The training took five
full days, of which three days were consecutive; which qualifies as adequate training in the
VCA process (IFRCRCS 2007:41).
3.5.1 Direct observation
A direct observation exercise was conducted in Six Men’s Bay, on Friday 24 July 2015. The
objective of conducting this VCA tool was to observe and identify the areas in the
community that are likely to be vulnerable to climate change factors and non-climate change
15
factors. Moreover, the direct observation exercise assisted with background information
pertaining to the research site. This tool assisted with validating conclusions reached in other
VCA tools and aided with the formulation of adaptation strategies.
The direct observation activity was conducted by a small team of four individuals, inclusive
of the researcher. All of the team members were trained in implementing VCAs. Among the
members were former a Programme Officer of the Department of Emergency Management
(DEM), the DEO officer for St. Michael South, and the Barbados Red Cross Youth Officer.
The team was split in two and were assigned to observe north and south of Six Men’s Bay
community, both landward and seaward sides. This form of direct observation concentrated
on the following areas: capacities, vulnerabilities, daily activities, infrastructure,
health/sanitation, livelihoods and historic built environment.
During the direct observation exercise some of the community members were identified and
interviewed to collect valuable information; inclusive of identifying their coping strategies
that are practiced to reduce vulnerability to climate impacts. At the same time, the
community members were informed of an upcoming stakeholders’ participatory workshop
and a community-based hazard mapping exercise.
3.5.2 Stakeholders’ participatory workshop
Two participatory stakeholder workshops were conducted on Sunday 9 August 2015 and
Thursday 13 August 2015. The first workshop was held to sensitise the community to the
VCA in relation to the researcher’s project. Also, the stakeholders’ participatory workshop
was used to assess the vulnerability of the community with the use of three IFRCRC VCA
tools: historical profile, capacities list and seasonal calendar. Again the small VCA team
attended the workshop and members were each assigned a task. One recorded the
information gathered on a flip chart. The researcher formally sensitised the participants of the
VCA and facilitated the seasonal calendar exercise. The other two team members facilitated
the historical profile and the capacities list activities. The second workshop involved a
transect walk exercise and a hazard mapping exercise. The researcher facilitated both
activities at the second workshop. Refreshments were provided at both workshops.
3.5.2.1 Historical profile
In order to identify the extent of risk in the area, which is critical in the preparation of an
adaptation plan, a historical profile was prepared by the community stakeholders. Further, the
timeline was used to identify climatic trends and changes over time. Historical events
information pertaining to the Six Men’s Bay community gathered in this exercise included
ecological, social, economic and physical events.
3.5.2.2 Seasonal calendar
The primary stakeholders were asked to prepare a seasonal calendar to identify the
vulnerability of livelihoods and the consequent coping strategies. Further, the seasonal
calendar tool was used to analyse the seasonal changes activities and dependence on
vulnerable resources and services. This tool assisted in understanding the periods of hazards,
stress, and disease.
16
3.5.2.3 Capacities list
The stakeholders generated a capacities list to identify the vulnerable capacities in the
community. Capacities refer to the resources and/or services owned by an individual,
household, community or country that can resist the impact of a hazard and/or recover from
it. The compiled list includes a number of occupations, gender roles and services in the area.
Later a Garmin Global Positioning System (GPS) device was used to geo-reference the
geographical locations of the capacities of Six Men’s Bay.
3.5.2.4 Transect walk
A transect walk was undertaken at the start of the second workshop by the researcher and a
few volunteered community members. The objective of this exercise was to become more
familiar with the community and at the same time identify the hazards there. During the
transect walk, the community members were able to reveal various issues in the community
to the researcher; man-made hazards, natural hazards effects, and socio-political issues were
identified during the transect walk. The transect walk was throughout the Six Men’s
community; Six Men’s Bay, Six Men’s Development, Six Men’s Village and Port Ferdinand.
The transect walk path started in front of the fishers shed and ended there.
3.5.2.5 Community-based hazard mapping
A community-based hazard mapping exercise was done at the second workshop in an effort
to identify areas and resources that are at risks from climate change and variability impact
and to analyse changes in hazards and planning for risk reduction. A large road map of Six
Men’s dated 2006 was used. To represent the various built infrastructure and resources of Six
Men’s community Bristol board shapes of such were pre-prepared to be applied to the map
by the community members. The members pointed out changes to the map; for instance, a
new road was added to the research area since the map was made in 2006. They drew the
new road on the map and proceeded to highlight hazardous areas by applying coloured notes
containing various issues in the identified area (Figure 6). They identified the man-made
hazards, natural hazards and socio-political issues on the map. After the map was made the
participants were then asked three central questions:
What are the impacts of the hazards identified?
How do people cope with such impacts?, and
Are the strategies to cope working?
17
Figure 6: Community-based hazard mapping exercise.
The photograph illustrates the community members are manipulating a map of Six Men's Bay during a
hazard mapping exercise.
(Photo credit Charlette Alleyne-Greene, 2015)
Again, a Garmin GPS device was used to record the geographical locations of the hazards
identified during the community-based hazard map exercise. The researcher proceeded to
create a digital hazard map using ESRI ArcGIS 10.2 from the sketched hazard map produced
during the community-based exercise. In this way, the information was analysed and stored
for use in future planning and monitoring. Polygon shapefiles were created using the editor
tool in ESRI ArcMap to represent the various hazardous issues that the stakeholders
experience throughout the community. The polygons were overlaid on a 2012 satellite image
of Six Men’s. In addition, a shapefile of coastal erosion at Six Men’s Bay was also created to
illustrate the erosion at the site since the 1970s. The 1970s coastal erosion polyline shapefile
was created over a 1970s contour map shapefile of Barbados using the ArcMap editor tool.
3.5.3 SocMon fishery households survey
A SocMon household survey was conducted with a small sample of six fishery households to
understand and identify the coping strategies used to reduce vulnerability at the site and
household level. See Appendix 1 for the fishery household survey questionnaire. The sample
was purposively selected out of the 16 fishery households that existed at Six Men’s St. Peter
at the time the study was conducted. A name list was compiled at the first VCA workshop
from which the six fishery households were chosen for the survey. A4 size paper maps of Six
Men’s Bay community were utilised during the survey for the respondents to identify any
hazardous areas in the community.
3.6 Limitations
Various limitations were experienced while examining the current socio-economic and bio-
physical situation at the research site. The main challenges encountered included:
Lack of and/or inadequate data.
o There is no known time period of when the Six Men’s Bay reef first fell into
decline since the Barbados coral reef monitoring is conducted at five-year
intervals (F. Hinds, pers. comm. 2015).
18
o Also, there was the lack of, and/or deficiency in, fish landing records for the
Six Men’s Bay landing site provided by the Fisheries Division. The total
record of fish species landings has deficiencies due to inadequate data
collection and poor storage of data. Many years of fish landing records were
entirely missing or minimally recorded; for example, information on the
inshore pelagics and demersal fish species groups that are known to be
annually landed at Six Men’s Bay was missing. In most cases, only the
pelagic groups, such as flyingfish and dolphin fish, were recorded. In addition,
there are no records of fish landed at Six Men’s Bay after the year 2004. As a
result, the Half Moon Fort secondary fish landing site was used as a proxy in
this study. Half Moon Fort was utilised in this aspect since the two fish
landing sites are located in close proximity (Figure 7), and it was mentioned
that some of the fishers of Half Moon Fort occasionally land some of their fish
catch at the research site. Unfortunately, there were also similar deficiencies
in the record keeping for Half Moon Fort fish landing site. For example, no
records of fish landings were found for Half Moon Fort for the year 2012, and
the records found mainly recorded flyingfish and dolphin at the same site. In
addition, vessel types for the recorded fish landings were also unsuccessfully
requested. Hence, the lack of data has created a gap in the information
gathered in this study. For example, an average annual catch per unit effort
could not be made based on the deficiently recorded landings and lack of
vessel type data. The missing, and/or deficiency in, fish landing data is
primarily the result of human error due to incomplete data collection, poor
record keeping and data storage of the fish species landed at Six Men’s Bay.
Figure 7: Google satellite image of the locations of Six Men's Bay and Half Moon Fort fish landing sites in
Barbados.
(Source: Google map, 2015)
Inaccessible data.
o The CZMU’s engineering department’s personnel were busy with their project
19
commitments while this study was being conducted. As a result, the CZMU’s
engineer department personnel were unable to state or provide data of what is
causing the rapid coastal erosion at the Bay.
o Similarly, to show the level of dependency the fish processors have for the
infrastructure at the Bay, unsuccessful request was made to access the utility
bills (electrical and water consumption utilities) of the fish vending stalls of
Six Men’s Bay via the Fisheries Division.
o Likewise, to illustrate that the price of fish is affected by the amount of fish
landed, or due to other variables such as the price of diesel, an unsuccessful
request was made to access the fish price series via the Markets Division and
the Barbados Statistical Department.
Difficulty in scheduling an appointment to use governmental resource technology.
o An appointment was sought to utilise the Barbados Land and Survey
Department’s Digital Terrain Model to create elevation levels for a sea level
rise hazard map for Six Men’s Bay. This proved futile.
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
In the methodological design, some outputs were sequenced to serve as inputs to other
components. The results and discussion will be presented together in this chapter to reflect
such. This chapter begins with an analysis of the current socio-economic and bio- physical
situation of the Six Men’s Bay fishing community. It continues with the results and
discussion of the assessment related to the main components of vulnerability - exposure,
sensitivity and adaptive capacity - of Six Men’s Bay fish landing site and households.
4.1 Situation analysis
The fishing industry plays a significant role at Six Men’s Bay as it’s one of the island’s
tertiary fishing landing sites where some of the community members’ livelihoods depend on
it. The fisherfolk at Six Men’s Bay consist of fishers, boat owners, boat builders, fish
processors and fish vendors. The role of women in the fishing industry at Six Men’s is
mainly as the fish processors and fish vendors; making them heavily dependent on the
fishermen. There are a few locally made fish vending stands that the male fish vendors
operate and seven government constructed fish processing/vending stalls where the female
fish vendors operate. The female fish vendors are responsible for maintaining and repairing
the stalls. No rental fees or utility (water and electricity) consumption fees are collected for
the government built fish vending stalls. Nevertheless, the fish processors/vendors will soon
be asked to contribute to the utility bills (J. Leslie, pers. comm. 2015). There is one female
boat owner in the vicinity compared to many male boat owners. There are currently 78
fishing vessels officially registered at the Fisheries Division to the Six Men’s Bay landing
site. These include 12 iceboats (over 12m, multi-day trips), 11 launches (6-12m,/day- trip
boats) and 55 open dinghies (3-6m, locally called moses) (Barbadian Fishing Vessels, 2015).
The registration is done annually.
The Fisheries Division records state that four of the iceboats’ primary landing site is at the
Bridgetown Fisheries Complex. However, during semi-structured interviews, it was
20
mentioned that all of the iceboats land and sell approximately 80% to 90% of their catch at
the Bridgetown Fisheries Complex, and the remainder is sold at Six Men’s Bay. The iceboat
owners transport the remainder via their fishing vessels to the Bay. On the other hand, the
launches and moses owners land and sell 90% to 95% of their fish catch at the Bay.
Nevertheless, due to the lack of cold storage facility at Six Men’s Bay, if there is a large
catch of flyingfish (e.g. 3,000-4,000 flyingfish) by individual launch vessel owners some of
the catch is taken to the Bridgetown Fisheries Complex to be sold. See Figure 8 for the
relative proportion of fishing vessels type in the registered fishing fleet of Six Men’s Bay and
their fish landing sites.
Figure 8: Relative proportion of fishing vessels type in the registered fishing fleet of Six Men's Bay and
their fish landing sites.
(Source: Registered vessels data by the Fisheries Division, 2015)
The iceboats’ owners take advantage of the facilities at the Bridgetown Fisheries Complex.
For instance, the fishers are able to wash their vessels after a fishing trip at sea, weigh their
catch, and get ice and diesel fuel supplies at the fisheries complex. Six Men’s Bay lacks the
appropriate infrastructure and facilities to handle the larger vessels with high volumes of fish.
There was once a jetty at Six Men’s Bay that was demolished in the early 1970’s. Thus, some
boat owners find it difficult to off-load their fish catch, and some have to swim to and from
their moored vessels while others use the moses as tenders. The fishermen also lack
washroom facilities, ice, cold storage and a diesel supply at Six Men’s Bay. Diesel supply
was once available at Six Men’s Bay, provided by a small private business. However, the
rates were a bit higher than diesel sold by Port St. Charles luxury marina, and it was
inconvenient for boat owners to load their vessels with the diesel due to lack of a jetty. Thus,
the business was unsuccessful and eventually stopped providing diesel supply in 2014. Boat
owners of Six Men’s Bay continue to purchase diesel from Port St. Charles. In the 1990s,
there were plans for a Northern Fisheries Development (NFD) by the Ministry of Agriculture
and Rural Development. Due to ongoing legal issues before the law courts concerning
government’s acquisition of land in Six Men’s and other aspects of land ownership and
development planning, the NFD has not been executed (GOB 2004) whereas the marina
development proceeded.
Although some community members depend on fisheries for livelihoods, the fisherfolk of
Six Men’s Bay are not affiliated with any fisherfolk organisation, and none of the fishing
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Iceboats Launches Moses
Bridgetown Six Men's Bay Six Men's Bay
Per
cen
t (%
) fr
eq
uen
cy
Registered fishing vessels and fish landing sites
21
vessels are insured. Some say they were once members of Six Men’s Fisherfolk Association,
where they came into contact with BARNUFO personnel. From 1997 to 2000 the Fisheries
Division implemented the Fisherfolk Organisation Development Project as a basis for
national level fisheries co-management, from which both the Six Men’s Fisherfolk
Association and BARNUFO stemmed (McConney et al. 2003). The former fisherfolk
organisation was short lived. Registered fishing vessels of Six Men’s Bay are not insured due
to avoidance of the fees and expenses of insurance premiums.
Apart from some animal rearing, for instance, one or two sheep and chickens, there are no
agricultural practices done at the site. Land space does not allow for other farming practices.
The housing situation is a hazard in itself due to the wooden houses in close proximity to
each other causing fire hazards. This high density of housing also does not permit access to
emergency medical services.
Both anthropogenic activities and climatic events have impacted negatively on the natural
environment of Six Men’s Bay. The fisherfolk recall a wetland in the south of Six Men’s Bay
in the 1960s, along with a small fish processing building, which is presently occupied by Port
Ferdinand luxury marina’s harbour. See Table 2 for historical profile of Six Men’s Bay. In
the 1980s, fishers would catch crabs from the wetland to be used as bait while fishing.
Fisherfolk recollect in the 1960s and early 1970s the beach being sandy and extensive before
beach erosion and the development of Port St. Charles luxury marina took place. The media
recorded coastal erosion at the Bay in the early 1980s. For example, the Nation Newspaper
16 August 1983, and the Barbados Advocate newspaper 29 December 1988 mention that
“trees were being uprooted, and the back parts of homes were removed and damaged by
waves.” The narrowing of the beachfront led to significant social impacts such as forced
relocation of eight homes in the 1980s (Table 2) and loss of social and recreational space
(Figure 9). The community described the further narrowing of the beach as due to the
development of Port St. Charles from 1996 and Port Ferdinand from 2011 exacerbated the
coastal erosion at Six Men’s Bay.
Table 2: Historical profile produced by the participants at the Six Men’s Bay’s community workshop 9
August 2015
YEAR
EVENT
1950s - 1970s Migrants from St. Lucia and St. Vincent
1950s- Early 1970s Wooden Jetty
1960s Private fish processing plant once located on Port Ferdinand luxury marina’s harbour
1960s - present Coastal erosion. Sea reclaimed approximately 80ft of land
1960s - present Sea surges and marine inundation
1960s Roach Drug Store
1960s - 1980s Infrastructural improvement
1960s -Late 1970s Loss of sea egg population
1980s Loss of reef fish due to loss of reef
22
YEAR
EVENT
1989-1990 8 beachfront houses relocated to Six Men’s Development
Late 1980s – early
1990s
The fishers’ shed
1990s Improvement of Six Men’s road infrastructure
1990s Halfway house (Hurricane shelter)
Early 1990s Construction of Port St. Charles. Damage to the reef. Less haul up space for fishing
boats.
1990s 2 doctor offices- Dr. Roger and Dr. Gilmore
1990s – 2000s Migrants from Guyana
Late 1990s- early
2000s
Restoration of playing field
2000s Influx of tourists due to the developments to the south and north of the Bay
2010 Rodney’s Boat Yard
2011 Construction of Port Ferdinand Luxury Marina and lift bridge. Continued erosion of
the coastline.
2011-2014 Sargassum seaweed out at sea and the invasion of the lionfish
Early 2000s -2014 Turtle tourism
23
Figure 9: Photographs of Six Men's Bay main highway facing north in 1969 and 2015.
In the 1969 photograph, the beachfront homes on the left were relocated in the 1980s (photo credit Judith
Palapal). In the 2015 photograph, the fish vending/processing stalls are now located where homes were
once located (photo credit Charlette Alleyne-Greene).
In addition, the fishers mentioned that the coral reef habitat in the Bay has disappeared.
Before the disappearance, nearshore fishing was practiced extensively prior to the early
1980’s for reef fish at Six Men’s Bay. Presently there are dead reef areas and algae where
there was once a healthy coral reef. The community members also recall seeing a healthy reef
prior to the development of Port St. Charles. During the construction phase of Port St.
Charles, there were occasions when the sediment curtains were not securely placed to capture
sediments (L. Nurse, pers. comm. 2013). The reef probably died due to being smothered by
sedimentation caused by the construction of the mentioned marina, along with high sea-
surface temperature.
The fishers stated that there have been changes in abundance, size, disposition and diversity
of fish species at the Six Men’s Bay nearshore waters. For example, the fishers mentioned a
reduction in the following areas; in the abundance of flyingfish, jacks (carangids) and
snappers, and in the size of reef fish such as ‘chubs’ (parrotfish) and ‘ning nings’ (coney).
Furthermore, the fishers stated that there has been a loss of ‘frays’ (mixed species of
anchovies) since 2009 to present. See Table 3 for reported species caught by registered
fishing vessels of Six Men’s Bay. Also, from 2011 to date, the invasion of the lionfish and
the abundance of Sargassum along the west and north coast has had a deleterious impact on
the amount of fish caught by the fishers. See Figure 10 for the effect of climate change and
variability on the fisheries value chain at Six Men’s Bay. The Sargassum seaweed is not a
yearlong issue, neither does it frequent Barbados waters annually; it is brought to the island
via ocean currents. There were also reported cases of dead fish appearing in Six Men’s Bay
around 1994. The Barbados Advocate newspaper, dated 12 August 1994, mentions that “an
environmental consultant suggests that the fish kills were due to disease.” Another article in
the Barbados Advocate newspaper, dated 27 August 1994, states that the fish kills were due
24
to chemical contamination. There was also another case of a fish kill on a larger scale in the
eastern Caribbean, including Barbados, in 1999. However, most of the fish kills of 1999
beached on the northeast, south and west of Barbados. It was concluded that the 1999 fish
kill was caused by bacterial infection, Streptococcus iniae (Willoughby et al. 2002). In
addition, the community members indicated that the loss of the ‘sea egg’ (white sea urchins)
population started around the late 1970’s and within the last 6 to 8 years there has been a loss
of ‘frays’ (mixed anchovy species).
Table 3: List of present reported species caught by registered fishing vessels at Six Men's Bay.
Species group Species Fishing vessel
Flyingfish Flyingfish Launches and Ice boats
Offshore pelagics Dolphin, kingfish, shark, tuna, turpits, albacore Launches and Iceboats
Demersals Brim, snappers, ning nings, horse-eye jacks,
‘amberfish’ (amberjack) (carangids)
Launches, Iceboats and Moses
Inshore pelagics Cavalli, bonito, blow goats, pot fish, jacks, ‘tabio’
(rainbow runner) (carangids)
Launches and Moses
(Source: Fisherfolk of Six Men’s Bay, 2015)
Figure 10: Schematic diagram of the effects of climate change and variability on the fisheries value chain
at Six Men’s Bay.
The records revealed that there were a few more species landed at Six Men’s Bay that were
25
not reported by the present day fishers; such as swordfish and barracuda. However, an apt
comparison could not be made with present day landings due to missing records. See Table 4
for recorded fish species landed at Six Men’s Bay, along with fishing vessels, from 1997 to
2004.
Table 4: Recorded fish species landed at Six Men's Bay (1997-2004).
Species group Species Fishing vessel
Flying fish Flyingfish Launches
Offshore pelagics Dolphin, kingfish, shark, tuna, turpits, albacore,
swordfish, billfish
Launches
Demersals Any other variety (AOV), brim, snappers, Launches and Moses
Inshore pelagics Cavalli, bonito, pot fish, jacks, barracuda Launches and Moses
(Source: Data from fish landing records of Fisheries Division, 2015.)
The fishermen of Six Men’s Bay practise various types of fishing methods. There is hook and
line fishing on the shallow shelf of the Bay for ‘chubs’, snappers and ‘ning nings’ fish
species by both, moses and launches vessels owners. Pot fishing, with the use of moses
fishing vessels, is done on the deep slope and bank at Six Men’s Bay for groupers, grunts,
orange spotted filefish, parrotfish and other reef type fish. The fishermen, with access to
launches and iceboats, have been trolling for small pelagic fish species such as ‘bonito’ and
‘blow goats’ (local terms for several tuna species), and cavallis (carangids). Moreover, the
fishers with access to launches and iceboats have been catching snappers, ‘horse-eye jacks’
(big eye jacks), cavallis, and ‘brims’ (queen snapper) by using the brim fishing method on
the deep slope. The iceboats fish on the deep slope of the Bay, especially during the
hurricane season. Horse-eye jacks, cavallis, and jacks are caught in a seine net by a seine
boat (a type of moses). There is one seine boat located at the Bay, which is mainly operated
by an agent. The owner of the seine boat resides overseas.
4.2 Exposure
4.2.1 Climate projections for Barbados
The climate projections for Barbados (Table 5) can adversely impact a coastal community
such as Six Men’s Bay landing site since it is highly exposed. Increases in air temperature,
and, in turn, SST can lead to migration of fish causing a loss of fish species (IPCC 2014). A
loss in fish species can negatively affect the income generated by the fisherfolk since such
effects would produce less fish for the fish consumers to purchase. Furthermore, increases in
precipitation can result in flash floods causing exacerbated inundation. The inundation can
damage the limited fisheries infrastructure along the coastline of Six Men’s Bay. Likewise,
intense hurricane and tropical storm activity can have adverse impacts on the fisherfolk
households, poor fisheries infrastructure; inclusive of the fishers’ uninsured vessels (Table 6
and Table 7). In other words, the climate model projections’ events can devastate the
fisherfolk households, as well as their livelihoods at Six Men’s Bay.
26
Table 5: Climate Change modelling projections for Barbados
Parameter
Impact
Temperature Regional Climate Models (RCMs) indicate increases ranging from 2.4˚C to 3.2˚C in mean
annual temperatures by the 2080s in higher emissions scenarios
Precipitation General Circulation Model (GCM) shows overall increases and decreases, ranging from-36
to +12 mm per month by 2080 under the high emissions scenario. Most projections tend
toward decreases. The RCM reveals decreases in mean annual rainfall (-32%) when
compared to simulations based on the ECHAM4 (-12%).
Sea Surface
Temperatures
(SST)
GCM indicates increases in SST throughout the year. Projected increases range +0.8 ˚C to
3˚C by 2080s across all three emissions scenarios.
Tropical Storms
and Hurricanes
North Atlantic hurricanes and tropical storms appear to have increased in intensity over the
last 30 years. Observed and projected increases in SSTs indicate potential for continuing
increases in hurricane activity and model projections indicate that this may occur through
increases in the intensity of events but not necessarily through increases in the frequency of
storms.
Source: (Simpson et al. 2012)
Table 6: Saffir Simpson hurricane scale with Central Barometric Pressure Ranges
Category Central
pressure
Millibars
Central
pressure
Inches
Winds (MPH) Surge (FT) Damage
1 >980 >280 74-95 4-5 Minimal
2 965-979 2850-2891 96-110 6-8 Moderate
3 945-964 2781-2847 111-130 9-12 Extensive
4 920-944 2717-2788 131-155 13-18 Extreme
5 <920 <2717 >155 >18 Catastrophic
Source: (Smith Warner International Limited, 2007.)
Table 7: Damage associated with different categories of hurricanes
CATEGORY DAMAGE ASSOCIATED
1
No real damage to buildings.
Damage to unanchored mobile homes and boats.
Some damage to poorly constructed signs.
Also, some coastal flooding and minor pier damage.
2 Some damage to building roofs, doors and windows.
Considerable damage to mobile homes.
Flooding damage piers and small craft in unprotected moorings may break
moorings.
Some trees are blown down.
3 Some structural damage to small residences and utility buildings.
Large trees blow down.
Mobile homes and poorly built signs are destroyed.
Flooding near the coast destroys smaller structures with larger structures damaged
by floating debris.
27
Terrain may be flooded well inland.
4 More extensive curtainwall failures with some complete roof structure failure on
small residences.
Major erosion of beach areas.
Terrain may be flooded well inland.
5 Complete roof failure on many residences and industrial buildings.
Some complete building failures with small utility buildings blown over or away.
Flooding causes major damage to lower floors of all structures near the shoreline.
Massive evacuation of residential areas may be required.
(Source: Smith Warner International Limited 2007)
4.2.2 Meteorological data results for Barbados
Climate change and variability can be detrimental to the fisheries value chain. For instance,
high air temperatures can lead to higher SST causing more intense storms and hurricanes and
coral bleaching. These effects of SST can lead to less fishing trips and a reduction in
abundance and size of fisheries (Mahon 2002; IPCC 2014). In turn, such effects lead to a
scarcity of fish species, which inevitably leads to an increase in the price of rare fish for the
fish consumer. As a result, temperature and precipitation data sets captured the localized
nature of rainfall and temperature as it relates to Barbados and Six Men’s Bay alike. For the
most part, temperature and rainfall impact the entire island at the same time due to its small
size; thus, the meteorological data results for the island were used for this study. At the same
time, the meteorological datasets were compared to the climatic modelling projection for
Barbados.
4.2.2.1 Temperatures over a 15 year period in Barbados
Figure 11: Annual mean maximum temperatures in Barbados (2000-2014).
(Source: Temperature data by the Barbados Meteorological Office at Grantley Adams International
Airport, 2015)
The above chart (Figure 11) illustrates maximum temperatures over a fifteen year period in
Barbados. The highest annual average of 27.75 oC was recorded in 2005, whereas the lowest
annual average of 24.71 oC was observed in 2008. The monthly mean maximum temperature
for the 15-year study period was 27.22 oC. The fifteen years mean maximum temperatures
26.6
26.8
27
27.2
27.4
27.6
27.8
28
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016
Tem
per
atu
re
(◦C
)
Year
Mean Maximum Temperatures (2000-2014)
28
recorded (Figure 11) by the Barbados Meteorological Office, at the Grantley Adams
International Airport, reveals an increase in average temperature ranging from 0.8 oC – 1 oC
per annum. The meteorological temperature datasets confirm the Regional Climate Model
projections of mean annual temperatures are increasing by the 2080s (Table 5). Rising
temperatures will negatively affect the size of fish caught. High temperatures can reduce the
oxygen carrying capacity of the ocean, which in turn restricts the maximum growth of adult
fish (IPCC 2014). As aforementioned, an increase in temperatures will lead to an adverse
change in stock distribution (Mahon 2002), migration of fish species and extinction of
various fish species (IPCC 2014). Hence, such effect can lead to unemployment or less
income for some fishers, fish processors, fish vendors and less local fish to purchase by the
consumer. Some fish consumers are owners of restaurants which can also have an
unfavourable effect on their sales. In other words, the increase in temperature can have an
adverse impact on the entire fisheries value chain.
The effects of rising air temperatures and SST on fisheries can lead to a repeat of the 1999
fish kill economic impact in the Barbados fishing industry. Less income was generated by
fisherfolk and less fish bought by the consumers due to the fish kill. Along with a bacterium,
high SST was said to have contributed to the 1999 fish kill in Barbados. The SST in 1999
September was recorded at 28-32oC (Willoughby 1999). During that period, the fish sales
dropped significantly everywhere in Barbados (McConney et al. 2003).
4.2.2.2 Precipitation over a 15 year period in Barbados
Figure 12: The mean precipitation of Barbados from 2000 to 2014.
(Source: Precipitation data by the Barbados Meteorological Office at Grantley Adams International
Airport, 2015)
The prevailing mean precipitation recorded during the study period (Figure 12) shows an
overall increase that fluctuated between years. The increase in rainfall can lead to sea level
rise which can contribute to coastal erosion. The highest annual mean precipitation of 74.2
mm observed in 2010 while the lowest annual mean precipitation of 38.56 mm in 2003. The
overall mean precipitation recorded over the 15 year study period was 51.67 mm, with a
standard deviation of 11.42 mm. The meteorological datasets for 2000 to 2014 reveal
increases and decreases in mean annual rainfall (Figure 12). Likewise, the General
Circulation Model indicates overall increases and decreases per month in rainfall by 2080.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
20
09
20
10
20
11
20
12
20
13
20
14
Pre
cip
ita
tio
nl
(mm
)
Year
Precipitation (2000-2014)
29
Climate change contributes significantly to changes in annual precipitation. Similar to the
increases and decreases in precipitation, the region also experienced increases and decreases
in SST within some of the same study period. The high patterns of precipitation in tropical
regions are dominated by shifts as sea surface temperature changes (Trenberth 2011). For
instance, in July 2010 the SST (oC) was very high in the Lesser Antilles (Figure 13) and
Barbados experienced 303.3 mm of precipitation during the same period; whereas in July
2013 the SST (oC) was medium and the precipitation recorded for that period was 62 mm.
Similarly, in May 2010 the SST (oC) in the lesser Antilles was slightly high, and Barbados
observed 122.17 mm of rainfall; while in May 2013 the SST (oC ) was medium (Figure 13)
and 55.12 mm rainfall was recorded in Barbados.
In addition, the climate models had projected higher SST, which in turn would lead to coral
bleaching causing loss of fisheries habitat, and a shift in the distribution of fish species
(Nurse 2011). Further higher SST will cause more intense hurricanes and storms activities
that can have deleterious outcomes for coastal fishing communities and the fisheries value
chain alike. For instance, uninsured fishing vessels and the limited fisheries infrastructure,
such as the fish vending sheds at Six Men’s Bay, can be destroyed by intense weather
systems. See Table 7 for damage associated with different hurricanes. The destruction of the
fisheries infrastructure and vessels would lead to unemployment of some fishermen, fish
processors and/or fish vendors and less fish catch for the customers to buy. In addition, more
intense storms and hurricanes will cause the fishers to have less fishing days during June to
October (Mahon 2002); which would inevitably lead to less fish to be processed and sold.
30
Figure 13: Monthly comparison of daytime SST in the Lesser Antilles in 2010 and 2013.
The red represents high SST (30oC+); the yellow signifies medium SST (between 14oC and 30oC) and the
green presents low SST (14oC-). The year 2010 recorded the highest precipitation, and the SST was
similarly high during that year.
Source: (US government satellite imagery website: http://oceancolor.gsfc.nasa.gov AquaModis sea
surface temperature (11µ monthly) 4km resolution)
4.2.3 Vulnerability to climate and non-climate hazards
The first VCA tool used in this study, the direct observation tool, revealed several
vulnerabilities within the fishing community of Six Men’s Bay. See Table 8 for direct
observation exercise results. What was prominent in the exercise is that there were many
areas which placed some fisherfolk livelihoods at risk. Noticed were boats not anchored to
the ground on shore, and some were along watercourses. The fishing vessels can become lost
at sea or severely damaged during a potential severe weather event such as flash floods.
Further, poor sanitation practises were observed along the Bay, such as refuse and
dilapidated boats. The unsanitary environs can harbour rodents and vermin, which can cause
health issues among the fisherfolk, which in turn would lead to fewer days to earn revenue.
Beach erosion is evident along the Bay. Thus, there is limited fisherfolk infrastructure there.
Not only is there limited land space for fisheries infrastructure but also for pavements.
31
Highway 1B is typically busy with traffic on a daily basis. Hence, the lack of pavements on
the busy highway of Six Men’s Bay is a major risk for the entire fisheries value chain. Some
male fish processors operate on a narrow strip of land along the highway and consumers
purchase the fish on the busy highway.
Table 8: Direct observation exercise results.
Capacities Vulnerabilities Historical and Livelihoods
Port Ferdinand Luxury Marina
(provides jobs and
accommodations)
Fish processing/vending stalls
Guesthouse
Church
Shop (3)
Playing field
Watercourses (2)
Ackee tree (1)
Breadfruit trees (6)
Coconut trees (27)
Bridges (2)
Bar (1)
King George VI mailbox
Highway
Fruit and vegetable stall
Boats not anchored to the
ground
No pavements
Beach erosion
Earthquake can affect bridges
No street crossing signage
Blocked drainage
Fishing vessels on land (26)
Fishing vessels moored at sea
(36)
Construction zones
Fishers’ shed
Jet ski
Poor beach vegetation
Utility cables in ackee tree
Port St. Charles marine
dredging
Houses are fire hazards
Boat building
Fish processing
vending
Fishing
King George VI mailbox
Braddy’s Bar
Fisher’s shed
Lift Bridge
Port Ferdinand Luxury Marina
(provides jobs and accommodations)
Demographics information
and Daily Activities
Health, Sanitation and
Essential Services Infrastructure
African decent
All age ranges
Motorists
Wholesale trading
Retail trading
Socializing in the
neighbourhood
Vending (fruit and food)
Refuse (old tires, refrigerators,
stalls in poor state)
11 sheets of galvanized
Dilapidated house
Dilapidated boats
Roads: asphalt and unpaved
roundabout
Bridges
Utility: Electricity, water and telephone
Street lights
Houses: wood and concrete
Bus stops
Church
Fishers’ Shed
Drainage
Bar
Shops
During a seasonal calendar exercise the stakeholders highlighted a few hazards that have an
annual impact on Six Men’s Bay (Table 9). The climatic and non-climatic hazards include
sea surge caused by the northerly swells, flash flooding and coastal erosion. It was agreed
that coastal erosion takes place at Six Men’s Bay monthly at a medium rate. One of the
contributors to the coastal erosion at the Bay is northerly swells, and these are common at a
high rate during the months of December, January and February, or the winter period. The
continued coastal erosion at the Bay would eventually affect the fish vending stalls, which in
turn would affect both the fish vendors and fish consumers negatively. There is a low rate of
flooding caused by flash flooding, from the month of June until November, and there is a
high rate of marine inundation caused by northerly swells during the months of December to
February. During the flash flooding period, there have been cases of some fisherfolk
contracting mosquito diseases such as dengue or chikungunya. A fisherfolk falling ill to
mosquito diseases would lead to less income generated while home recuperating. In addition,
32
a part of the hurricane season, from August to September, was also mentioned as a low-
income period for the fisherfolk at Six Men’s Bay (Table 9). During the hurricane season, the
sea is too rough to make fishing trips, so boat repairs are done in between this period, along
with engaging in supplementary livelihoods that require fewer skills. During the low-income
period not only does it mean less catch and less income generated by the fisherfolk but also
less fish for the fish consumer to purchase.
Table 9: Seasonal calendar Key: L= low M= medium H= high
HAZARD J F M A M J J A S O N D
Flooding due to blocked drainage L L L L L
Bushfires’ smoke H H H H H
Beach erosion M M M M M M M M M M M M
Sea surge/ Northerly swells H H H
Hurricane/ storm M M H H H M
Marine inundation H H H
HEALTH
Mosquitoes L L L L L
Rodents L L L L L
Limited garbage collection H H H H H H H H H H H H
Squatting M M M M M M M M M M M M
SEASONALITY
Marine traffic H H H H H H H H H H H H
Seasonal pot fishing H H H H H H
Overfishing pot fishing H H H H H H H H H H H H
Flyingfish H H H H H H H H
Large pelagic H H H
Low income L L L
There were a number of risks identified by the community members of Six Men’s Bay using
both the hazard map and transect walk tools. See Figure 14 illustrating the transect walk path.
After a community-based hazard mapping exercise with some of the community members of
Six Men’s Bay, the researcher placed the findings into a hazard map using ArcGIS (Figure
15). There were a number of risks identified by the participants. Among those identified were
fringing reef mortality, coastal erosion, marine inundation, land pollution, traffic hazard, fire
hazard, blocked drainage causing flooding, rising water table and land tenure issues.
33
Figure 14: 2013 satellite image illustrating transect walk path (orange line).
(Source: Google earth 2015. Path created by Charlette Alleyne-Greene, 2015)
Figure 15: Community-based hazard map of Six Men's Bay.
(Source: Esri ArcGis map created by Charlette Alleyne-Greene, 2015)
4.2.3.1 Reef mortality at Six Men’s Bay
There were known cases of sedimentation degrading the reef during the construction of Port
St. Charles in the early 1990s. Sedimentation smothers coral reefs which eventually cause
34
them to die. Sediment curtains are mandatory for coastal developments; however, proper
monitoring of them during construction could have prevented sediment pollution of the near
shore waters. Consequently, the developers were told by Coastal Zone Management Unit
(CZMU) that they had to seek additional sediment curtains to prevent further pollution of the
sea (L. Nurse, pers. comm. 2013).
CZMU has no records dating the exact period of when the reef first fell into decline. The
community members indicated that the reef went into decline in the early 1990s. The pot
fishers explained that since the reef fell into decline at Six Men’s Bay, there has been a
decrease in abundance of various fish species that were once caught near shore. The coral
reef monitoring records for Six Men’s Bay revealed a reduction in the number reef fish
species per 100m2 from 2002 to 2012. There were 22 reef fish species per 100m2 registered
in 2002 and 2007. However, the total number of reef fish species declined in 2012 to 10 per
100m2 (GOB 2014). Again, the reef monitoring data revealed a decrease in abundance of reef
fish. For instance, an abundance of 77.8 reef fish per 10m2 was recorded in 2002 compared
with an abundance of 31.1 reef fish per 10m2 in 2012. Consequently, less abundance of reef
fish at the Bay has impacted revenue generated by some nearshore fishermen. One nearshore
fisher mentioned that approximately 10 years ago his weekly earnings from reef fishing
would have been twice as much what he is making today. Hence, climate change can affect
revenues from fishing incidentally via stock abundance (Mahon 2002).
Further, an excessive amount of macroalgae can harm reefs and cause them to die.
Macroalgae can arise from excess nutrients to nearshore waters from runoff and a reduction
of algae eating reef fish. Herbivorous reef fish, such as parrotfish, assist with the
maintenance of the reef by consuming such algae. The coral monitoring survey data of the
CZMU revealed an increasing abundance of macroalgae coverage recorded at the bay’s reef.
For instance, 0.37% abundance of macroalgae has been recorded in 1997, compared to
0.00% recorded in 1987 (GOB 1998). The macroalgae abundance increased after 1997; the
latest record of the abundance of macroalgae was 11.80% in 2012 (GOB 2014).
Also, the fishing activities of the local fishers at Six Men’s Bay have changed since the
reduction in fish abundance. For instance, once before fishers of moses’ vessels could cast
seine nets 3 metres away from the nearshore to fish for pelagics (Figure 16), however
nowadays fishing a few metres away from shore is unlikely. Presently fishers of moses’
vessels fish a 1.6 kilometre or more away from the nearshore.
Figure 16: Fishing with a seine net nearshore at Six Men's Bay in 1969.
(Source: Photograph credit Judith Palapal).
35
4.2.3.2 Coastal erosion at Six Men’s Bay
From the 1970s to present the coastline of Six Men’s Bay has been undergoing erosion
(Figure 17). The community members of Six Men’s Bay estimate that the sea has reclaimed
approximately 24 to 30 metres of the land. As a result, in the late 1980s, eight households
were relocated to Six Men’s Development, also known as Colleton Gardens, due to
exacerbated erosion along the bay.
Figure 17: Map of the coastline of Six Men's Bay illustrating erosion since the 1970s (red line).
A polyline shapefile (by Charlette Alleyne-Greene 2015) created over a 1970s contour map shapefile (by
GB GeoEngineering Inc. 2015) of Barbados to depict coastline erosion against a 2012 satellite image of
Six Men’s.
(Source: 2012 satellite image by GB GeoEngineering Inc. 2015)
The beach profile datasets of Six Men’s Bay winter and summer periods, for a five year
period, reveals significant beach erosion by the year 2001 (Figure 18). The year 2001 was the
final year of the beach profile monitoring at the Bay by the CZMU due to significant erosion
at the profile location, which made it difficult to survey (R. Roach, pers. comm. 2015). The
ongoing coastal erosion at the Bay has led to limited infrastructure for the fisherfolk there.
The loss of the fringing reef contributed to the massive coastal erosion; since coral reefs can
provide ample shoreline protection by attenuating high wave energy and converting this
energy to assist in accretion of sand on the leeward side of the coral reef (Harris 2003; Burke
and Maidens 2004). As aforementioned, annually Six Men’s Bay shoreline is heavily
impacted by northerly swells during the winter period. The effect of the northerly swells on
the shoreline is severe beach erosion (Figure 19).
36
Figure 18: A five-year period of Six Men's Bay beach profile data.
The chart illustrates severe beach erosion, during the winter and summer periods, from the year 1995 to
2001. The beach chainage eroded from 30m to 12 m, and the elevation decreased from 2.61m to 1.88 m
during the mentioned period.
(Source: Beach profile data by CZMU, 2015)
Figure 19: The effect of a northerly swell to the shoreline of Six Men's Bay.
The photograph reveals severe beach erosion immediately after a northerly swell of March 2005.
(Source: Photo credit Philip Jackman, Senior Fisheries officer, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries
Division, 2005)
In addition, healthy coral reefs replenish shorelines with beach sand during calm periods but
due to the reef mortality, this is impossible. Rubble and algae now exist where a healthy
fringing reef once existed at Six Men’s Bay. Efficient fisheries infrastructure cannot be
accommodated on the seaward side of the main road of Six Men’s Bay due to the dearth of
beach front land space caused by the eroding shoreline. Unfortunately, the livelihood of the
fisherfolk of Six Men’s Bay depends on the limited infrastructure along the coast.
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Ele
va
tio
n (
m)
Chainage (m)
Beach Profile: Six Men's Bay
09/05/1995
15/03/1996
04/05/1998
24/03/1999
27/03/2001
37
4.2.3.3 Inundation
At the mid-section of Six Men’s Bay shoreline, there is a narrow strip of beach that leads to
the highway that undergoes coastal flooding during storm surge and northerly swells (Figure
20). After the mentioned climatic events, some of the fisherfolk shovel away beach sand and
coastal debris from that section of the highway in order to restore transportation.
Figure 20: Photograph illustrates the narrow stretch of beach and the highway that becomes inundated
due to climatic events.
(Source: Photo credit Charlette Alleyne-Greene, 2014)
The CZMU has created a polygon shapefile describing inundation areas resulting from a
modelled 1 in 100-year storm event affecting the south, west and north-west coasts of
Barbados. Figure 21 is a segment, or clip, of the mentioned CZMU’s 1 in 100-year flood
polygon overlaid on a 2012 satellite image of Six Men’s Bay. The metadata for the polygon
states that “the 100 year storm event corresponds to a Category 4 hurricane (winds = 120
knots) passing within 80 nautical miles of the northeast coast of Barbados” (Table 6 and
Table 7 for a description of a Category 4 hurricane and the damage associated with it). The
flood polygon illustrates the predicted extent of inundation if impacted by the mentioned
event and does not predict the height of the waters above terrestrial elevations (R. Roach,
pers. comm. 2015).
The 1 in 100-year flood map (Figure 21) illustrates flood extent to the capacities and/or
resources located on the seaward side and to the landward side of Six Men’s Bay. The
capacities of Six Men’s Bay that are vulnerable to the impact of the 1 in 100-year flood
include the limited fisheries infrastructure, boat building activity, Braddy’s Bar, fruit vending
stall, three shops, one barbershop, one church, playing field, historic mailbox, over 25 homes,
the main highway of Six Men’s Bay, among others. See Table 10 for capacities and
livelihoods that are at risk. Hence, many livelihoods and services are vulnerable to flooding
impacts.
38
Figure 21: 1 in 100-year storm surge flood hazard map of Six Men's Bay.
The above map consists of a 100-year flood impact polygon shapefile overlaid on a 2012 satellite image. The flood extent of the polygon was modelled in 1993 by Delcan for the Coastal Zone Management Unit.
However, SLR has gotten higher since 1993 due to climate change. Hence, the present flood extent would
be more severe.
(Source: 1 in 100-year flood impact shapefile by CZMU, 2015. Map by Charlette Alleyne-Greene, 2015)
Table 10: Capacities list, inclusive of livelihoods and gender role lists, partly produced by the participants
at the Six Men’s Bay’s community workshop 9 August 2015.
Capacities Livelihoods Gender roles
Shops (3) Boat builders 3 male boat builders
Braddy’s Bar Fishermen 1 female and 77 male boat owners
Barbershop Fish processors Fish processors are both male and female
Church Vendors
Fruit and vegetable stall Port Ferdinand (provides jobs)
King George IV mailbox Barber
Houses Fish Pot restaurant (provides jobs)
Playing field
Guesthouse
Port Ferdinand (provides
accommodations)
Road
Fish vending stalls (7)
Bridges (2)
4.2.3.4 Land pollution
Along the highway on the seaward side of Six Men’s Bay are dilapidated launches boats next
39
to a watercourse, old refrigerators, tyres and other refuse. The dilapidated boats are
hazardous since they are not securely placed on the ground; thus, flash floods and storm
surge could possibly move them out to sea where they can damage moored boats. Also, there
is limited garbage collection. Furthermore, the polluted land areas can harbour rodents and
vermin in the area which can lead to locals being vulnerable to fall ill to related diseases such
as leptospirosis and dengue fever. One of the community members, an environmental health
officer of the local clinic, highlighted that some of the community members usually contract
either mosquito or rodent diseases from June to November, during the rainy season.
4.2.3.5 Traffic hazard
The coastal highway at Six Men’s generally lacks road safety signage and pavements for
pedestrians and for some fish vendors (Figure 20). Therefore, pedestrians and fish consumers
are endangered normally and especially when crossing to board public transportation or to
purchase fish. Also, there are two bus stops along the narrow highway of Six Men’s, of
which one of them has inadequate space for the public to wait for public transportation. The
traffic along Six Men’s Bay is usually busy since it happens to be highway 1b which is the
main road used for persons in the north to get to Speightstown or Bridgetown. In addition,
the roundabout at Six Men’s Bay needs proper alignment between the T-junction at the south
of Six Men’s Bay highway. The roundabout correct usage is often missed at night time by
motorists travelling from north to south of the Six Men’s Bay highway 1B towards the
roundabout. The roundabout is positioned too far left of the motorists when travelling south
and is hardly visible at night time. This miscalculation of positioning the roundabout may
lead to a road fatality in the future. Some residents complained of minor car accidents in the
past due to the mentioned road hazard.
4.2.3.6 Fire hazard
There are approximately 20 houses on the landward side of Six Men’s Bay main road that are
located in close proximity to each other and mainly built of wooden materials. The houses
behind the mentioned houses are also built close to each other, and there is an inadequate
road network to access emergency and medical services. The stakeholders had highlighted
that the closeness of the houses is directly attributed to the high density of squatter
households at Six Men’s St. Peter. As a result, many residents would not have adhered to the
Standard Conditions part II of the Town and Country Development Planning Office
(TCDPO) Order, 1972. The TCPDO Order restricts the erection of a house less than 6 feet
from the boundary of the plot “if the external walls or roof covering are constructed with
wood or combustible materials” (GOB, 1989: A20).
4.2.3.7 Flood hazard
At the south of Six Men’s Bay highway, stakeholders complain of flooding of a blocked
drainage during flash floods. The function of the drain has been compromised due to low
maintenance. The stagnant water that remains over time due to the blocked drain can become
a breeding ground for mosquitoes causing residents, fish processors and fish vendors to be
vulnerable to get ill from mosquito diseases. In addition, fish consumers, who do not have
access to private transportation, may be hesitant to pass the stagnant water by foot to
purchase fish from the fish vendors.
40
4.2.4 Demographically vulnerable groups
According to the latest official statistics, the total population of Six Men’s Bay was 438
people in the year 2010, which includes 211 males and 227 females (GOB, 2010). The modal
age range is 40 to 44 years and the smallest being the 80 to 85 and over age range. From
among the mentioned population, there were 17 fishery households when this study was
conducted. The highest educational institutional level for the population ranged from pre-
primary to tertiary (Figure 22). The majority of the population’s (47%) highest educational
institution is secondary level and followed by primary level (30%). Only a small percentage
(6%) of the Six Men’s Bay community has a tertiary level education (GOB, 2010). From
among the 16 fishery households, two households consists of one member that has attained
tertiary level education. None of the fisherfolk of the fishery households has a tertiary
education.
Figure 22: The highest educational institution for the population of Six Men's Bay.
(Source: Statistical data by GOB, 2010)
A small sample of six fishery households was purposively selected for this study. The fishery
households sample consisted of one fisherfolk person per household; the other family
members were engaged in other livelihoods or in some cases a few were unemployed (Figure
23). The sample consisted of 83% male-headed households. The gender distribution of
income earners in the sample is 52% males and 48% females. The total age range goes from
19 to 82 years old. There is one elderly male among the sample who voluntarily continues in
the fishing industry as a fisherman. His revenue generated through fishing contributes to his
household.
4.2.4.1 Educational background
The majority (52%) of the sample’s highest form of education is at the secondary level while
the minority (10%) of the sample attained an education at the tertiary level (Figure 23).
Moreover, 29% of the sample achieved primary level education only; of which the majority
are fishermen. The other 9% of the sample’s educational background was unknown by the
interviewer. As mentioned earlier, based on the semi-structured interviews and discussions
conducted, the community members have a general idea of what is climate change and
variability; this knowledge probably gathered via the media, but their perceived risk of such
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Pe
rce
nt
(%)
Fre
qu
en
cy
Highest Educational Institution
Male Female
41
was very limited.
4.2.4.2 Gender roles
As aforementioned, the sample consisted of 83% male-headed households, only 17% of the
sample households were headed by females. As shown in Figure 24 there are 20%
unemployed females compared to a mere 5% unemployed males. Most of the working males
possess critical skills that can contribute more to raising an income towards the household.
However, the unemployed females are known to be the caretakers of the family. Also, the
unemployed male had completed tertiary education while 10% of the unemployed female had
only accomplished primary level education and the other 10% secondary level education
(Figure 23).
Figure 23: Livelihoods activities by gender (M=Male F=Female) and level of education.
The female fisherfolk of Six Men’s Bay are generally involved in fish processing and
vending. Their livelihood is also seasonal with the fishers’ since they depend on the fish
catch of the fishers.’ Here the fish processor/vendor purchase fish either from Six Men’s Bay
or some may venture to the Bridgetown Fisheries Complex. Some fishers sell fish to the
vendor at the same rate as the fish consumer and others at a lower rate than the fish
consumer’s price. The vendor, in turn, sells the fish for an additional price after processing
the fish. For example, the vendor will purchase flyingfish at $1.30 and some cases $1.50 per
fish and after processing the fish it will retail at an additional .50 cents or .70 cents, that is,
$2.00. See Figure 24 for the fish marketing channels reported by the fisherfolk of Six Men’s
Bay. When comparing the inputs and outputs with the fishermen, the fishers generally have
more costs involved than the fish processor/vendor. For example, an iceboat fisher has to
purchase diesel, fishing gear, ice and pay for boat repairs. Boat repairs, for iceboats and
launches, can amount to over $2,000.00 in some cases, and a fraction of the boat repairs is
returned via government subsidies. Whereas the fish vendor hardly has any cost to cover
other than purchasing fish, bags for packaging and making any necessary repairs to the stall;
of which the latter is minimal compared with boat repairs by fishermen.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
M F M F M F
Primary Secondary Tertiary
Per
cen
t F
req
uen
cy
Gender and level of education
Livestock Farming Tourism sector Fishing
Unemployed Store Owner Retired
Office worker Butcher Seamstress
42
Figure 24: Schematic diagram of the fish marketing channels reported by the fisherfolk of Six Men's Bay.
The results show that the majority (83%) of the fishery households rated their economic
status as average compared to other families in the community while 17% of the sample, who
received social security benefits from overseas, rated theirs as above average. Similarly, 83%
recorded that their household income level is just enough to cover the pertinent household
expense, whereas 17% stated it is usually not enough to cover essential household expenses.
The sample has revealed that the income produced by fisheries and the other occupations
adequately covers the household expenses and, therefore, shows their reliance on fisheries as
a means to generate revenue. Hence, this dependency on the marine resource makes the
fishery households extremely vulnerable if that resource becomes depleted due to climate
change and variability impacts or by anthropogenic means.
A household should have access to a number of pertinent lifelines in order to reduce its
vulnerability to climate change and variability impacts and risks. The fishery household
sample has access to a limited amount of crucial lifelines (Figure 25). Only 17% have access
to backup drinking water via water harvesting tanks and back up for electricity via a portable
generator. None of the sample has access to private transportation.
43
Figure 25: Fishery households’ family access to lifelines.
The sample indicated yes or no to having various lifelines.
4.3 Sensitivity
This section focuses on the extent to which a community or household is adversely affected
by climate change and variability. It also assesses the relationship, and the dependency, of
the household to the climate impacted fisheries resource.
4.3.1 Dependence on resources and services vulnerable to climate change
The majority of the households of Six Men’s are affiliated with the marine resource fisheries
for employment, even if it is only one member of the family being involved in the fishing
industry. Among the sample of fishing households surveyed 83% of the households utilise
fisheries to generate income while 17% generate revenue from the marine resource as a water
sports operator in the tourism sector. However, the water sports operator engages in weekly
hook and line fishing where 100% of his catch is for household uses. On the other hand, only
about 10% of the fish caught by the other households is used for consumption. Moreover,
50% of the sample household uses the marine environment for its cultural value and services;
for instance, the families would engage in sea baths. Most of the sample fishery households
(83%) depend on the marine resource to generate income, thus making them highly sensitive
to climate change and variability impacts.
In addition, 50% of the sample households are also dependent on the upland area (terrestrial)
resource which is vulnerable to the effects of climate variability, such as tropical storms or
hurricanes. Among them, 17% are involved in banana cultivation and 33% committed to
livestock farming of poultry. The banana crop is for household purposes only. Of the 33%
that engage in livestock farming, one household farms both turkey and chickens for sale,
while the other household farms only chickens for sale. Both poultry farming households
retain approximately 10% of the produce for household uses.
Most of the man-made infrastructure provided for the Six Men’s Bay community is heavily
utilised by the fisheries households (Figure 26). For example, the main road or highway of
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%P
erc
en
t Fr
eq
ue
ncy
Access to lifelines
Yes
No
44
Six Men’s Bay is used a 100% by the entire sample in order to get to and from their
livelihood. However, this main road is affected by both anthropogenic and climate change
impacts; such as flooding due to blocked drainage and marine flooding during the storm
surge and northerly swells. The water sports operator works at a hotel in Heywoods, in order
to get there, he takes his jet ski to that location by crossing the highway and entering the Six
Men’s Bay sea. The other 83% of the sample uses the main road to earn income. They
process and sell the fish next to the highway; hence, the 83% of the fisheries households
recorded that the main road assists in producing 100% of the income.
The bridge next to Port Ferdinand luxury marina makes a significant contribution to the
income generated by 83% of the households. The fishers use the bridge to get supplies from
Bridgetown or Speightstown. Also, some of the fish buyers access both the bridges of Six
Men’s to purchase fish at the Bay. All of the fisheries households recorded a 100%
household use of the Port Ferdinand bridge for household use. However, the bridge can be
affected by an earthquake which can negatively affect the fisheries value chain. Since the
consumers commuting from the south side of the bridge would be cut off from accessing the
fish landing site. Hence, the fishers and the fish processors/vendors would generate less
income since there would be fewer fish consumers to purchase their commodity. Also, the
fisherfolk utilise the bridge for their livelihood supplies, and 33% of the sample makes use of
the free medical service provided by the mentioned polyclinic for approximately 20% to 30%
of household purposes. If the bridge is out of service not only would it affect the necessary
supplies needed for their livelihoods but also their health if they need medical attention.
On the seaward side of Six Men‘s Bay, there are seven stalls developed by the government
for fish processing and vending, and a few poorly constructed stalls made by the fishermen
for the same purposes. There is also the water supply for the fishermen’s stalls, along with
temporary electrical supply on utility poles. The service provided by the poorly constructed
stalls and the government constructed stalls are utilized by 67% of the sample to generate
100% income. Also, 50% of the sample utilises the electrical supply, of which 17% uses a
100% to generate revenue for boat building purposes, and 33% of the sample recorded that
they use only 20% of the electrical supply to generate income. Furthermore, 67% of the
fisheries households use the water supply of which 90% to 100% is used to produce income,
whereas 17% use it for household purposes. The locations of the mentioned man-made
infrastructure are vulnerable to the impact of hurricanes, storm surge and other climate
change and variability events; however the fishery households are very dependent on the
high climatic-sensitive infrastructure to generate income.
45
Figure 26: Usage of man-made infrastructure at Six Men's Bay.
4.4 Adaptive Capacity
4.4.1 Dependence on vulnerable resources and income diversification
At both the community level and household level, there is strong dependence on the
vulnerable fisheries resource. Owners of launches and iceboats mentioned that the large
pelagic season exists from the month of March until the month of May. In addition, the
community fishers said that the flyingfish season once started from the month of November
of one year until the month of June of the next year. See Table 7 for the seasonal calendar.
Some of the iceboats fishers of the community reported of catching 7 or 10 flying fish per
fishing trip, compared to hundreds of flyingfish 5 to 6 years ago. Over the years, some of the
Barbadian fishermen travel into other islands’ Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) for the
flyingfish commodity. There have been reported cases of Barbadian fishermen illegally
frequenting the EEZ of Trinidad and Tobago for flyingfish; for example in the Trinidad and
Tobago Newsday online newspaper, dated 29 of November 2011, and 24 of July 2013, and
the Nation Newspaper dated 30 of October 2010.
Records reveal that the flyingfish is the most important fish species in the Six Men’s Bay
fishery, contributing between 50-100% of the annual total recorded landings over a 17 year
period (Figure 27). However, there is a low abundance of flyingfish in the Barbados (EEZ)
compared to 5 to 6 years ago. The launch vessel owners would have experienced a significant
drop in the flyingfish catch after 2009. The flyingfish landings recorded at the research site
decreased significantly from 251,470 kg in 2009 to 76,500 kg by 2014 (Figure 26). As a
result, the fish consumer and the fisherfolk had been affected negatively economically when
the flyingfish landings dropped after 2009 to the present. For instance, less flyingfish landed
is equivalent to less income earned for the fisherfolk and a price increase for the fish
consumer. Some of the fishers, owner of launch vessels, mentioned that the scarcity of the
flyingfish supply, after the year 2009, has affected them financially since its one of their most
popular fish catch sold to the fish consumers. Similarly, many of the fish processors/vendors
mentioned that this year the industry was not as productive as previous years. Some of the
female fish processors said that during this year (2015) they spent many days at home due to
the scarcity of the flyingfish supply.
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
Main road Bridge Water
supply
Electrical
supply
Health
clinic
Stalls
Per
cen
t F
req
uen
cy
Man-made Infrastructure
46
The paucity of the flyingfish commodity is also reflected in the price that it is sold for. As
mentioned by the fishermen of the Bay, during the year 2009 flyingfish species were
plentiful (Figure 27) and marketed as cheaply as100 unprocessed flyingfish being sold for
$25. On the other hand, in 2014 flyingfish were insufficient in supply and 100 unprocessed
flyingfish sold for as much as $100.00, or in some cases $150.00. Currently, 16 unprocessed
flyingfish are sold for $24, and 10 processed flyingfish are sold for $20. For many years,
there was a significant demand for this fish by the consumers when it was plentiful since it
was a cheap fish to purchase.
Dolphinfish, of the offshore pelagics, also played a significant role in the total fish species
landed at Six Men’s Bay within the 17 year study period (Figure 27). From the year 1998
until 2007 the offshore pelagics contribution was stable (Figure 27). For the years 2003,
2005, 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2014 there were no records of offshore pelagics landings at the
fish landing sites.
Figure 27: Flyingfish, other offshore pelagics and total recorded landings in Six Men's Bay and Half
Moon Fort (1997-2014, excluding 2012).
(Source: Fish landing data by the Fisheries Division, 2015)
The demersal fish group and the inshore pelagic group contributed the least towards the
annual total recorded fish landed at Six Men’s Bay in the 17 year study period (Figure 28).
The year 2001 contributed the largest recorded amount of landed demersal fish species
(12,756 kg), and the year 1999 contributed the largest recorded amount of landed inshore
pelagics (Figure 28). There are no records of both aforementioned fish species group being
landed at Six Men’s Bay or Half Moon Fort from 2003 to 2010.
-1000
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016
Tota
l lan
din
gs (
kg)
Tota
l lan
din
gs (
kg)
Year
Flyingfish Total recorded landings offshore pelagics
47
Figure 28: Inshore pelagics and demersal landings in Six Men's Bay and Half Moon Fort (1997 -2014,
excluding 2012).
(Source: Fish landing data by the Fisheries Division, 2015)
Pot fishing has been practiced as a means for generating income for many years at Six Men’s
Bay (Figure 29). For some of the fishers in the community, pot fishing is done seasonally
from June until November. However, others pot fish weekly. Weekly pot fishing can deplete
reef fish resources at Six Men’s Bay similar to “a tragedy of the commons” (Hardin, 1968).
The weekly pot fishers are mainly the younger adult male fishers, and some have been
observed catching juvenile fish species to assist their families. As aforementioned among the
pot fishers catch are groupers, grunts, ‘rusty nails’ (orange spotted filefish), and ‘chubs’
(parrotfish). The parrotfish are the most common for the pot fishers of Six Men’s Bay.
Figure 29: Fish pots on the shore of Six Men's Bay in 1969.
Fish pots can be seen on the right of the photograph. The photograph also reveals a wide beach.
Source: (Photograph credit Jessica Palpal, 1969)
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
Tota
l lan
din
gs (
kg)
Tota
l lan
din
gs (
kg)
Year
Demersal Inshore pelagics
48
Among the fishery households sample, 50% reported catching flyingfish and dolphinfish.
The owner of an iceboat (17%) mentioned that from December of one year until June of the
following year there is a high catch of flyingfish and little catch of dolphin. The iceboat
owner fishes 26 kilometres to 34 kilometres north of Six Men’ Bay. Another 17%, who have
access to a launch boat, stated that there is a little catch of dolphinfish from the month of
February until the month of June and a small catch of flyingfish from the month of October
of one year until the month of July in the following year. Moreover, another 17%, who has
access to a launch boat and fish 8 kilometres to 11 kilometres away from the bay, mentioned
that there is a high catch of both dolphinfish and flyingfish around April until mid-June and a
low catch of snappers from July of one year until March of another year. In addition, 33% of
the household sample’s fishers heavily depend on the said fisheries resources since they both
live with their spouses only, which one of the wives is unemployed, and the other is retired.
One of the fishery households’ fishers is now about to engage in supplementary income since
they have started building an apartment that was soon to be ready for occupancy. There is
also another fishery household where the fisher engages in supplemental self-employment.
This fisher engages in boatbuilding from June to November, invests in small-scale poultry
farming and fishes for coneys and snappers throughout the year. Hence, it is crucial that the
fishery households of Six Men’s Bay engage in a supplementary livelihood to create
adaptation strategies to climate change and variability impacts.
Some of the fishers of Six Men’s Bay fish landing site have additional occupations. For
example, one of the members happens to be an owner of two boats, an environmental health
officer for the local clinic and plays steel pan in the tourism industry. Another fisher engages
in carpentry when there are periods of low fish catch. There is also a fisher who works for the
sanitation department and participates in pot fishing once per week. It was agreed that there
is usually a low-income period of four months, from July until October. Hence,
supplementary livelihood income sustains some of the community stakeholders during the
low-income period.
The low-income period is throughout the peaked months of the hurricane season, July to
October. See Table 9 for the seasonal calendar. This period is considered to be the fishers’
low income period since many fishing trip days are lost due to severe weather events such as
storms, hurricanes or tropical depressions. During this period, some launch owners haul up
their vessels for repairs and engage in day fishing at the Bay, using the hook and line method
for ‘ning nings’. Others engage in low skill supplementary livelihoods until November.
On the other hand, some iceboat owners continue fishing in their vessels until the end of
September and haul up for repairs until late November. However, during the months of July
to September, the iceboats owners engage in night fishing for snappers, ‘cavalli’,
‘amberfish’, barracuda and kingfish. Iceboat owners also engage in day fishing during the
said period for ‘brims’. The hooking fishing method is heavily utilised during this period by
the iceboat owners. Most moses owners continue to fish for reef fish during this time of the
year. A few moses vessels owners engage in supplementary livelihoods at this time; for
example, carpentry or masonry.
49
Figure 30: Main livelihood sources for household cash generation and household use.
The above chart (Figure 30) illustrates the main livelihood sources of the sample for
household cash income and household use. The livelihood sources among the females are
non-agricultural and included office worker (17%), butcher (17%) and private business
ownership (17%). Also of the 66% of the sample that receives pension, 17% of the sample is
female. Whereas the livelihood sources among the males include fishing, tourism, livestock
farming and arable farming, with the majority (83%) of the sample engaging in fishing for
finfish. The majority of the males sampled (83%) have agricultural-related livelihoods
sources with the exception of the minority (17%) who engages in tourism. Also of the 66%
of the sample that received pension 50% were males.
There are two sources recorded for household use, some of the fish catch by 83% of the
sample and all of the banana crops by 17% of the sample. The fishers reported that
approximately 5% of the fish catch is for household use, whereas the tourism worker had
mentioned 100% of his catch is for household use. The fact that only 5% of the fishers’ catch
is used for nutritional purposes and the remainder 90% is sold reveals the reliance on the
fishery economic sector for their livelihood. Similarly, the tourism worker also relies heavily
on the tourism economic sector for a livelihood; since the water sports operator does not
engage in a supplementary livelihood with the fishery. The households that are heavily
dependent on the sensitive economy of fishing and tourism are more vulnerable to climate
change and variability impact than those that have a more diversified economy.
50
4.4.2 Perceived alternative and supplementary livelihoods
Figure 31: Perceived alternative and supplemental livelihoods.
The sample of fishery households had a number of perceived alternative livelihoods and a
few supplemental livelihoods (see Figure 31). For instance, fish farming was regarded as a
potential alternative livelihood for 17% of the sample, as they reflect on a past mariculture
fish farming project in Shermans, St. Lucy. There is a passion for fishing. Thus, a
continuation in a fisheries-oriented field is welcomed. Fish farming can prove to be a
sustainable livelihood once well managed and monitored. Hence, training in aquaculture
management is imperative in order to achieve sustainability.
The construction industry was perceived by 32% of the sample as a real beneficial economic
sector, with tiling and carpentry chosen as alternative livelihoods. The construction industry
provides part-time employment opportunities, be it for private homes or large businesses.
However, outdoor carpentry in some cases can be impacted by severe weather events.
Nevertheless, there is a guarantee of payment for services provided, in most cases, by
carpenters/tilers in the construction industry. On the contrary, there is no guarantee that fish
will be caught on each fishing trip for a fisher.
Fishing was chosen as a supplementary livelihood by 17% of the sample that are employed in
the tourism sector. If responsible fishing practices are conducted, it can accomplish
sustainability. As aforementioned some members of the Six Men’s Bay community engage in
supplementary fishing livelihood; one member is a senior environmental health officer,
owner of two fishing vessels, who also plays steel pan in the hotel industry. This has proven
very sustainable for this community member in that even when distinct fishing seasons and
tourist season are closed he still has a monthly salary to support his household.
Apartment rental was seen as a lucrative supplementary livelihood for another 17% of the
fishery household sample. The same fisher will soon complete the construction phase of his
apartment building and is soon ready to operate his business. One constraint may be the
location of the apartment building. Most tenants tend to look for a central location to reside
while Six Men’s is to the north of the island. However, if occupied by long term tenants’,
apartment rental can still generate monthly income for the owner.
Carpentry16%
Tiling16%
Fish farming17%
Apartments rental17%
Watersport operator and
fisher17%
Depend on pension
17%
51
Lastly, dependence on a monthly pension was settled for since the respondent is a fisher in
his 80s and does not think that a supplementary livelihood or an alternative was necessary at
his age. Hence, willingness to change livelihoods or to have an additional livelihood,
especially if a climate impact affected the area, is a great sign of readiness to build adaptive
capacity to climate change and variability.
4.4.3 Awareness of household vulnerability to climate hazards
All of the sample households (100%) all experienced tropical storms in the past 50 years at a
low rate of frequency and severity, and estimate the negative impact of this hazard and
coping with it as low. Figure 25 illustrates that most of the fishery households do not possess
the lifelines needed to assist with a high adaptive capacity to climatic events such as tropical
storms. The response of the households was probably due to the fact that very few tropical
storms have passed directly over the island of Barbados within the last 50 years to cause an
adverse impact on Six Men’s Bay.
Moreover, 67% of the fishery households rate sea level rise and coastal erosion as very
frequent and severe. The adaptive capacity to SLR and coastal erosion is low since the
households perceive a high rate of the degree of adverse impact and high rate of the difficulty
of coping with both events. These two climatic events have caused some households to
complain that there is hardly any space to haul up their moses vessel, and sometimes the
moses has to be stacked on each other.
Furthermore, 50% of the sample households rate storm surge at low frequency and with high
severity. However, 33% of the said 50% rate the degree of the negative impact as high since
annually they have to shovel away sand and debris from the main highway in front of their
stalls. It must be mentioned that 17% rate the degree of the negative impact as low since their
livelihood is not affected in the tourism industry. Again 33% of the above 50% of the sample
fishery households rate the difficulty of coping with storm surge as high, whereas 17% rate it
as very low.
The climatic projections have revealed hotter climate temperatures by 2050 to 2080 (see
Tables 1 and 5). Similarly, 66% of the fishery household sample rates the frequency and
severity of hotter climate as high. Further the mentioned 66% rate the negative impact of the
hazard as high, along with the difficulty of coping with this risk as high. However, 33% rate
the frequency and severity as a medium, as well as the negative impact of the hazard and the
difficulty of coping with this hazard. Hence, the adaptive capacity to the hotter climate for
the fishery household can be said as low to medium.
The Sargassum seaweed has invaded the waters of Barbados since late 2011 to date. The
seaweed is known as a menace in both the tourism and fishing industry. The seaweed has had
an adverse impact on the income generated by fishermen since its arrival in Barbados. The
Sargassum seaweed does not frequent the nearshore waters of Six Men’s Bay. As a result,
only fishers who fish 8 kilometres and over, come into contact with the seaweed. Thus,
persons working in the nearby tourism industry and fishing less than 8 kilometres, such as
pot fishers, would hardly come into contact with Sargassum seaweed around this side of the
island. Consequently, 33% made no mention of the seaweed, and 17% rate the frequency and
severity as low, and they all estimate the adaptive capacity as high. Whereas, 50% of the
fishery households measure the frequency and severity as very high and the adaptive capacity
as low; since they fish more than 8 kilometres away from the bay and come in close contact
with the seaweed on a daily basis.
52
4.4.4 Access to and use of climate-related knowledge
Figure 32: Fishery households’ sources of climate-related knowledge
The entire sample (100%) gathers climate data from the television source (see Figure 32).
The sample mentioned that the television is used to determine if the weather will affect their
fishing trip and or water sports activity. Following the television source was the radio with
83% of the sample utilising this means of climate data source as a supplementary choice.
However, 33% of the sample also uses the internet to gather climate data. A small percentage
of the sample, 17%, equally used the following sources: the meteorological services,
newspapers and family and friends. As a result, in order to build the adaptive capacity of the
fishery household, the television and radio can be strongly utilised to transmit valuable
climate data. However, in times of power outages, the television may prove futile making the
radio a more reliable source for the fishery households to receive valuable climate data.
When warned of an approaching natural hazard, such as a tropical storm, the sample fishery
households prepare in the following way:
To protect the windows against flying missiles, plywood is nailed against the window
on the outside (50%) or the window panes are reinforced with scotch tape (17%) or
permanently constructed hurricane shutters are utilised (17%),
Dry food is stored (67%),
Water is temporarily stored (33%) or water tank source is employed (17%),
Relevant documents are always kept in a plastic bag (17%),
Clothing is stored in plastic bags (17%),
Batteries, candles, and flashlights are bought (33%), or a portable generator is utilised
(17%),
Listen to radio during and after passage of weather event (100%),
The roof is checked for security (17%), or the roof is permanently secured with
hurricane straps (17%),
Of the 67% of the sample that owns vessels, boats are hauled-up at Port St. Charles
(33%) or on the shore of Six Men’s Bay (33%).
The above disaster preparedness measures reveal that only 17% of the fishery households are
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
Per
cen
t fr
eq
uen
cy
Sources of climate-related knowledge
53
always prepared for the most part for a climate variability event, such as a tropical storm or
drought. Similarly, another 17% of the sample has property insurance for their house due to
mortgage requirement, and none of the owners of vessels (0%) invested in boat insurance. As
a result, most of the fishery households (83%) illustrate a low adaptive capacity to the impact
of climate variability, such as tropical storm, since there is no insurance to safeguard their
household and vessel, from which the latter generates income.
4.4.5 Networks supporting climate hazard reduction and adaptation
Formal and informal networks are needed to contribute immensely to preparedness, response
and recovery (Wongbusarakum and Loper 2011). The community of Six Men’s Bay does not
contain any informal networks that support preparedness for climate or non-climate hazards
and adaptation. The parish of St. Peter does have a formal network for the mentioned
purpose, that is, the DEO, which is under the directive of the governmental institution called
the Department of Emergency Management. In previous years the DEO for St. Peter has
facilitated clean up campaigns in an effort to eradicate the mosquito issue in the said parish
and conducted Tsunami evacuation drills throughout St. Peter. In addition, the DEO of St.
Peter has also facilitated first aid training for the residents of St. Peter (D. Hurley pers.
comm. 2015).
Unfortunately, when the community members and fishery households were asked if they
know who the chairman is of the DEO none of the community members or fishery
households knew of the DEO personnel. Further, one of the purposes of the DEO is to inform
the residents of the shelters in case of a disaster; however, all of the fishery households said
they know where the hazard shelters are, and some indicated a school shelter which is not on
the list of shelters for the area. For instance, the households referred to the Coleridge and
Parry Secondary School and Rowland Edward Primary School. However, the DEO chairman
said the schools shelters for the area are Rowland Edwards Primary School, Alma Parris
Secondary School and the Alexandra Secondary School. As a result, the DEO was not
adequately making the community members aware of its existence and purpose, and in turn,
the DEO could not gauge the adaptive capacity of the Six Men’s Bay community.
Consequently, an effort was made, by the researcher, to address this issue where a
community consultation meeting was set up with the community members and the DEO
chairman.
Other formal governmental network institutions affiliated with Six Men’s Bay are the
Maurice Byer polyclinic, CZMU, and the Markets Division. The Maurice Byer health
institution covers non-climate hazards related to medical and environmental health. Also, the
CZMU would have been responsible for monitoring the coral reef of Six Men’s Bay, water
quality and the coastline there. As mentioned earlier, the fringing reef of Six Men’s Bay is
dead, and the shoreline has eroded severely over the years. As a result, for the latter, the
CZMU had stopped beach profiling monitoring at Six Men’s Bay. However, there is still
monitoring of fish species and other marine life at Six Men’s Bay by CZMU. The Markets
Division is responsible for the fish vending stalls at the Bay.
4.4.6 Ability of community to reorganise
In an effort to achieve sustainable outcomes of the primary functions of the community, the
ability of the community to reorganise is critical. Since, it is “the degree to which it is able
collectively to learn, plan, and make necessary changes to cope with climate-related impacts”
(Wongbusarakum and Loper 2011:33). The fishery households were given five statements
54
related to the community’s ability to reorganise where they indicated if they strongly agree or
strongly disagree (see Table 11). The overall results reveal a low capacity of the community
to reorganise.
Table 11: Responses to the ability of community to reorganize statements.
Survey statements Strongly agree Neutral Strongly disagree
Our community has plans in place to deal
with climate-related events
(100%) Low capacity
Our community is able to coordinate
activities to respond quickly to the impact of
a natural hazard
(100%) Low capacity
Our community is able to reorganise to
respond to a new situation
(100%) Low capacity
Our community has institutions that support
us when we need to reorganise to cope with
new situations or problems
(100%) Low capacity
Our community members work well with
each other
(33%) (17%) (50%) Low capacity
Our community is able to access outside
support when needed.
(33%)
(67%) Low capacity
4.4.7 Governance and leadership
The governance indicator assesses if processes and decisions are geared towards the
community’s best interests. The leadership index measures the existence of community
leaders or governmental officials who can organise climate change responses and resources
to support adaptation (Wongbusarakum and Loper 2011). This indicator is critical since
communities need strong, capable, transparent, dynamic leaders to be able to adapt. As a
result, the fishery households were given 11 statements related to governance and leadership
where they indicated if they strongly agree or strongly disagree (Table 12).
In previous years, the community leaders played a pivotal role in leading the community
members through climate hazards. This shows the high adaptive capacity of the fishery
households in the past since 83% of the sample agreed to such. The majority of the sample
agreed to this. Most of the sample reflected on the late 1980s where it was decided to relocate
the seaward side residential homes of Six Men’s Bay to Six Men’s Development or Colleton
Gardens, due to severe coastal erosion. Similarly, high adaptive capacity is evident where
83% of the fishery households strongly agree that their leaders can provide them with the
resources they need for climate adaptation activities. However, the fishery households
revealed a low adaptive capacity with the remainder statements pertaining to governance and
leadership (Table 12).
The results indicate that the fishery household sample generally has a lack of trust in the
governance and leadership, which can have an adverse impact on the community’s reception
to new adaptation strategies and livelihood initiatives (Wongbusarakum and Loper 2011).
Lastly, the results also reveal that the leaders, such as the DEO chairman and officers, need
55
to communicate actively and distribute climate-related information adequately to all the
residents of the parish of St. Peter, inclusive of the fishery households and community
members of Six Men’s Bay.
Table 12: Responses to governance and leadership statements
Survey statements Strongly
agree
Neutral Strongly
disagree
Our community has led us through climate hazards in the past (83%) 17%
Our community leaders are interested in climate change issues and
the impact on our community
(100%)
Our community has leaders who have knowledge and skills to
effectively take charge of climate adaptation
(33%) (67%)
I trust our leaders to lead the community through climate change
adaptation
(33%) (67%)
Our community leaders/government officials inform us of national
or regional climate change policy or initiatives that may impact our
community
(33%) (67%)
Our community leaders advise us where we can get climate-related
information
(17%) (83%)
Our leaders suggest to us what we can do to adapt to changing
climate
(100%)
Our leaders can provide us with the resources we need for climate
adaptation activities
(83%) (17%)
Our leaders encourage community members to take part in climate
adaptation planning
(100%)
My voice is heard in community planning for climate change
adaptation
(100%)
I have had the opportunity to participate in community-level
decision-making
(100%)
4.4.8 Equitable access to resources
The equitable access to resources examines the perceptions of community members of
having equal rights and ability to use of natural resources as other members of the
community (Table 13). Equal access to the services, information, decision-making, and job
opportunities can have a positive impact on the community’s adaptive capacity
(Wongbusarakum and Loper 2011).
56
Table 13: Responses to equitable access to resources statements
Statement % of respondents
1.Compared with other households in my community, my household has
More access to marine resources 50%
The same access to marine resources 50%
2. Compared with other households in my community, my household receives
Less benefits from government’s assistance programs 33%
The same benefits from government’s assistance programs 67%
3.Compared with other households in my community, my household has
The same access to disaster relief 100%
4.Compared with other households in my community, my household has
More access to climate-related information 17%
Less access to climate-related information 17%
The same access to climate-related information 67%
The majority of the household fishery sample (67%) agrees that they receive the same
benefits from known government programs. The government, through the Fisheries Division
the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, offers subsidies and subsidised services
that assist the fisherfolk of the island (GOB 2015). Some members of the fishery households
of Six Men’s Bay take advantage of the government benefits. For example, some take
advantage of the maintenance and upgrade subsidy of up to US$2, 000 per boat per year. On
the other hand, some (17%) have never bothered to seek the mentioned subsidy since they are
more involved in the tourism industry, and others (16%) cannot find the time to venture to
the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development which is located to the south of the
island in the parish of Christ Church. As mentioned earlier, none of the sample has access to
land vehicles, and this may be a critical factor why some of the fishery households do not
make use of the government incentive mentioned above. However, the entire fishery
households take advantage of the following government initiatives due to their convenience;
utility subsidies payment for water and electricity at the landing site and the tax and duty
subsidies on marine fuel, boats, engines and spare parts, fishing (GOB 2015).
Moreover, half (50%) of the sample mentioned that they have more access to marine
resources while the other half (50%) said that they have the same access to marine resources.
Also, 100% of the sample perceives that they have the same access to disaster relief as each
other. Further, 17% of the sample heavily utilises all sources of climate-related information
and believes that they have more access to climate-related information. On the other hand,
another 17% does not have internet access and, therefore, believes that they have less access
to climate data. However, the majority of the fishery households sample (67%) perceived that
they have the same access to climate-related information.
57
4.5 Adaptation community consultation meeting
There was a strong need to bridge the gap of poor communication between the Six Men’s
Bay community members and the DEO; especially since the former would benefit from the
latter sharing of disaster risk reduction measures and climate-related information. At the
same time, there was a need to offer feedback on the results of the vulnerability capacity
assessment, and to share the proposed adaptation strategies with the community members. As
a consequence, a community consultation meeting pertaining to the aforementioned areas
was held at the fishers’ shed of Six Men’s Bay, on Thursday 22 of October 2015.
At the meeting the DEO chairman for St. Peter was introduced to the community members of
Six Men’s Bay by the researcher. The DEO chairman shared climate-related information,
disaster risk reduction measures information, inclusive of evacuation drills, clean-up
campaigns and listed the hurricane shelters available for the community. The chairman made
the community members aware of mitigation training available to them, such as First Aid
training. The chairman ended by leaving his contact information and asked for volunteers for
the DEO, the latter proved futile.
In addition, the researcher reviewed the results of the integrated vulnerability assessment and
shared the proposed adaptation strategies with the community members. The community-
based hazard mapping exercise was reviewed with the aid of the GIS hazard map of the area.
Also, the 1 in 100-year GIS flood map of Six Men’s Bay was shared with the community
members. The community members’ reaction was shocking when shown the 1 in 100-year
GIS flood map of their community. Proposed adaptation strategies were raised for each risk
identified. Among the proposed adaptation strategies included public awareness, coral
restoration, coastal defence infrastructure, traffic hazard reduction measures, fire hazard
reduction measures and the unification of DRM and CCA. The two primary strategies that
were repetitive was the need to build resilience with the aid of a community-based Climate
Adaptation Committee and to revive the fisherfolk organisation. Six members volunteered to
be a part of the community-based Climate Adaptation Committee. The community members
were given the opportunity to contribute additional adaptation strategies. However, none
were added. Finally, the community was thanked for their participation.
5. ADAPTATION STRATEGIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the methodology and results presented in this report, there are proposed adaptation
strategies that can assist to reduce vulnerability, and in turn, build the resilience of the Six
Men’s Bay fish landing site and fishery households to climate change and variability.
5.1 Public awareness and education
One of the primary ways to effectively increase awareness of climate related information for
the community members of Six Men’s Bay, and the general public alike, is through the use of
the media, in particularly the television and radio sources. Most of the public owns either a
television and/or radio. Therefore, advertisements via these media can be used to educate the
public of actions they can implement to achieve climate adaptation. These announcements
can be broadcast on a daily basis between the hours of 7 p.m. and 8 p.m. when most persons
are at home viewing the evening news on channel 8 of the Caribbean Broadcasting
Corporation (CBC). The Ministry of Agriculture, CZMU, CMHI, CDEMA, DEM and
CERMES can collaborate to implement a public awareness campaign on climate change
through the use of the radio stations and the television station on the island. The media
58
stations include Caribbean Broadcasting Corporation (television and radio), Starcom
Network Inc. (radio), Mix Media Services (radio) and Habar Investments Inc. (radio).
Since the younger generation is more technologically savvy than the older generation,
climate related information should be made available through other means of technology
other than radio and television, which is, via social media, smartphones, and the internet.
Climate change and variability impact and adaptation information can also be delivered
effectively through an educational app to be administered through the aforementioned type of
technology. The educational app can be developed through a collaborative effort by the
island’s mobile phones and internet companies, (Flow and Digicel), DEM, the DEOs and
CERMES.
In addition, the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology and Innovation, and the
Caribbean Examination Council can create a new curriculum for the primary schools to
include aspects of climate change as it relates to Barbados and the entire Caribbean alike.
Currently, at the secondary level, only the senior students who are preparing to attain the
Caribbean Secondary Examination Certificate in Geography and Social Studies, and the
Caribbean Advance Proficiency Examination in Environmental Studies and Geography are
exposed to climate change education. Therefore, climate change curriculum should be an
implementation to cater for all junior level students. This can be incorporated into the Social
Studies curriculum during the students’ first year at secondary school. In this way, Barbadian
citizens, and CARICOM citizens alike, will be more aware of climate change and variability
and adaptation from an early age, and in turn, the children can transmit what they have learnt
to their parents and family at home who are unaware of climate related information.
Furthermore, it is critical that climate related information is made available to community
members through the DEOs. This information may be shared via town hall meetings, flyers
and as well as social media. The date and venue of the town hall meetings should be
advertised on the radio and/or the television in order to alert the public of such.
5.2 Community climate adaptation committee
A Six Men’s Bay community-based committee should be set up, with the primary focus
being climate adaptation awareness, in order to educate community members about
mitigation processes in times of climate and non-climate impact. In addition, the committee
should implement training exercises for the members pertaining to various adaptation
processes. The committee should have an elected chairman and a secretary, with the
responsibility of organising meetings which should be hosted at least once a month. There
should be close network building among the community-based committee and the DEO for
St. Peter in an effort to stay abreast with climate- related information.
The Community Climate Adaptation Committee should work towards reducing the risks
associated with natural hazards and man-made hazards in an attempt to build resilience. As a
result, for this task, the committee will need funding. As a community-based organisation, it
is eligible to apply for funding from the Canada Caribbean Disaster Risk Management Fund
(CCDRMF). CCDRMF is a part of the Caribbean Disaster Risk Management Programme,
created to support community-based projects aimed at reducing risks of climate change and
variability, ranging from CDN $25,000.00 to CDN $100,000.00. The Six Men’s Bay
Community Climate Adaptation Committee can partner with a government organisation,
such as DEM, to submit a proposal to CCDRMF for financial support (CDEMA 2015).
59
5.3 Fisherfolk Organisation and fishing vessel insurance
5.3.1 Fisherfolk organisation
A fisherfolk organisation offers empowerment to the fisherfolk; since the members of a
fisherfolk organisation’s voices are heard when offering advice to governmental decision
makers. Transparency and trust among the members of the organisation are vital in order to
achieve sustainable outcomes. There is a strong need for the fisherfolk of Six Men’s Bay to
revive the Six Men’s Fisherfolk Association for their socio-economic benefits. As
aforementioned, the fisherfolk at Six Men’s Bay have various socio-economic issues to
contend with, such issues can be channelled through a primary community fisherfolk
organisation or BARNUFO. BARNUFO is a secondary fisherfolk association and is not a
trade union but an alliance (McConney et al. 2003). In previous times fisherfolk of Barbados
had to become members of a primary fisherfolk organisation in order to take various
grievances to the BARNUFO, however, that no longer apply. Fisherfolk can become
members of BARNUFO without being a member of a primary fisherfolk organisation (V.
Nichols, pers. comm. 2015).
Recently, September 2015, BARNUFO offered a variety of training sessions to benefit the
Barbadian fisherfolk. For instance, the training included navigation and safety of life at sea,
marine diesel engineering preventative maintenance, book-keeping, financial planning, first
aid and implementing standard operating procedures in fish handling. The researcher alerted
the fisherfolk of Six Men’s Bay of the training offered by BARNUFO for the month of
September 2015. A few of the Six Men’s Bay fisherfolk showed the interest in attending the
training but had to attend to their fishing vessels, as they were hauled-up for repairs.
However, one member attended one of the training sessions, navigation and safety of life at
sea. The boat owner that attended the aforementioned session indicated that he had once
gotten lost at sea and would not like to experience it again. He appreciated the training
session which was facilitated by the Barbados Coast Guard. The boat owner was willing to
share his training with other fisherfolk of Six Men’s Bay.
5.3.2 Group insurance for fishing vessels
One critical issue that most of the fisherfolk of Barbados experience is the lack of insurance
for their vessels. Most Barbadian fishing boats are not insured due to avoidance of the fees
and expenses of insurance premiums. Climate variability, such as tropical storms and
hurricanes, can cause severe damage to a fishing vessel leading to unemployment of some
boat owners and fishers who do not engage in supplementary livelihoods. The boat owners
can invest in group insurance; since the insurance for a single boat owner can be very
expensive given the fluctuated type of income generated via fishing, and the expenses of boat
repairs, haul-up and fishing gear. Therefore, the joint premium should be sought by the
vessel owners and fishers of Six Men’s Bay where the cost is divided equally among them.
The proposed fisherfolk organisation can be used to meet and agree on the group insurance.
The fisherfolk organisation can delegate members to contact, and to invite various insurance
companies and insurance brokers to inform the group of the group insurance during a
community meeting.
60
5.4 Diversification of livelihoods and alternative livelihoods training
5.4.1 Diversification of livelihoods
Climate change and variability will further impact on the sensitive marine resources that the
fisherfolk at Six Men’s Bay heavily depend on. Some of the fisherfolk community members
already engage in supplementary livelihoods, and a few fishers engage in alternative
employment in the low fish catch season to generate income. There is a need for more
fisherfolk to diversify their livelihoods so that they can avoid a depletion of the fisheries
resource and at the same time build the capacity at Six Men’s Bay.
5.4.2 Training for alternative livelihoods
Training in alternative livelihoods for the fisherfolk of Six Men’s Bay is crucial in order to
achieve climate adaptation. Training can be conducted in areas such as marine and
aquaculture initiatives, seamoss cultivation and production, and Sargassum seaweed fertiliser
production. The Sargassum seaweed has been seen as a menace to the tourism and fishing
industries. The seaweed has been washing up on shores becoming an eyesore to tourists and
leading to fewer visitors’ stay over at some hotels, as well as entangling various marine life
in the seaweed while in the ocean. A venture in Sargassum seaweed harvesting will assist
with eradicating the issues mentioned. The training will involve the production and
marketing of the product.
It is evident that the fishing community has not benefited from the luxury tourism
developments in the vicinity. As a result, a community-based climate adaptation committee
can lobby the wealthy corporate developers of the luxury tourism developments to create a
development fund from a small percentage of their profits for the fishing community. This
funding can assist with the alternative livelihood projects and training.
5.5 Coral restoration and coastal defence infrastructure at Six Men’s Bay
5.5.1 Coral restoration
The fringing reef of Six Men’s Bay came under pressure from tourism development. As a
result, the reef is dead and coral restoration would enhance the marine environment of the
nearshore of Six Men’s Bay. This restoration will attract fish once again to the near shore
waters, along with tourists to snorkel, which in turn can create new supplementary and
alternative marine resource livelihood initiatives.
Unfortunately, there are no future plans of the CZMU to conduct a coral restoration project at
Six Men’s Bay, which could be due to a lack of funding. However, funding can be sought
from Global Environment Facility (GEF) Small Grant Programme (SGP). GEF-SGP is aimed
at helping with international environmental problems, with a focus on climate mitigation and
climate adaptation. Consequently, GEF-SGP has assisted with similar projects worldwide.
For instance, GEF-SGP funded US $16,600 towards a coral restoration and fish stock
rehabilitation of marine reserve project in Samoa in 2007, and offered funding of US
$10,875.00 for a coral replanting and restoration project in Sri Lanka 2010. As of recently,
2014 to 2015, GEF-SGP funded US $50,000.00 to a coastal conservation education program
in Barbados, with emphasis on coral reef (UNDP-GEF, 2015).
61
5.5.2 Coastal defence infrastructure
Climate change and variability, in particular, storm surge and sea level rise, can exuberate
erosion and coastal flooding at Six Men’s Bay. This has grave implications for the present
limited fisheries infrastructure, limited vegetation and livelihoods that exist there. Hence,
there is an urgent need for sound shoreline management of the coastal erosion at Six Men’s
Bay. Shoreline management aims to achieve applicable policies for coastal defence against
erosion and inundation of the coastline (Gray-Bernard and Chadwick 1999). The procedure
must acknowledge, “the natural coastal processes and issues relating to the environment, and
human needs” (Gray-Bernard and Chadwick 1999:34). The CZMU is the government
department responsible for the island’s shoreline management and monitoring. Coastal
defence infrastructures are designed to divert the high wave energy from the shore
(revetments and groynes), or they reduce wave energy behind the structure (breakwaters)
(USAID 2009). Presently, the CZMU has no plans in place to develop coastal defence
infrastructure, such as groynes, breakwaters or revetments, for Six Men’s Bay (F. Hinds,
pers. comm. 2015).
Shoreline stabilisation projects can be costly, and can also cause erosion ‘down drift’ or ‘up
drift’ of the area. However, the livelihoods of the community members heavily depend on the
shoreline of Six Men’s Bay. Therefore, coastal infrastructure should be considered for their
socio-economic benefit. Again funding can be sought from CCDRMF to implement a
shoreline stabilisation project, facilitated by the CZMU, at Six Men’s Bay.
5.6 Road caution signage for public safety
Highway 1B of Six Men’s Bay needs pedestrian crossing signage, speed reduction signage
and or speed bumps for the community’s safety. At present one of the two bus stops is
located on the seaward side on a narrow stretch of land which cannot occupy spacing for a
bus shoulder or pavement. As a result, it is critical that the Ministry of Public Works and
Transport provide the necessary signage at Six Men’s Bay to avoid any road fatality or
serious injuries caused by motorists. In addition, there is an urgent need to reposition the Six
Men’s Bay roundabout correctly to prevent future vehicular accidents.
5.7 Solid waste management and drainage monitoring
There is a need for the community members of Six Men’s Bay to be cognizant of sound
disposal of solid waste to avoid hazards such as health issues related to vermin, rodents and
flooding. The community members, via a community committee, can pool resources together
to have the Sanitation Service Authority remove the dilapidated fishing vessels and old
refuse along the shoreline. In addition, the community members can place more garbage cans
in the community and along the shore. Further, there should be regular checks and clearance
of drainage systems. The checks and clearances can be done by the community members on a
bi-weekly basis in the dry season and weekly during the wet season. Hence, the drainage
systems should not become blocked by debris and or garbage causing flooding, especially
during the rainy season.
5.8 Fire hazard reduction
As mentioned earlier, there are land tenure issues at Six Men’s Bay, therefore; many would
not have adhered to the Town and Country Development Planning Office (TCDPO)
stipulations. Despite the land tenure issues at Six Men’s Bay, there is a need to reduce the
62
risk of fire hazard. The 20 wooden houses on the main highway of Six Men’s Bay, along
with the other houses immediately located in Six Men’s Village, need to install firewalls and
apply fire resistant coating. In addition, future plans to construct wooden homes in Six Men’s
Village, especially close to other houses, need to utilise combustible building materials as
stipulated by the TCDPO.
5.9 Unification of disaster risk management and climate adaptation
The national fisheries management plan needs adaptation strategies that incorporate disaster
risk reduction and climate change in an effort to build the resilience of the Barbados fishing
industry. As aforementioned the needs of fisheries are not adequately addressed. Therefore,
integration of DRM and CCA into the fisheries sector and vice versa is crucial in order to
reduce the vulnerability of the Barbados fishing industry to climate change and variability.
Hence, the DEM, CZMU, the Ministry of Environment and Drainage and the Fisheries
Division should collaborate and cooperate to update existing disaster risk reduction measures
and create new adaptation strategies based on the results and proposals of this study. In this
way, fisheries would have the capacity and resources to assist with the reduction of the
vulnerability of small-scale fishing communities’ livelihoods.
6. CONCLUSION
The integrated vulnerability assessment undertaken in this study was able to meet the
research objectives. The ecological, social, economic and environmental factors and
processes that underpin the vulnerability of the Six Men’s Bay fishing community to climate
change and variability were all identified. This was achieved by incorporating a stakeholders’
participatory process in the methodology in an effort to gain valuable information and
comprehension of the community’s vulnerabilities. The various tools provided by the
IFRCRCS VCA allowed for a participatory process to reveal the climate and non-climate
hazards that exist at Six Men’s Bay community. Further, SocMon climate change variables
revealed poor coping strategies implemented by the households that are not enough to reduce
vulnerability to climate change and variability. As a result, proposed adaptation strategies
were formulated to build the resilience, and adaptive capacity, of the Six Men’s Bay fish
landing site and fishery households, and they can help inform climate development policy.
7. REFERENCES
Abramovitz, J., T.Banuri, P. Girot, B. Orlando, N. Scheider, E. Spanger-Siefried, J. Switzer
and A. Hammil. 2002. Adapting to Climate Change: Natural Resource Management
and Vulnerability Reduction. World Conservation Union–IUCN, Worldwatch
Institute, International Institute for Sustainable Development–IISD, Stockholm
Environment Institute/Boston.
Agostini, V., L. Roth, S. Margles. 2014. Assessing the Vulnerability to Climate Change of
Small Scale Fisheries: The Grenada Example. The Nature Conservancy, Global
Marine Team, Miami, Florida. The Nature Conservancy, Caribbean Program, Miami,
Florida.
Allison, E. H., A. L. Perry, M. C. Badjeck, W. N. Adger, K. Brown, D. Conway, A. S. Halls,
G. M. Pilling, J. D. Reynolds, N. L. Andrew and N. Dulvy. 2009. “Vulnerability of
National Economies to the Impacts of Climate Change on Fisheries.” Fish and
Fisheries 10: 173-196.
Badjeck, M. C., E. H. Allison, A. S. Halls, N. K. Dulvy. 2010. “Impacts of Climate
63
Variability and Change on Fishery-Based Livelihoods.” Marine Policy 34, no. 3, 375-
383.
Barbadian Fishing Vessels. 2015. Ministry of Agriculture Barbados.
www.agriculture.gov.bb (accessed 10th of September 2015).
Barsley, W. 2013. “Vulnerability Assessment Methodologies: an Annotated Bibliography for
Climate Change and the Fisheries and Aquaculture Sector.” FAO Fisheries and
Aquaculture circular no. 1083.
Brugere, C. and C. De Young. 2015. “Assessing Climate Change Vulnerability in Fisheries
and Aquaculture. Available Methodologies and Their Relevance for the Sector.”
FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper No. 597. Rome, Italy.
Burke, L., and J. Maiden. 2004. “Reefs at Risk in the Caribbean.” Washington, DC: World
Resources Institute.
Caribbean Community Secretariat. 2015. Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre
(CCCCC). www.caricom.org (accessed 18th of November 2015).
CDEMA, 2015. CDEMA News. The Bulletin of Caribbean Disaster Risk Management
Agency. www.cdema.org (accessed 15th of October 2015).
Cinner, J. E., T. R. McClanahan, N. A. J. Graham, T. M. Daw, Joseph Maina, S. M. Stead,
Andrew Wamukota, Katrina Brown, and O. Bodin. 2012. “Vulnerability of Coastal
Communities to Key Impacts of Climate Change on Coral Reef Fisheries.” Global
Environmental Change 22, no. 1: 12-20.
Chambers, R., G. Conway. 1992. “Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: Practical Concepts for the
21st Century.” Institute of Development Studies (IDS), Brighton.
CPACC. 1999. C6: “Component 6 Coastal Vulnerability and Risk Assessment. Screening
Assessments Sub-regional Workshop, St. George’s, Grenada.” Technical Report
5C/CPACC 99-09-1. 10p.
CRFM. 2013. Regional Workshop Report - Formulation of a Strategy, Action Plan and
Programme Proposal on Disaster Risk Management, Climate Change Adaptation in
Fisheries and Aquaculture in the CARICOM and Wider Caribbean Region., 10 - 12
December 2012, Kingston, Jamaica. CRFM Technical & Advisory Document, No.
2013 / 8. 28p.
CRFM. 2013. Policy Development and Implementation of the Ecosystems Approach to
Fisheries, Climate Change Adaptation, and Disaster Risk Management in Small-
scale Fisheries in the Caribbean. Issues Paper no. 2.1p.October.
Fisheries Marketing and Statistics. 2015. Ministry of Agriculture Barbados.
www.agriculture.gov.bb (accessed 10th of September 2015)
Folke, C., S. Carpenter, T. Elmqvist, L. Gunderson, C. S. Holling, and B. Walker. 2002.
“Resilience and Sustainable Development: Building Adaptive Capacity in a World
of Transformations.” AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment 31, no. 5
(2002): 437-440.
Fussel, H. and R. Klein. 2006. “Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments: An Evolution of
Conceptual Thinking.” Climate Change 75, no. 3: 301-329.
64
Gitz, V. and A. Meybeck. 2012. “Risks, Vulnerabilities and Resilience in a Context of
Climate Change.” Building Resilience for Adaptation to Climate Change in the
Agriculture Sector 23 (2012): 19.
Government of Barbados. L. R.O 1989. Town and Country Planning Development Order,
1972.
Government of Barbados. 1998. “Temporal Changes in Coral Reef Communities on the West
and South Coasts of Barbados: 1987-1997.” Prepared for CZMU. Prepared by
Bellairs Insitute, St. James, Barbados.
Government of Barbados. 2001. Barbados’ First National Communications to the United
Nations Framework Climate Change Convention (UNFCCC). Government Printery:
St. Michael.
Government of Barbados. 2004. “Environmental Impact Assessment of the Northern
Fisheries Complex and Retreat Marina Volume II Planning Assessment.” Submitted
to Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Government of Barbados and
Port St. Charles Development.
Government of Barbados. 2008. “The Barbados Coral Reef Monitoring Programme. Changes
in Coral Reef Communities on the West and South Coasts 1997-2007.” Prepared for
CZMU. Prepared by the Environmental Impact Assessment Programme. Office of
Research, The University of the West Indies.
Government of Barbados. 2010. “Population Census 2010.” Barbados Statistical Service,
Statistical Department.
Government of Barbados. 2013. “Barbados Fishing Industry Hurricane Preparedness.
Fisheries Division Response Plan.” Fisheries Division, Ministry of Agriculture.
Government of Barbados. 2014. “The Barbados Coral Reef Monitoring Programme. Changes
in Coral Reef Communities on the West and South Coasts 2007-2012.” Prepared for
CZMU. Prepared by the Environmental Impact Assessment Programme. Office of
Research, The University of the West Indies.
Government of Barbados. 2015. “Barbados Fisheries Management Plan 2004-2006.”
Schemes for the Management of Fisheries in the Waters of Barbados. Fisheries
Division, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. www.agriculture.gov.bb
(accessed 10th of October 2015)
Gray-Bernard, C. and A. J. Chadwick. 1999. “Development of a Shoreline Management Tool
for Trinidad.” The Journal of the Association of Professional Engineers of Trinidad
and Tobago. Vol.38, No.1, October 2009, pp.33-41.
Guillotreau, P., L. Campling and J. Robinson. 2012. “Vulnerability of Small Island Fishery
Economies to Climate and Institutional Changes.” Current Opinion in
Environmental Sustainability 4:1–5.
Hardin, G. 1968. “The Tragedy of the Commons.” Science 162, no. 3859 (1968): 1243-1248.
Harris, L. 2003. “Submerged Artificial Reefs for Beach Erosion Control.” Coastal Structures
2003. ASCE.
Hurricane City. 2014. “Barbados History with Tropical Systems.”
www.hurricanecity.com/city/barbados.htm (accessed 3rd of June 2014)
65
IFRCRCS. 2007. “How to do a VCA. A Practical Step by Step Guide Red Cross and Red
Crescent Staff and Volunteers.” Geneva, Switzerland.
IPCC. 2001b. “Climate Change 2001: Impact, Adaptation and Vulnerability.” Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, UK2001.
IPCC. 2014a. “Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A:
Global and Sectoral Aspects.” Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
IPCC. 2014: Annex II: Glossary [Mach, K.J., S. Planton and C. von Stechow (eds.)]. In:
Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and
III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change [Core Writing Team, R.K. Pachauri and L.A. Meyer (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva,
Switzerland, pp.117-130.
IPCC, 2014. “Climate Change: Implications for Fisheries and Aquaculture. Key Findings
from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fifth Assessment Report.”
University of Cambridge Institute for Sustainable Leadership. Cambridge Judge
Business School. Sustainable Fisheries Partnership.
IISD. 2003. Livelihoods and Climate Change. Combing Disaster Risk Reduction, Natural
Resources Management and Climate Change Adaptation in a New Approach to the
Reduction of Vulnerability and Poverty. A conceptual framework paper prepared by
the task force on climate change, vulnerable, communities adaptation. International
Institute for Sustainable Development, International Union for Conservation of
Nature and Natural Resources and Stockholm Environment Institute.
IRIN, 2016. “The Inside Stories of Emergencies. Coping Vs. Adapting.”
http://www.irinnews.org/report/95224/climate-change-coping-versus-adapting
(accessed 18th of March 2016).
Islam, M. M, S. Sallu, K. Hubacek, J. Paavola, 2014. “Vulnerability of Fishery-Based
Livelihoods to the Impact of Climate Variability and Change: Insights from Coastal
Bangaladesh.” Environ Change (2014) 14:281-294.
Kelly, P. Mick, and W. Neil Adger. 2000. “Theory and Practice in Assessing Vulnerability to
Climate Change and Facilitating adaptation.” Climatic Change 47, no. 4 (2000):
325-352.
Knoema 2015. World Data Atlas. http://knoema.com/atlas/Barbados/Pump-price-for-diesel-
fuel-USdollar-per-liter (accessed 25th of November 2015)
Lummen, N., D. Miller, and F. Yamada. 2012. Integrated Vulnerability and Risk
Assessment: Case Study in Coastal Communities, Jamaica. In Paper Read the 8th
Annual International Conference of The International Institute or Infrastructure
Renewal and Reconstruction, at Kumamoto, Japan.
Mahon, R. 2002. “Adaptation of Fisheries and Fishing Communities to the Impacts of
Climate Change in the CARICOM Region.” Prepared for the CARICOM Fisheries
Unit, Belize City, Belize, as input to the planning process for the project
Mainstreaming Adaptation to Climate Change (MACC) of the Caribbean Centre for
Climate Change (CCCC) (2002).
McConney, P., J. Charlery and M. Pena. 2013. “Climate Change Adaptation and Disaster
Risk Management in Fisheries and Aquaculture in the Caribbean Region. Volume 1
– Assessment Report.” CRFM Technical & Advisory Document Series. Number
66
2013/8. Volume 1.
McConney, P., R. Mahon and H. Oxenford. 2003. “Barbados Case Study: The Fisheries
Advisory Committee.” Caribbean Coastal Co-management Guidelines Project.
Caribbean Conservation Association, Barbados. 77pp.
Mendoza, M. E., T. B. The, H. Naret, V. Ballaran, J. K. Arias. 2014. “Assessing
Vulnerability to Climate Change Impacts in Cambodia, the Philippines and
Vietnam: An Analysis at the Commune and Household Level.” Journal of
Environmental Science and Management 17(2): 78-91 (December 2014) ISSN
0119-1144.
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, 2015. “Fisheries Marketing and Statistics.”
www.agriculture.gov.bb (accessed 15th of April 2015)
Mirza, M. M. Q. 2003. “Climate Change and Extreme Weather Events: Can Developing
Countries Adapt?” Climate Policy 3, no. 3: 233-248
Monnereau, I., R. Mahon, P. McConney and L. Nurse. 2013. “Vulnerability of the Fisheries
Sector to Climate Change Impacts in Small Island Developing States and the Wider
Caribbean: Early Findings.” CERMES Technical Report No 56.
Nicholls, R., P. P. Wong, V. Burket, C. Woodroffe, J. Hay, 2008. “Climate Change and
Coastal Vulnerability Assessment: Scenarios for Integrated Assessment.” Integrated
Research System for Sustainability Science and Springer. 3:89-102.
Nicholls, R., P. P. Wong, V. Burket, C. Woodroffe, J. Hay, L. Nurse, 2011. “Scenarios for
Integrated Assessment.” In: Treatise on Estuarine and Coastal Science, edited by E.
Wolanski and D.S. McLusky, Vol 12 pp. 289-303. Waltham: Academic Press.
Nurse, L. 2011. “The Implications of Global Climate Change for Fisheries Management in
the Caribbean.” Climate and Development 3:228-241.
Pielke, R. A. J., 1998. “Rethinking the Role of Adaptation in Climate Policy.” Global
Environmental Change 8, 159-170.
Pomeroy, R., B. D. Ratner, S. J. Hall, J. Pimoljinda, V. Vivekanandan, 2006. “Coping with
Disaster: Rehabilitating Coastal Livelihoods and Communities.” Marine Policy 30
no .6 (2006): 786-793.
Salim, S., P. U. Zachariah, V. Kripa, A. Mohan, T. V. Ambrose, S. M. Rani. 2014.
“Vulnerability Assessment of Coastal Fisheries Household in Kerala: A Climate
Change Perspective.” Indian Journal of Fisheries 61, no. 4 (2014): 99-104.
Simpson, M. C., J.F. Clarke, D.J. Scott, M. New, A. Karmalkar, O.J. Day, M. Taylor, S.
Gossling, M. Wilson, D. Chadee, H. Stager, R. Waithe, A. Stewart, J. Georges, N.
Hutchinson, N. Fields, R. Sim, M. Rutty, L. Matthews, and S. Charles. 2012.
“CARIBSAVE Climate Change Risk Atlas (CCCRA) - Barbados.” DFID, AusAID
and The CARIBSAVE Partnership, Barbados, West Indies.
Smith Warner International Limited 2007. Intermediate Risk Assessment Report: St. Peter
Township: Adaptation for Climate Change and Disaster Mitigation: Township
Planning strategies for Storm Surge in the Caribbean. CDERA, Barbados.
Smit, B. and J. Wandel. 2006. “Adaptation, Adaptive Capacity and Vulnerability.” Global
Environmental Change 16: 282-92.
67
Smit, B., G. Hovelsrud, J. Wandel, M. Andrachuk., 2008. “CAVIAR: Community
Adaptation and Vulnerability in Artic Regions.” Department of Geography;
University of Guelph. Occasional Paper No.28.
Taves, J., 2015. “Assessing Vulnerability in Households and Communities Involved in the
Fisheries Sector.” University of Ottawa, Canada.
Trenberth, K. E.2011. “Changes in Precipitation with Climate Change.” Climate Research 47
(1): 123.
United Nations (UN) 1992. United Nations Framework Conventions on Climate Change.
UNDP-GEF, 2015. GEF Small Grants Programme. Community Action Global Impact.
https://sgp.undp.org (accessed 15th of October 2015)
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) 2011. IEA Training Manual Volume Two
Climate Change Vulnerability and Impact Assessment in Cities. Madruga, R. P., G.
H. Pedraza, A. Suarez, A. Sabelli, G. Metternicht, C. Davies. ISBN: 978-92-807-
3163-7.
United States Agency for International Development (USAID). 2009. “Adapting to Coastal
Climate Change: A Guide Book for Development Planners.” USAID, Washington.
Vulnerability and Capacity Assessment, 2015. “Vulnerability and Capacity Assessment
Toolbox.”
http://reliefweb.int/files/resources/98C04B0F4CDCC34C256C7003D4D59-ifrc-
Toolbox-oct96 (accessed 28th of November 2015)
Willoughby, S.(ed.) 1999. “Report of the Barbados Reef Fish Kill from September to
October 1999 and Summary Proceedings of the CARICOM Regional Technical
Workshop on Fish Kill Events held on 16th October 1999 in Barbados.” CARICOM
Fisheries Resource Assessment and Management Programme (CFRAMP) in
association with the Caribbean Environmental Health Institute (CEHI) Pan
American Health Organisation (PAHO) and Fisheries Division, Ministry of
Agriculture and Rural Development, Barbados. 25pp
Willoughby, S., C. Parker, W. Hunte, V.S. St.John, C.J. Roach, and H. Ferguson. 2002.
“Factors Contributing to the 1999 Mass Mortality of Reef Associated Fish in
Barbados.” Proceedings of the Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute, 53: 26-37.
World Meterological Organization, 2015. “What is the Difference Between Climate
Variability and Climate Change.” http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/wcp/ccl/faqs.php
(accessed 6th of October 2015).
Wongbusarakum, S. and C. Loper. 2011. “Indicators to Access Community-Level Social
Vulnerability to Climate Change: An Addendum to SocMon and SEM-Pasifika
Regional Socioeconomic Monitoring Guidelines.”
Yamin, F., A. Rahman and S. Huq. 2005. “Vulnerability, Adaptation and Climate Disasters:
A Conceptual Overview.” IDS bulletin 36, no. 4:1.
7.1 Personal Communications
Hinds, Fabian. 2014. Coastal Zone Management Unit.
Hinds, Fabian. 2015. Coastal Zone Management Unit.
Hurley, Dave. 2015. Disaster Emergency Organisation of St. Peter.
68
Leslie, Joyce. 2015. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries Division.
Nicholls, Vernel. 2015. Barbados National Union of Fisherfolk Organisations.
Nurse, Leonard. 2013. Centre for Resource Management and Environmental Studies.
Roach, Ramon. 2015. Coastal Zone Management Unit.
Taylor, Colvin. 2014. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries Division.
8. APPENDIX
Appendix 1: SocMon Fishery Household Survey Instrument
TO: ALL RESPONDENTS
My name is Charlette Alleyne- Greene, a post-graduate student at the University of the West
Indies (UWI). The research aim is to conduct community-based landing site and household
vulnerability assessments at Six Men’s Bay fishing community, in order to inform local level
planning for climate adaptation along the entire fisheries value chain.
The information collected in this survey will provide critical data inputs to my research
project titled “Assessing Vulnerability to Climate Change and Variability in the Barbados
Fishing Industry”. The research project is an essential component of my training, in partial
fulfilment of the award of the Master of Science, Centre for Resource Management and
Environmental Studies (CERMES), Faculty of Science and Technology, UWI, Cave Hill
Campus, Barbados. Please be assured that all responses to the questionnaire will be treated
with strict confidentiality.
I thank you sincerely for your willingness to participate and contribute to this research effort.
Signed……………………………….
Charlette Alleyne-Greene BA (Hons), Dip. Ed UWI
SECTION A: EXPOSURE
CC1: Demographically vulnerable groups
Household
member*
Age Sex Highest level of
education/literacy
Occupation Any special
health needs
*Identify all living in house by role (e.g., father, mother, grandmother)
69
1. Compared with other families in your community, how would you rate the economic status
of your household?
A) Below average __________
B) Average_____________
C) Above average____________
2. How would you rate your household income level, based on your expenses?
A. Usually not enough to cover important household expense___________
B. Just enough to cover important household expense____________
C. Usually have some left after important household expenses ____________
3. Are you newly migrated into the area? N ______ Yes______, since
4. What is your household religious affiliation?______________________
5. Does your family have the following?
Lifelines Yes or no If relevant, identify them
a)Back-up for electricity
b)Back-up for drinking
water
c)Tools to catch or grow
food
d)Land vehicles
e) Boat
f) Radio
g) Landline telephone
h) Mobile cellular phone
i)Internet access
j)First-aid kits
k)Access to shelter
l)Access to health care
SECTION B: SENSITIVITY
CC2: Dependence on vulnerable resources and services
6. *For each good and service produced please estimate the percentage of each used for
personal consumption or income generation.
Resource Goods and Services % Household Use % Sale (income
70
generated)
Marine Fisheries
Tourism/Recreation
Cultural value and
services
Upland Areas Crops
Livestock farming
Man-made
infrastructure
Main road
Bridges
Fish vending stalls
Health clinic
Water supply
Electrical supply
SECTION C: ADAPTIVE CAPACITY
CC3: Current household livelihood and income diversity
(continue CC3: Dependence on vulnerable resources and services with the use of the
calendar)
7. A Seasonal Calendar depicts key events and activities that occur during the year. Please
indicate high (H) and low (L) periods throughout the year for a particular event. It should
include the following:
Holidays and festivals
Timing of hazards/disasters such as storms, droughts and floods
When common illnesses occur
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
71
8. What are the main livelihood sources for your household for both cash income generation
and household use? Check all that apply.
Sources For
household
cash income
For
household
use
No. of household members
engaged in the activity and
their role
Fishing for ________________
Harvesting other marine life
Farming
Livestock
72
Handicrafts
Salary from employment -----------
Money received from relatives
abroad
-----------
Private business ownership
(e.g., stores)
-----------
Pension/ social security -----------
Tourism -----------
CC4: Perceived alternative and supplementary livelihoods
9. a) Identify possible alternative and supplementary livelihoods for the household.
A) Sustainable aquaculture project____________
B) Government project on aqua and mariculture_____________
C) Seamoss cultivation________________
D) Seamoss beverages production__________
E) Sargassum fertilizer operation production___________
F) Handicrafts production made of fish by-products and other marine products________
G) Tourism industry (seasonal or permanent?)_________ (specify area)_____________
H) Other (please specify)_____________________________________________
9. b) Please state why you have selected the above alternative and supplementary livelihood.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
CC5: Awareness of household vulnerability to climate hazards
10. Please check the types of hazard that are relevant to your household and rate the
perceived level of vulnerability to each (1=low, 2=medium or 3=high)
Climate
hazards and
impacts
Which of
the
following
climate
A: How
would you
rate the
frequency
B: How
would
you rate
the
C: How
would you
rate the
degree of
D: How
would you
rate the
difficulty
Total
vulnerability
rating (sum
of columns
73
events has
your
household
experienced
in the past
50 years?
of this
occurrence?
severity
of this
hazard?
negative
impact on
your
household
by this
hazard?
of coping
with this
hazard, for
your
household?
A through
D)
Tropical storm
Storm surge
(seawater
level rise due
to storm)
Sea level rise
Coastal/beach
erosion
Changes in
rainy and dry
seasons,
leading to
changes in
fishing
seasons, etc
Drought
Flood
Climate-
related land or
mudslide
Brush fire
caused by heat
and dryness
Increased
water surface
temperature
Coral
bleaching
Hotter climate
Cooler climate
Sargassum
74
seaweed
Other
(specify)
CC 6: Access to and use of climate related knowledge
11. Indicate which source of climate-related knowledge is utilised by your household to
access climate information. Please state how the source is used.
Sources of climate-related
knowledge
Check if you get climate
information from this
source, and N/A if the
source is not available for
your household
Check if you use this
information describing
briefly how the information
is used
Meteorological services
Newspapers
Radio
TV
Internet
School/teachers
Visiting climate
scientists/experts
Village leaders
From family and friends
Government information
Other (please specify)
12. If you have access to climate information sources, but do not use the information, please
state why?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
75
13a). When warned of an approaching natural hazard, such as a tropical storm, what do you
and your family do to prepare?
___________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
13b) Is your home and/or boat insured? If your answer is no, please state why not.
CC8: Ability of community to reorganize
14. On a scale from 1 to 5 (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neutral, 4 = agree, and
5 = strongly agree), please rate the following:
A. Our community has plans in place to deal with climate-related events (such as
response plan, large quantities of sargassum on the beach and near shore
waters)______
B. Our community is able to coordinate activities to respond quickly to the impacts of a
natural event/hazard_______
C. Our community is able to reorganize to respond to a new situation_______
D. Our community has institutions that support us when we need to reorganize to cope
with new situations or problems_______
E. Our community members work well with each other_______
F. Our community is able to access the local Disaster Emergency Officer _____
G. Our community is able to access outside support when needed _______
CC 9: Governance and leadership
15. For each statement, rate your level of agreement.
1 = strongly disagree, 2= disagree, 3= neither agree nor disagree, 4 = agree 5= strongly
agree
A. Our community leaders have successfully led us through climate hazards in the
past_____
B. Our community leaders are interested in climate change issues and the impacts on our
community._______
C. Our community has leaders who have knowledge and skills to effectively take charge
of climate change adaptation.________
76
D. I trust our leaders to lead the community through climate change adaptation_____
E. Our community leaders/government officials inform us of national or regional climate
change policy or initiatives that may impact our community_______
F. Our community leaders advise us where we can get climate –related information____
G. Our leaders suggest to us what we can do to adapt to changing climate______
H. Our leaders can provide us with the resources we need for climate adaptation
activities______
I. Our leaders encourage community members to take part in climate adaptation
planning_______
J. My voice is heard in community planning for climate change adaptation______
K. I have had the opportunity to participate in community- level decision-making____
CC10: Equitable access to resources
Please select the most suitable answer
16. Compared with other households in my community, my household has
A. More access to marine resources
B. Less access to marine resources
C. The same access to marine resources
17. Compared with other households in my community, my household receives
A. More benefits from government’s assistance programs
B. Less benefits from government’s assistance programs
C. The same benefits from government’s assistance programs
18. Compared with other households in my community, my household has
A. More access to disaster relief
B. Less access to disaster relief
C. The same access to disaster relief
19. Compared with other households in my community, my household has
A. More access to information about climate change
B. Less access to information about climate change
77
C. The same access to information about climate change
Thank you for your participation