A Review of Fishing Gear Exchange Programmes in East Africa - Review & Recommendations

Oct 17, 2026

Fishers along the East Africa coast use diverse fishing gears that vary in deployment and ecosystem impacts. This review synthesizes case studies of fishing gear exchange programmes (FGEP) and gear donations to assess programme success and to guide future implementation. FGEP aims to replace illegal and destructive gears, reduce user conflicts, and enable access to deeper/offshore fisheries through provision of legal, acceptable alternatives. Reported outcomes are mixed, with documented challenges including resale of new gears, provision of illegal gears, and high by-catch rates of vulnerable species such as turtles. Recommendations emphasize training, strong fisher organisations, beneficiary knowledge, technical guidance, enforcement, deterrence of overfishing and gear disposal, stakeholder participation, continuous monitoring and evaluation, and support for alternative income activities.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages16

Reading Time40 min

AccessFree to download

Abstract

Introduction

Fishing gears used along the East Africa coast

Problems from destructive fishing gears

A Review of Fishing Gear Exchange Programmes in East Africa GEORGE WAWERUMAINA* AND MELITAA. SAMOILYS CORDIO East Africa, P.O.BOX 10135, Mombasa 80101, Kenya *Corresponding Author, Email [gwaweru@cordioea.org](gwaweru@cordioea.org), [gwmaina2000@yahoo.com](gwmaina2000@yahoo.com) Abstract Fishers along the east Africa coast use an extensive range of fishing gears which differ in terms of effectiveness, mode of deployment and impact on the ecosystem. This study reviewed different case studies on fishing gear exchange programmes (FGEP) and donations carried out along the East Africa coast, to determine their success and how best to implement future programmes. FGEP have been trialed in East Africa with the intention of replacing illegal and destructive fishing gears, reducing user conflicts and supporting fishermen to access deeper water or offshore fisheries. Fishermen are provided with legal, acceptable and less damaging gear types after surrendering the illegal and destructive gears. Although it is a widely recommended way of managing illegal and destructive gears, success stories are few. Challenges have included cases where fishers have sold the new gears and returned to their old fishing techniques, programme implementers have provided illegal gears, or legal gears with a high incidence of by-‐catch of vulnerable species such as turtles. For future FGEP, the following recommendations should be considered: a) awareness and training be conducted before, during and after the programme, b) strong fisher organisations are needed, c) background knowledge about the beneficiaries of fishing gear exchange is essential for planning, d) programme implementers should seek technical advice to be properly informed about impacts of potential fishing gears being considered, e) sustained enforcement of fisheries regulations is required, e) use methods for discouraging overfishing and disposing of acquired gears, f) stakeholders’ participation in all aspects of the programme is important, h) monitoring and evaluation is essential throughout, and i) support alternative income generating activities. Despite the varied levels of success in implementing FGEP, the approach remains a viable way of removing illegal and destructive gears. Concerted efforts by all stakeholders in the implementation, enforcement, monitoring and awareness should ensure a significant reduction in the use of destructive fishing gears and resource use conflicts associated with them. Introduction Fishers along the East Africa coast use an extensive range of fishing gears (Glaesel 1997; Jiddawi and Ohman 2002; FiD 2008) . These include nets, hook and line, traps and spears. These gears differ in terms effectiveness, mode of deployment and impact on the ecosystem (Samoilys et al. 2011) . Access to different types of gears is mainly determined by cost, availability of mending materials, efficiency, fishermen’s knowledge and experience as well as economic and environmental considerations (Versleijen and Hoorweg 2008) . Continued use of destructive fishing gears and techniques is a major problem (Jiddawi and Ohman 2002; Kazimoto, 2005; Makoloweka and Kalombo, 2005; McClanahan et al., 2005; Wells et al 2007, Signa et al., 2008) and one of the main causes of habitat/reef degradation along the east Africa coast. Seine nets of small mesh size including mosquito nets CORDIO Status Report 2011. Obura DO & Samoilys MA (Eds) . CORDIO East Africa. [www.cordioea.org](www.cordioea.org) Fishing Gear Exchange Programmes in East Africa/Maina & Samoilys. CORDIO Status Report 2011 Table 1. Summary of ten case studies of gear exchange and donations done on the East African coastline. Missing information means it was not available. Shaded fill for case studies in Kenya. 1 inch = 2.54 cm. 1 USD = ~ 94KSh, 1,600 TzSh (Sept 2011) . Programme Location Gear type given out Gear Donor and Value type and Year Replaced | 1. Exchange
2002 | Mafia
Marine Tanzania | Isl

FAQs

What is the main purpose of fishing gear exchange programmes (FGEP) along the East Africa coast?

FGEP seeks to replace illegal and destructive fishing gears, reduce user conflicts, and support fishermen to access deeper water or offshore fisheries.

Why are FGEP outcomes described as mixed in the review?

Success stories are few because challenges include fishers selling the new gears and reverting to old techniques, implementers providing illegal gears, and cases where legal gears cause high by-catch of vulnerable species such as turtles.

What key recommendations does the review propose for future FGEP?

The review recommends awareness and training before/during/after the programme, strong fisher organisations, beneficiary background knowledge for planning, technical advice for implementers, sustained fisheries regulation enforcement, methods to discourage overfishing and manage acquired gear, broad stakeholder participation, ongoing monitoring and evaluation, and support for alternative income-generating activities.

Oct 17, 2026

Uploaded by SundayMiles