Environmental Management (2014) 54:1237–1248 DOI 10.1007/s00267-014-0358-z

FORUM

Technological Innovation and Developmental Strategies for Sustainable Management of Aquatic Resources in Developing Countries Julius Ibukun Agboola

Received: 19 September 2013 / Accepted: 18 August 2014 / Published online: 9 September 2014  Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Abstract Sustainable use and allocation of aquatic resources including water resources require implementation of ecologically appropriate technologies, efficient and relevant to local needs. Despite the numerous international agreements and provisions on transfer of technology, this has not been successfully achieved in developing countries. While reviewing some challenges to technological innovations and developments (TID), this paper analyzes five TID strategic approaches centered on grassroots technology development and provision of localized capacity for sustainable aquatic resources management. Three case studies provide examples of successful implementation of these strategies. Success requires the provision of localized capacity to manage technology through knowledge empowerment in rural communities situated within a framework of clear national priorities for technology development. Keywords Technology
Developing countries
Strategies
Aquatic resources
Sustainable management

Introduction Technological innovations and development (TID), in the past, has been approached from the perspective of structural

J. I. Agboola Operating Unit Ishikawa/Kanazawa, Institute for the Advanced Study of Sustainability, United Nations University, Ishikawa 920-0962, Japan J. I. Agboola (&) Department of Fisheries, Faculty of Science/Centre for Environment and Science Education (CESE), Lagos State University, Ojo, Lagos, Nigeria e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]

change and technical choice, with little or no consideration for sustainable technologies to meet local needs and address environmental problems across scales. Although concepts of what is economically and technologically practical, ecologically necessary, and politically feasible are rapidly shifting, weak links still exist between the formal Research and Development (R&D) institutions and local communities that hold and use traditional knowledge (Colby 1991; AMCOST 2010). Since the 1970s, developing countries have expressed in various international fora their desire for improved access to foreign technologies and enhanced technological capabilities. In the past three decades, specific provisions on transfer of technology have been incorporated into various international instruments. Such provisions have various objectives and scope, a variety of modes of implementation, including the provision of financing, and are subject to different terms and conditions. In most cases, however, such provisions contain only ‘‘best efforts’’ commitments, rather than mandatory rules. An example of a detailed definition of the objectives of technology-related provisions is provided in the Law of the Sea Convention (Law of the Sea 1982), which details the ‘‘basic objectives’’ to be reached directly or through competent international organizations. Also, unlike the Vienna Convention, the Law of the Sea Convention and Agenda 21 focus more on the development of local capabilities than on access to technology (UN 2001). The Law of the Sea Convention deals specifically with transfer of marine technology and capacity building in the management, exploration, and exploitation of marine resources. The past century has seen advances in fishing technology blamed as a major cause of the current over-exploitation of fish stocks. Challenges of bycatch of charismatic species (such as dolphins in tuna purse seines) and the

123

1238

discarding of not-so-charismatic species (such as juvenile fish killed by shrimp trawling) have led to the successful development of various innovative gear-based and operational solutions to ameliorate these issues. The steps involved in successfully reducing bycatches have tended to follow an incremental framework involving identification of problems, experimentally testing proposed solutions, implementing these solutions throughout industry, and finally gaining acceptance of the solutions from concerned interest groups (Kennelly and Broadhurst 2002). Also, after millennia of assuming that seafood resources are inexhaustible, and centuries of somewhat muted concerns that advanced fishing technology may have a detrimental impact on stocks and ecosystems, advances in fishing technology came to be recognized as a major cause of the current over-exploitation of fish stocks (Kennelly and Broadhurst 2002). During the last few decades, however, fishing technologies have begun to focus more on conservation-oriented goals, and more recently, on sustainable management approaches. This paper draws on successful examples of TID projects around the world to propose relevant strategies (in ‘‘Framework for TID Strategies’’ section) to overcome some technological challenges to sustainable management of aquatic resources in developing countries. It further hinges on the need for clear national priorities for technology development, identification of appropriate forms of cooperation, an enabling environment, and capacity building.

The Need for Localized TID Globalization has been a very uneven process in which very poor countries, in particular, have experienced marginalization (World Bank 2002; Sachs 2000; Ghose 2003). Also, inadequate skills, limited access to technical information, ineffective institutional and regulatory frameworks, as well as organizational rigidities impede technical change and innovation (UNESCO 2010). Analysis (Table 1) reveals the global trend in Gross Domestic Expenditure on Research and Development (GERD) and the number of researchers, between developed and developing (including less developed) countries. GERD totals from developing countries make up less than a quarter of the world’s GERD, and researchers from developing countries make up only one-third of the total number of researchers globally. As a result, low intensities of applied technologies among other factors constrain dynamic investment and competitive industrial development in developing countries. It is evident that technology transfer (TT) from developed to developing countries is required for growth and

123

Environmental Management (2014) 54:1237–1248

development. However, the transfer of methods from one context to another raises concerns familiar from past attempts to duplicate technological success stories by abstracting from the specific social, political, and organizational conditions in which a particular technology emerged (Biggs and Smith 1998). Also, many technologies and solutions that work efficiently in western countries often fail in many African and some Asian contexts (Esposto 2009). Thus, there is a need to redefine the current technology cooperation process between developed and developing countries. In the context of economic development, sustainable aquatic resource management is a critical component (Agboola and Braimoh 2009). The livelihoods of a vast majority of developing countries and coastal communities depend on aquatic resources which support the functioning of aquatic ecosystems. UNIDO (2005) has emphasized the importance of building technological capabilities that are appropriate for catching up and for sustaining poverty reduction. Technologies for developing countries need to be efficient, adaptive, and inexpensive.

TT, Applications, and Aquatic Resources Technology is widely accepted as essential for improving the economy of a nation, especially in developing countries where industrial growth has occupied a very important role (Guan et al. 2006). However, it is believed that technology will perform differently in different institutional and infrastructural environments. In short, most technology is circumstantially sensitive in some way (Evenson and Westphal 1995). One of the major challenges to sustainable development in developing countries has been the problems of direct applications of often inappropriate technology from developed countries and subsequent technological marginalization. On the one hand, there is indigenous technology and local initiatives (often neglected), and on the other is the lack of capacity to manage the so called ‘‘transferred technologies.’’ TT is gaining more attention and institutional interest is rapidly expanding (Reisman 2005). In the context of this paper, ‘TT’ is defined as the process of transferring scientific findings from developed countries to users in developing countries to create tangible benefits for the purpose of sustainable development. The need for TT, especially to developing countries, has been recognized in various international fora (UN 2001). Over 80 international instruments and numerous subregional and bilateral agreements contain measures related to transfer of technology and capacity building. The technology-related provisions contained in such instruments follow different approaches, depending on the object and

Environmental Management (2014) 54:1237–1248

1239

Table 1 Regional totals R&D for expenditure (GERD) and researchers, 2002 and 2007 Region

World

% World GERD

Researchers (thousands)

% World researchers

Researchers per million inhabitants

2002

2007

2002

2007

2002

2007

2002

2007

100.0

100.0

5,810.7

7,209.7

100.0

100.0

926.1

1,080.8

Developed countries

82.6

76.2

4,047.5

4,478.3

69.7

62.1

3,363.5

3,655.8

Developing countries

17.2

23.7

1,734.4

2,696.7

29.8

37.4

397.8

580.3

0.1

0.1

28.7

34.7

0.5

0.5

40.5

43.4

Less-developed countries

Sources GERD and researchers data: UNESCO (2010). Population: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division, 2009; World Population Prospects: The 2008 Revision and UIS estimations

purpose of the respective instruments. They all aim, however, at promoting access to technologies and, in some cases, the development of local capabilities in developing countries, particularly in least developed countries. While transfer of technology is a fundamental goal of many international instruments, especially in agreements involving developing countries (UNCTAD 2000), one of the main challenges is how to ensure that ‘‘transfer and diffusion’’ provisions are given effect and translated into practice. The technology required for growth and development in developing countries should positively aim at enhancing sustainable production, use, and management of natural resources including aquatic resources. Human use of aquatic ecosystems and resources including coastal and ocean waters is changing. The scarcity of aquatic resources threatens global food supplies and the state of human health in many regions of the world (FAO 2007). In essence, sustainable fresh and marine water resources are a foundation for human survival and economic development, and for maintaining life-supporting aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. They encompass all the possible roles for water in terms of quality and quantity for intended uses, supporting the functioning of aquatic ecosystems and as an essential component of economic development. Aquatic resources also encompass the hydrological systems, the linkages between freshwater systems, and the downstream coastal areas into which they drain and where they sustain biologically rich and commercially important coastal ecosystems (Agboola and Braimoh 2009). With recent advances in technology, exploitation of the aquatic ecosystems and resources has produced some attendant challenges. Technological challenges related to aquatic systems are numerous, quite dynamic, and may not be exhaustive. Here we review a few technological challenges relevant to sustainable management of aquatic resources. Challenges Arising From Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) Aquatic biotechnology is an exciting area of science that involves combining science and technology applied to

aquatic organisms to develop and apply innovative tools, techniques, and products that help to conserve oceans and other aquatic ecosystems, protect species at risk, detect and treat disease in fish, and identify fish populations among others. It is a recent technique, used mainly for the genetic improvement of fish, and produces great hopes and fears regarding the future use of aquatic resources. Public oppositions arising from ethical, environmental, and social equity concerns are challenges yet to be fully addressed, and the potential impacts of GMOs on aquatic ecosystems are far from fully understood. According to Costa-Pierce (2003), the aquatic biotechnology sector inherited not only problems from the broader agricultural biotechnology sector, but also unique challenges specific to aquatic environments. However, experiments with transgenic or genetically modified fish have shown that commercially important traits, such as enhanced growth rates (proved to be significant), disease resistance, and increased environmental tolerance (not yet proved to be significant), can be improved (Dey and Gardiner 2000). Transgenic fish not only have many potential applications in aquaculture, but also raise concerns regarding the possible deleterious effects of escaped or released transgenic fish on natural ecosystems (Maclean and Laight 2000). Challenges Arising From Ocean Energy (OE) and Fishing Practices OE defines a wide range of engineering technologies that are able to obtain energy from the ocean using a variety of conversion mechanisms. It has the potential to make an important contribution to the supply of energy to countries and communities located close to the sea (Esteban et al. 2008). This in itself is an important possible limitation of OE, as contrary to an extended belief, over 60 % of the world’s population lives over 120 km away from the coastline (Gommes et al. 1998). Also, it has been reported that the theoretical global potential for the various types of OE is between 20,000 and 92,000 TWh/year, compared to the world consumption of electricity of around 16,000 TWh/ year. Therefore, it is unlikely that this technology alone will

123

1240

be able to solve the energy needs of the planet (Soerensen and Weinstein 2008). Nevertheless, it is likely that certain countries well endowed with this type of energy could eventually rely on it to produce a significant percentage of their energy needs (Esteban et al. 2008), while some countries are looking to develop energy export too. Although alternative energy projects such as wind, current, wave, tidal, and thermal energy conversion can help meet our increasing energy demands while curbing global climate change, they also have potential direct impacts on coastal ecosystems including the disruption to sea currents or longshore sediment transport; hazard to shipping; risks to biodiversity; and fluid spillages or leakage (Esteban et al. 2008). While many OE technologies have the potential to produce energy without greenhouse gas emissions, the impacts of such technologies on coastal ecosystems will need to be effectively assessed, minimized, and mitigated (Gill 2005; Pelc and Fujita 2002). Challenges Arising From Constructed Environments Constructed wetlands (CWs) are artificially CWs, built in areas where wetland ecosystems do not naturally occur (Sundaravadivel and Vigneswaran 2001). CWs are considered as a suitable technology for sustainable wastewater management especially for developing countries. The main features of CWs are adaptation to local conditions, cost effectiveness, and adequate capacity for local management of water resources. Natural wetlands act as a biofilter, removing sediments, and pollutants such as heavy metals from the water, and CWs can be designed to emulate these features. CWs are an emerging, environmentally friendly engineering system employed in some developing countries like China. They require lower investment and operation costs while providing higher treatment efficiency and more ecosystem services than conventional wastewater treatment methods (Liu et al. 2009). However, there is currently a lack of sufficient and appropriate data to assist in the further development of Constructed Wetland systems and the implementation of integrated ‘‘bottom-up’’ and ‘‘topdown’’ approaches by both the public in general and government bodies in particular. Liu et al. (2009) reported that land availability, institutional limitations, and public education will be ongoing challenges for the development of CWs technology in China. Thus, great effort is still required, focusing on further research, policy decisions, public education, and management training to promote the development of CWs systems in developing countries. Challenges of Advances in Fishing Technology Advances in technology for fishing in recent years have been amazing. Fishing technology has developed with the

123

Environmental Management (2014) 54:1237–1248

objective of trying to catch the greatest quantity of fish possible, of an ever increasing variety (Kennelly and Broadhurst 2002). Unlike conventional fishing methods, new fishing technology makes possible highly efficient fishing practices, especially with commercial trawlers. The latter produces higher catches and greater food abundance, pushing market prices lower. With lower market prices, fishing operations make less profit and consumers and retailers waste more fish because waste is less economically detrimental at the lower prices. The increased wastefulness and the higher catch rates result in lower fish populations; this, combined with the lower profits the fishing operations now garner, causes a need for ever greater efficiency in fishing operations. There is no doubt that the worldwide demand for seafood will continue to rise and while increased production from aquaculture may meet some of this demand, there will always be increasing pressure to harvest wild stocks (Kennelly and Broadhurst 2002; FAO 2007). Thus, persistence of resource conservation problems such as overexploitation of aquatic resources indicates the need for a better institutional response to natural and societal impacts on aquatic ecosystems (Agboola and Braimoh 2009). In addition, in recent years, attention has focused on issues associated with abandoned, lost, or otherwise discarded fishing gear (ALDFG). The many negative impacts of ALDFG, such as ‘‘ghost fishing,’’ navigational hazards, and amassed marine debris, have increased with new technologies and greater capacity (FAO 2010). Reducing these impacts requires the use of preventive, mitigating, and curative measures. Also, destructive fishing practices such as bottom trawling in the North Atlantic and dynamite and cyanide fishing in the Indo-Pacific Ocean (Konstapel and Noort 1995) are damaging or even destroying precious marine fish habitats, with devastating effects on the regenerative capacity of fish stocks. The vast amount of bycatch due to unselective gear and fishing practices is another matter of concern: almost one-third of the total world catch is caught and discarded each year by the world’s fishing fleets. The vast majority of this ‘bycatch’ does not survive. Approximately 10 % of the world’s fish catch is assumed to be lost through decay caused by poor post-harvest facilities (Aerni 2001). Existing Laws as Pertaining to Aquatic Environment and Resources Management The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea deals specifically with marine technology and capacity building in the management, exploration, and exploitation of marine resources. This is the only international agreement on transfer of technology as it relates to marine

Environmental Management (2014) 54:1237–1248

environment and resources (Law of the Sea 1982). Specific articles are as follows (Law of the Sea 1982): Article 144 on Transfer of technology: ‘‘The Authority shall take measures in accordance with this Convention: (a) to acquire technology and scientific knowledge relating to activities in the Area; and (b) to promote and encourage the transfer to developing States of such technology and scientific knowledge so that all States Parties benefit therefrom.’’ Article 266 on promotion of the development and transfer of marine technology: ‘‘States, directly or through competent international organizations, shall cooperate in accordance with their capabilities to promote actively the development and transfer of marine science and marine technology on fair and reasonable terms and conditions.’’ Article 270 on ways and means of international cooperation: ‘‘International co-operation for the development and transfer of marine technology shall be carried out, where feasible and appropriate, through existing bilateral, regional or multilateral programmes, and also through expanded and new programmes in order to facilitate marine scientific research, the transfer of marine technology, particularly in new fields, and appropriate international funding for ocean research and development’’ Article 273 on co-operation with international organizations and the Authority: States shall co-operate actively with competent international organizations and the Authority to encourage and facilitate the transfer to developing States, their nationals and the Enterprise of skills and marine technology with regard to activities in the Area. Hoffman and Girvan (1990) suggested that TT to developing countries needs to be perceived in terms of achieving three core objectives: the introduction of new techniques by means of investment in new plants; the improvement of existing techniques; and the generation of new knowledge. All of these are valid and should be sustained through a more proactive framework of systematic strategies highlighted in the ‘‘Framework for TID Strategies’’ section.

Framework for TID Strategies The quest for a paradigm shift to sustainable use and allocation of aquatic resources will undoubtedly lead to technology innovations and developments in the management and production of aquatic resources, focused on efficiency and adaptation to local conditions. Technological distance between developed and developing countries is often best overcome by adaptive

1241

technological effort (Evenson and Westphal 1995). Vivid examples of technological initiatives adaptable to local conditions include the Seawater Greenhouse technology for creating fresh water from seawater in arid regions and the proposed Sahara Forest Project scheme that aims to provide fresh water, food, and renewable energy in hot arid regions as well as revegetating areas of uninhabited desert (Clery 2011). An ideal sustainable TT should combine traditional wisdom and techniques with modern science and technology so that rural livelihoods are strengthened both ecologically and economically (Swaminathan 1994; Kesavan and Swaminathan 2006). Several authors have stressed the need to promote concerted efforts for preserving natural ecosystems and diversifying coastal economies, which can enhance recovery from negative impacts and resilience to their effects (Adger et al. 2005; Allenby and Fink 2005). There is also a need to build adequate and continuing capacity to manage transferred technology. Localized technology innovation and development connotes a holistic approach encompassing efficient, adaptive, and inexpensive technology application. Given the challenges of globalization, local adaptability in terms of specific needs, low levels of applied technologies, inadequate skills, and technological marginalization among others, new framework strategies proposed here aim to resolve these problems, to begin with by identifying needs, growth, and development at the local level before upscaling. Secondly, having recognized the complexities in the institutional dimensions to management of aquatic resources and a successful technology cooperation process, a key response would be to carry out needs assessment, develop clear national priorities for technology development, identify appropriate forms of cooperation, ensure an enabling environment, and build capacity. Studies on drivers for and barriers to environmentally sound technology adoption in nine developing countries revealed that environmental regulation and market pressure appear to exert more influence than community pressure on the adoption of environmentally sound technology (Luken and Rompaey 2008). Thus, the need to look into ways for robust technology cooperation processes between developed and developing countries cannot be over-emphasized. What is required is technology that can be replicated and disseminated through capacity building programs, with necessary adaptations to local economies and cultures. This, in the long term, will foster the blending of frontier technologies with traditional knowledge to provide a pronature, pro-poor, pro-women, and pro-employment orientation to technology development and dissemination in developing countries.

123

1242

Strategies for Localized TID In the face of current and projected global environmental change and its effects on aquatic resources, the need for effective management strategies is becoming a worldwide issue, requiring both scientific and traditional knowledgebased experience for resilience and adaptation. In this framework, five TID strategies relevant to developing countries are analyzed. Strategy 1: Provision of Capacity to Manage TT Technologies relevant to sustainable rural development could be achieved through training and capacity building of the rural communities, provision of microcredit for microenterprises, and establishing market linkages. In my opinion, developing countries should be assisted in training and helped to develop capacity to adopt clean technologies for market-driven eco-enterprises. For instance, a remediation plan/program designed for a degenerated river should not consider a single area; rather the entire catchment area, including the upstream, central, and downstream sections, should be included in evaluation for effective remediation. Thus, ecological experts who are familiar with the local environment play very important roles in TT teamwork. Mastering development and application of clean TT in industry and the services sector is therefore a key requirement in developing countries. Technology cooperation is rarely successful and sustainable without some form of capacity building. Capacity building efforts are made more effective when they are extended, adapted, and localized (Measham 2007). This includes the extension of education and training to other groups, such as community or school groups, and the inclusion of women and children; the methods and delivery of education and training must be adapted to local conditions and to the knowledge and skill levels of the trainees. This can be achieved by developing local trainers. In the twenty-first century, knowledge is power and the various approaches toward evergreen revolution involve knowledge empowerment of the farming and fishing communities (Kesavan and Swaminathan 2008). Strategy 2: Bottom-up Approach in the Application of TT for Sustainable Management It is a fact that we cannot rely entirely on national initiatives or macro-economic policies to foster the sort of economic growth and political stability that developing economies so desperately need. Even when it comes to international aid to these countries, a growing number of voices are questioning the wisdom of the historical topdown approach that delivers massive amounts of direct aid

123

Environmental Management (2014) 54:1237–1248

to governments and to consultants and middlemen, instead of investing in small farmers, businesses and communities (Tougiani et al. 2009). In general, a bottom-up approach to economic development is generally more effective. Bottom-up approaches explore the specific material and human resources of small communities to promote economic expansion, a key to stimulating economic growth. For instance, in assessing the impact of fisheries comanagement interventions in developing countries, a comprehensive review of 204 cases by Evans et al. (2011) reveals a lack of impact assessments, suggesting the need for a change in management approaches. With respect to transferred technology for sustainable management, the technologies, timing, and locale-specific information content development are need based and should be chosen in a ‘‘bottom-up’’ manner. Bottom-up approaches encourage local communities to concentrate on local strengths, be they in materials, crops, and culture or personnel skills to create distinctive products which can then be effectively marketed locally or internationally. As already noted, knowledge is power and the various approaches toward evergreen revolution involve knowledge empowerment of the farming and fishing communities. If the green revolution was top–down, the evergreen revolution is essentially bottom–up and participatory (Kesavan and Swaminathan 2008). Strategy 3: Demystification of Technologies A key component of any TT process is the effective transfer of the skills and intangible know-how that ensure production capability (UN 2001). Sustainable development requires the implementation of appropriate environmentally friendly technologies which are both efficient and adapted to local conditions. Figure 1 shows a simple pathway of the technology cycle for global development. This starts from the need for growth and development in developing countries and the role that TT from developed countries can play. It proceeds through technological capabilities for development, which ultimately result in a number of positive attributes peculiar to developed countries. Key requirements include targeting the poor for technology development and some sort of adaptation to local conditions. According to Bell and Pavitt (1993), technological capabilities are ‘‘the resources needed to generate and manage change, including skills, knowledge and experience, and institutional structures and linkages.’’ A key concept in the ‘technological capabilities’ approach to enterprise development is ‘technological learning’ and the concept of the ‘learning firm’ (Cohen and Levinthal 1987; Marlerba 1992), describing the way in which enterprises acquire and enhance these capabilities. For Bell and Pavitt (1993), technological learning refers to ‘‘any process

Environmental Management (2014) 54:1237–1248

1243

Fig. 1 Technology cycle for global development

by which the resources for generating and managing technical change (technological capabilities) are increased or strengthened.’’ To overcome some of the challenges of introducing GMOs, there would be a need to explore more possibilities to ensure a safe and fair management of agricultural and aquatic biotechnology as a global public good. The need for a strong commitment from non-governmental organizations, governments, and industry to design a common strategy for the optimization of this emerging technology in developed and developing countries cannot be overemphasized. Public acceptance of GMOs or products derived from them is likely to be a matter of education, by demonstrating that they are safe to eat with the approval by regulatory agencies and competitive prices. Part of the largest concern about GMOs is that it is the poorest who have the least choice about managing the risks which are still unknown and which, even if applied locally, may prove to have global impacts. In general, technological capabilities have been specified in various ways (e.g., Dahlman and Westphal 1983; Dahlman et al. 1987; Lall 1992, 2004). Technological capabilities are particularly important as they are the basis for the creativity, flexibility, and dynamism of an economy.

developing countries, then it should not only be transferred but also be adapted to local conditions to meet local needs. Technology transferred to developing countries often encounters rapid breakdowns due to inadequate capacity and unfavorable local environmental conditions. This paper suggests that among other requirements, for sustainable development to be a development paradigm in developing countries, the target should be at least 80 % local technology growth and 20 % TT. Also response to technological marginalization will require, among other factors, sustainable industrial progress through the application of ‘‘safe-fail’’ and not ‘‘fail-safe’’ TT and management techniques at appropriate national, sectoral, and enterprise levels (Redford and Taber 2000). The ‘‘safe-fail’’ approach to TT is based on the premise—where things work, we amplify them; where they fail, we dampen their impact. As we move from a fail-safe design strategy to one of safe-fail experimentation, we do not assume that we can know in advance what the right solution is, but we do understand a process by which that solution can be discovered through action rather than reflection. One hundred percent (100 %) transferred technology is more likely to end up as partially failed technology in developing countries. Strategy 5: Growing Technology From the Grassroots

Strategy 4: Local Adaptation of Transferred Technology Because successful projects create real development, when introducing a new technology, preference should be given not only to the most economical and/or efficient solution, but also to the one that emerges as having the best relationship with the local social and cultural framework (Esposto 2009). For technology to add to capacity in

Ramanathan (2002) in his paper on ‘‘Successful transfer of environmentally sound technologies for greenhouse gas mitigation…’’ argues for technologies relevant to the local needs of the developing countries and sufficient expertise made available in the local market to maintain the technology. This is still far from been achieved, going by the present situation in developing countries. Thus, grassroot

123

1244

TID strategic approaches should be encouraged in developing countries, as it bridges the gaps between technology and human development, thereby fostering the global quest for sustainable development. However, in growing technology from the grassroots, the need for a participatory approach cannot be over-emphasized. Participatory approaches to development interventions, pioneered by writers such as Chambers (1995, 1997), have now largely entered mainstream thinking. They are even advocated by such institutions as the World Bank, and the technique of ‘Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA)’ is now ubiquitous. Through the application of PRA techniques, local situations can be assessed for community technology development. However, the limitations of participatory methods become a problem where exaggerated confidence in their efficacy leads to their being used exclusively and uncritically (Pelkey 1996). According to Biggs and Smith (1998), technology development processes typically involve conflicts over the direction, pace, and significance of change. Therefore, coalition building should be a priority for individuals and organizations participating in technology development. If we really want to give efficient support to a population in need, more complex and locally oriented approaches to problems are needed (Esposto 2009). Examples of Localized TID Strategies An overview of the TID strategies, operations, and lessons is presented in Table 2. The transfer of outside knowledge and the promotion of traditional knowledge have proven to be sustainable in some developing countries. A good example is the ‘‘biovillage’’ model of the M.S. Swaminathan Research Foundation (MSSRF) (http://www.mssrf. org/ecotech/ecotech-biovillage.html) in India (Kesavan and Swaminathan 2006). Here, pro-poor orientation is achieved by employing interventions that improve the livelihood security of the resource poor through empowering them with technology and skills. The biovillage paradigm is a good example of TID strategic approaches dealing with some of the challenges of TT (ecotechnology) especially in developing countries, addressing major socio-economic problems to meet the goal of sustainable development. It is considered as ‘Technology in Action,’ where sustainability is ensured through appropriate interventions/technology dissemination that is environment friendly and provides opportunities for ensuring livelihood security (Kesavan and Swaminathan 2006). Coastal communities can access both the land and marine resources for developing ecotechnologies and eco-enterprises. The coastal biovillage paradigm, therefore, takes into account both the marine- and the land-based natural resources for developing eco-enterprises, as well as training and capacity building of the local communities. Harnessing

123

Environmental Management (2014) 54:1237–1248

leading-edge technologies and blending them with the traditional wisdom and ecological prudence of the rural farming, fishing, and tribal forest dwellers by the MSSRF resulted in technologies which are pro-nature, pro-poor, pro-women, and pro-employment oriented. Some of the features and approaches to the biovillage model are synthesized in Table 3, and the processes and operations of the biovillage model are fully reflected in the five strategies proposed as approaches to TID for sustainable aquatic resource management in developing countries. Another recent TID-related initiative in India is the CSIR-800 Tech Villages concept. The Australian Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) launched the CSIR-800 programme with the aspiration of improving the lives of 800 million Indians through Science and Technology interventions. While CSIR-800 works in the technology arena, it recognizes societal needs as equally important. China’s experience in creating millions of farm jobs through its Rural Township Enterprise Program has been successful. This provides insight into the diversification of work opportunities in villages (Swaminathan 1994) and could be adopted in some other developing countries. An example of an innovative response to the introduction of genetically modified aquatic products in developing countries is the selective breeding of Nile Tilapia at the International Institute for Living Aquatic Resources Management (ICLARM), now known as The WorldFish Centre, an international, non-profit, non-governmental organization that works with partners to reduce poverty and hunger by improving fisheries and aquaculture in developing countries. This breeding led to a strain called Genetically Improved Farmed Tilapia (GIFT) that significantly outperformed the most widely farmed strains of Tilapia in Asia, both in terms of growth and survival rates (yield potential is 25–78 % higher, depending on local conditions). Tilapia (sometimes known as ‘‘everybody’s fish’’) is popular especially among resource-poor fish farmers because it is vigorous and tolerates crowding. It eats almost everything, from rice bran to weed and even sewage. The selective breeding of Nile Tilapia adapted to the local conditions in these countries is a good example of localized technology innovation and development strategies for sustainable management of aquatic resources. The environmental impact of such fish in different regions is assessed by ICLARM in various stages and accompanied by ex ante and ex-post monitoring. The potential impact on biodiversity cannot, however, be investigated to the same extent as would be possible in developed countries with the means to collect the data required. To date, no negative impacts of GIFT have been reported. ICLARM’s policy is to determine trade-offs between different types of research (an all embracing impact

Environmental Management (2014) 54:1237–1248

1245

Table 2 Overview of TID strategies for sustainable management of aquatic resources in developing countries TID strategies

Operation/process

Examples/lessons

References

1. Provision of capacity to manage TT

Training and capacity building of the rural communities, provision of microcredit for the microenterprises and establishing market linkages

China’s Rural Township Enterprise Program. Biovillage and CSIR 800 Tech village programs in India. Evolves evergreen/ecological revolution involving knowledge empowerment of the rural (farming and fishing) communities. Pro-poor orientation improves the livelihood security of the resource poor through empowering them with technology and skills

Kesavan and Swaminathan ((2008) and Measham (2007)

2. Bottom-up approach in the application of TT for sustainable management

Exploring the specific material and human resources of small communities to promote economic expansion

‘‘Sustainable sanitation –ECOSAN’’ program of the GIZ. CWs. Key features are adaptation to local conditions, cost effectiveness, and adequate capacity for local management of water resources

Esposto (2009), Biggs and Smith (1998), Tougiani et al. (2009), Robert and Robert (2004)), and Okurut (2000)

3. Demystification of technologies

Effective transfer of the skills and intangible know- how that ensure production capability. Strengthening technological capabilities

GIFT selective breeding of Nile Tilapia adapted to the local conditions

UN (2001), Bell and Pavitt (1993), and ICLARM (2001)

4. Local adaptation of transferred technology

New technologies that emerge as having the best relationship with the local social and cultural framework

Seawater Greenhouse technology. Sahara Forest Project scheme. Aims to provide fresh water, food, and renewable energy in hot arid regions as well as revegetating areas of uninhabited desert

Clery (2011), Evenson and Westphal (1995), and Ramanathan (2002)

5. Growing technology from the grassroots

Harnessing leading-edge technologies and blending them with traditional wisdom and ecological prudence

The ‘‘biovillage model’’ of M.S. Swaminathan Research Foundation (MSSRF), India. Bridges the gaps between technology and human development, and fosters quest for sustainable development

Swaminathan (1994), Kesavan and Swaminathan (2006), and Ramanathan (2002)

assessment). In the case of the GIFT-impact assessment, the farmed Nile Tilapia is compared to alternative uses of natural resources for food production (ICLARM 2001). In this vein, another suitable example of aquatic biotechnology being pursued as an important option in addressing food security is from Cuba. Cuba is a particularly interesting case following the end of the Cold War, Cuba could no longer rely on trade with other communist countries, but was unwilling to join the capitalist world. In the search for a strategy to overcome food insecurity and dependence on food imports, the government launched a National Food Programme in 1989. This combined the promotion of biotechnology with traditional conservation methods and with local low-input practices. In the meantime, transgenic varieties of all important food crops are currently under development in Cuba. The first transgenic product that has become available as food for consumers in 2000 is a genetically modified Tilapia, a transgenic fish that grows faster (Lehmann 2000). Other nations that have developed transgenic fish include the USA, Canada, EU, China, Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan. It is still too early to judge the success of Cuba’s approach, but it is certain that lessons drawn from their experience will help

to design appropriate strategies for other regions which may wish to adopt a similar strategy. Considering the vast interest in the technology, it is anticipated that transgenic fish will represent a new generation of broodstock, which will enhance the capacity and intensity of aquacultural output. All of the above-mentioned platforms and other new emerging technologies will undoubtedly generate the ‘‘gene revolution’’ that will contribute to future food security. Germany‘s contribution through the Deutsche Gesellschaft fu¨r Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ, formerly GTZ) program on sustainable sanitation (ECOSAN) is another good example of technology development and adaptation for sustainable aquatic resource development in developing countries. It provides valuable guidance on CWs for wastewater and greywater treatment in developing countries and countries in transition. The ecological sanitation (ECOSAN) approach is able to address child health, which needs to be improved through better household sanitation and wastewater treatment, and also sustainable management and safe recycling of important resources such as water and nutrients (Robert and Robert 2004;

123

1246

Environmental Management (2014) 54:1237–1248

Table 3 Features of the ‘‘biovillage model’’ approach of M.S. Swaminathan Research Foundation in TID strategic approaches for sustainable development (synthesized from http://www.mssrf.org/ ecotech.html) Features

Content and approaches

Biovillage key components

Participatory Technology Development (PTD) mode of TTs Training and capacity building Grassroot institutional building Micro financial services Partnership and linkages

Technological challenges

Diffusing environmentally sound technology

TID strategic approaches

Appropriate blends of traditional ecology and frontier science

Harmonizing the needs of the present with the future generation

Identifying and involving actors according to different situations, capacities, and priorities of rural areas and regions Adaptive participatory research and development Ensuring institutionalization with local community for continuity Invention/technology dissemination Derived benefits

Strengthening and diversifying the existing livelihoods Identifying alternative livelihoods for the resource poor

conservation and improvement of soil, water, biodiversity, atmosphere, and renewable energy sources, among others. This is discussed in the context of linking sustainable aquatic resources with food security for poor rural and coastal communities in developing countries. In a way, these seem to fulfill the urgent need to usher in an Ecological Revolution as sequel to the Agriculture Revolution and the Industrial Revolution to save humanity and planet Earth, which are at a crossroads (Clarke 2006). For localized technology to fully deliver the gains of sustainable aquatic resource management in the face of current technological challenges, the need for innovations and knowledge cannot be over-emphasized. Knowledge and its application in innovative products and processes are becoming the most important competitive factor to maintain or increase competitive advantages. Although the success of innovation systems depends on a number of country-specific factors such as market conditions, entrepreneurial capability, public infrastructure, and cultural norms and values, innovation systems are increasingly subject to external influences, such as foreign direct investment, international (trade) agreements, and international research cooperation. Also innovation capability will depend on how different actors work together efficiently and effectively in a system to generate and market new ideas.

Eco-entrepreneurship Pro-nature, pro-poor, and pro-women orientation

Okurut 2000). In developing countries, CWs are flexible systems which can be used for single households or for entire communities. As more and more regions are experiencing droughts or flooding due to climate change, water recycling and resilient technologies are key aspects to adapt to these effects of climate change. Also, based on past experiences of GIZ with CWs in diverse countries such as the Philippines, Syria, and Albania, CWs are considered as a suitable technology for sustainable wastewater management especially for developing countries. The main features are adaptation to local conditions, cost effectiveness, and adequate capacity for local management of water resources. GIZ accordingly follows an integrated, potential-oriented approach to promoting the enterprise innovation. This approach is geared to (national) innovation systems within which innovation and technological progress form a central basis for knowledge-based economic development (Wetzel 2000; Beharrel et al. 2002). Lessons drawn from these examples of localized TID strategies are that steps taken toward aquatic resource productivity enhancement should concurrently address the

123

Concluding Remark As effective aquatic resource management strategies are considered in the context of current and projected global environmental change, it is important to understand if and how advances in technology have impacted global aquatic resources and how ecosystems have changed over time. This paper highlights localized technology innovations and development strategies to neutralize technological challenges for sustainable management of aquatic resources, especially in developing countries. Proposed TID strategies, among others, recognize the need for provision of localized capacity to manage technology through knowledge empowerment for largely illiterate, unskilled, and resource-poor rural and coastal communities and technology development through cooperation. Finally, these strategies are examined and implications are considered for training, education, and participatory technology development. Acknowledgments Much of this work has been inspired through my participation as an invited early career speaker at the 17th Asian Symposium on Ecotechnology on November 11–13, 2010 at Unazuki International Hall ‘‘Selene,’’ Kurobe, Japan, and open discussions with lecturers and speakers, particularly with the works of Dipak

Environmental Management (2014) 54:1237–1248 Gyawali and M.S Swaminathan. I have enjoyed a fellowship support from the United Nations University Institute for Advanced Study on Sustainability (UNU IAS), Japan.

References Adger WN, Huges TP, Folke C, Carpenter SR, Rockstrom J (2005) Social-ecological resilience to coastal disasters. Science 309(5737):1036–1039 Aerni P (2001) Aquatic resources and technology: evolutionary, environmental, legal and developmental aspects. Science, Technology and Innovation Discussion Paper no. 13. Center for International Development, Cambridge, MA African Ministerial Council on Science and Technology (AMCOST) (2010) Securing and using Africa’s indigenous knowledge base, (http://www.nepadst.org/platforms/ik.shtml). Accessed 31 Jan 2010 Agboola JI, Braimoh AK (2009) Strategic partnership for sustainable management of aquatic resources. Water Resour Manage 23(13):2761–2775 Allenby B, Fink J (2005) Toward inherently secure and resilient societies. Science 309(5737):1034–1036 Beharrel M, Lim WH, Gan J (2002) Good practices in wetland management and conservation. In: Ahyaudin A, Salmah CR, Mansor M, Nakamura R, Ramakrishna S, Mundkur T (eds) Proceedings of a workshop on the Asian wetlands: bringing partnerships into good wetland practices. pp. 582–594 Bell M, Pavitt K (1993) Technological accumulation and industrial growth: contrasts between developed and developing countries. Ind Corp Change 2(2):157–210 Biggs S, Smith G (1998) Beyond methodologies: coalition-building for participatory technology development. World Dev 26(2): 239–248 Chambers R (1995) Making the best of going to scale. PLA notes no. 24. International Institute for Environment and Development, London Chambers R (1997) Whose reality counts? Putting the first last. Intermediate Technology Publications, London Clarke AAD (2006) The human ecological footprint. http://www. energybulletin.net/16237.html. Accessed 4 June 2011 Clery D (2011) Greenhouse-power plant hybrid set to make Jordan’s Desert Bloom. Science 331 (6014):136. doi:10.1126/science. 331.6014.136 Cohen WM, Levinthal DA (1987) Innovation and learning: the two faces of R and D. Econ J 99(397):569–596 Colby ME (1991) Environmental management in development: the evolution of paradigms. Ecol Econ 3:193–213 Costa-Pierce BA (2002) The ‘Blue Revolution’—aquaculture must go green. World Aquaculture 33(4): 4–5 Dahlman C, Westphal LE (1983) The transfer of technology—issues in the acquisition of technological capability by developing countries. Fin Dev 20:6–9 Dahlman C, Ross Larsen B, Westphal LE (1987) Managing technological development: lessons from newly industrializing countries. World Dev 15(6):759–775 Dey MM, Gardiner PR (2000) Impact assessment at ICLARM. Special edition of Aquaculture Economics and Management, 4 (1/2) Esposto S (2009) The sustainability of applied technologies for water supply in developing countries. Technol Soc 31:257–262 Esteban M, Webersik C, Leary D, Thompson-Pomeroy D (2008) Innovation in responding to climate change: nanotechnology, ocean energy and forestry. UNU IAS Report, November 2008, 46 pp

1247 Evans L, Cherret N, Pemsl D (2011) Assessing the impact of fisheries co-management interventions in developing countries: a metaanalysis. J Environ Manage 92(8):1938–1949 Evenson RE, Westphal LE (1995) Technological change and technology strategy. In: Behrman J, Srinivasan TN (eds) Handbook of development economics, vol 3. Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., Amsterdam FAO (2007) The state of the world fisheries and aquaculture. FAO, Rome FAO (2010) The state of world fisheries and aquaculture 2010. Facing challenges and seizing opportunities. FAO, Rome, p 197 Ghose AK (2003) Jobs and incomes in a globalizing world. ILO, Geneva Gill AB (2005) Offshore renewable energy: ecological implications of generating electricity in the coastal zone. J Appl Ecol 42:605–615 Gommes R, du Guerny J, Nachtergaele F, Brinkman R (1998) Potential impact of sea-level rise on populations and agriculture. Sustainable Development Dimensions (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 1998) Guan JC, Mok CK, Yam RCM, Chin KS, Pun KF (2006) Technology transfer and innovation performance: evidence from Chinese firms. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 73:666–678 Hoffman K, Girvan N (1990) Managing international technology transfer: a strategic approach for developing countries. IDRC. http://208.141.36.73/listarchive/index.cfm?mthd=msg&ID= 20090 International Institute for Aquatic Resources Management (ICLARM) (2001) ICLARM announces important new fish for Asian fish farms. Press release. Penang, Malaysia: ICLARM. http://208. 141.36.73/listarchive/index.cfm?mthd=msg&ID=20090 Kennelly SJ, Broadhurst MK (2002) Bye-catch begone: changes in the philosophy of fishing technology. Fish Fish 3:340–355 Kesavan PC, Swaminathan MS (2006) Managing extreme natural disasters in coastal areas. Philos Trans R Soc A 364:2191–2216 Kesavan PC, Swaminathan MS (2008) Strategies and models for agricultural sustainability in developing Asian countries. Philos Trans R Soc B 363:877–891 Konstapel K, Noort L (1995) Fisheries in developing countries. Sectoral Policy Document of Development Cooperation. Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The Hague, Netherlands Lall S (1992) Technological capabilities and industrialization. World Dev 20(2):165–186 Lall S (2004) Stimulating industrial competitiveness in Sub-Saharan Africa: lessons from East Asia on the role of FDI and technology acquisition. Paper prepared for the World Bank for the NEPAD/ TICAD Conference on Asia-Africa trade and investment. Tokyo International Conference on African Development 31October–2 November 2004 Law of the Sea (1982) International legal materials, vol 21(5) Lehmann V (2000) Cuban agrobiotechnology: diverse agenda in times of limited food production. Biotechnol Dev Monit 42:18–21 Liu D, Ge Y, Chang J, Peng C, Gu B, Chan GYS, Wu X (2009) Constructed wetlands in China: recent developments and future challenges. Front Ecol Environ 7:261–268 Luken R, Rompaey FV (2008) Drivers for and barriers to environmentally sound technology adoption by manufacturing plants in nine developing countries. J Cleaner Product 16S1:S67–S77 Maclean N, Laight RJ (2000) Transgenic fish: an evaluation of benefits and risks. Fish Fish 1(2):146–172 Marlerba F (1992) Learning by firms and incremental technical change. Econ J 102:845–859 Measham TG (2007) Building capacity for environmental management: local knowledge and rehabilitation on the Gippsland Red Gum Plains. Aust Geogr 38(2):145–159

123

1248 Okurut TO (2000) A pilot study on municipal wastewater treatment using a constructed wetland in Uganda. PhD Dissertation. Wageningen University & Institute for Infrastructural, Hydraulic and Environmental Engineering, Delft, the Netherlands, 170 pp Pelc R, Fujita R (2002) Renewable energy from the ocean. Mar Policy 26:471–479 Pelkey N (1996) Please stop the PRA RRA rah. Out of the Shell. Coastal Resour Res Netw News 5(1):17–24 Ramanathan R (2002) Successful transfer of environmentally sound technologies for greenhouse gas mitigation: a framework for matching the needs of developing countries. Ecol Econ 42:117–129 Redford KH, Taber A (2000) Writing the wrongs: developing a safefail culture in conservation. Conserv Biol 14:1567–1568 Reisman A (2005) Transfer of technologies: a cross-disciplinary taxonomy. Omega 33:189–202 Robert HK, Robert LK (2004) Treatment wetlands. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL Sachs JD (2000) Globalization and patterns of economic development. Weltwirtschafts Archiv Rev Econ 136(4):579–600 Soerensen HC, Weinstein A (2008) Ocean energy: position paper for IPCC. Key note paper for the IPCC scoping conference on renewable energy, Lubeck, Germany Sundaravadivel M, Vigneswaran S (2001) Constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol 31:351–409 Swaminathan MS (1994) Reaching the unreached: ecotechnology and rural employment: a dialogue. Macmillan India Ltd.

123

Environmental Management (2014) 54:1237–1248 Tougiani A, Chaibou G, Tony R (2009) Community mobilisation for improved livelihoods through tree crop management in Niger. GeoJournal 74(5):377–389 UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) estimations, June 2010. http:// stats.uis.unesco.org/unesco/ReportFolders/ReportFolders.aspx UNIDO (2005) Industrial Development Report 2005. Capability building for catching-up: historical, empirical and policy dimensions. UNIDO, Vienna United Nations (UN) (2001) Compendium of international arrangements on transfer of technology: selected instruments. Relevant provisions in selected international arrangements pertaining to transfer of technology. UNCTAD/ITE/IPC/Misc.5. United Nations Publication Sales No. E-01.II.D.28. ISBN 92-1112539-1 United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) (2000) International investment instruments—transfer of technology: a compendium, vol IV, V and VI (Geneva: UNCTAD). United Nations Publication, Sales Nos. E.00.II.D.13 and E.00.II.D.14 Wetzel RG (2000) Fundamental processes within natural and constructed wetland ecosystems: short term versus long-term objectives. Water Sci Technol 44(11–12):1–8 World Bank (2002) Globalization, growth and poverty: building an inclusive world economy. World Bank and Oxford University Press, New York, and Washington, DC