Perceptions of El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) and La Niña Shape Fishers’ Adaptive Capacity and Resilience

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I enjoyed reading this paper. It plugs an important gap in making the point about the fact that there has been no research that has attempted to understand whether fishers know the difference between El Niño and la Niña and therefore how they can adapt their livelihoods. The climate change point is well made and referenced. The set up section explains the issue very well.

 

The coverage was quite ambitious empirically in terms of 4 different sites and different fisheries. At times this left me wanting to know more about each but the value of the overall picture outweighed this also in the context of a genuine attempt to provide both qualitative and quantitative data and reflection to support the argument. However while I appreciated this focus and attempt very much I needed more reflection on the challenges and benefits of integrating these different data sets, especially given the long-term nature of the ethnographic work. Did this inform the survey design for example? What order where the interviews carried out in – after the survey and/or to deepen knowledge or confirm previous ethnographic perceptions. Currently I think you are underselling your contribution for a social science audience – the paper has methodological relevance beyond fisheries and livelihoods I this respect – so I would encourage you to expand here.

 

Also more reflection on the fact that all the direct quotations seem to be from men (a product of the fact that these were with high seas fishers and that was the sample) and the limitations of this was needed. As currently presented, there is an imbalance here because we need to take on faith that the comments about women and loans and the impact on the mangrove cockle collectors get into debt etc. are as valid. I appreciate it is not possible to get the same type of data on everything but this needs setting up and framing a little more carefully. For example, this is an important and interesting paragraph about diversification and its limits and costs but we needed more to make it appear more than anecdotal - more grounding introduction/ lead in to this ethnographic summary would lend it more rigour. For example tell us more about when were these observations made, how did they fit with longer term observations, What are the implications of more men doing this type of engagement etc? You can say more here to show the reader that this is precisely why we need interviews, ethnographic work and surveys to build up a picture.

 

 

The refences to the predictions for 2023 need updating as the mega El Niño never arrived. This could also be used to elaborate more the discussion about prediction in general and their benefits and pitfalls in relation to what fisheries believe and what they can trust in. George Adamson’s work here would be helpful – gere are acoupoe of pieces but his book on the History of l Niño is also very useful

 

Adamson, G. 2022. Situating El Niño: Toward a Critical (Physical) Geography of ENSO Research Practice. Annals of the American Association of Geographers. 112:4, 877-892. doi: 10.1080/24694452.2021.1945910

Adamson, G. 2022. El Niño without ‘El Niño’? Path dependency and the definition problem in El Niño Southern Oscillation research. Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space, 6(3): 2047-2070.

 

This below also useful to include as an example of how to ensure the lack of loss of generational knowledge and how this can contribute to innovative ways of collecting and disseminating past experiences to help reduce risk: Bell, I., N. Laurie, O. Calle, M. Carmen, and A. Valdez. 2024 Education for Disaster resilience: Lessons from El Niño. Geoforum 148.

 

Specific query

 

On page 6 why do we think that the older people tended to know more about El Niño – this point is not returned to in any detail in the discussion or conclusion – is it because they had experienced big ones before, were they migrants from inland areas where drought had been an impact – later you say the older people tended to do fishing and agriculture but younger ones not -a =re they likely to be applying their agricultural experience here form the past? – it would be good to hear what the longer terms ethnographic data would suggest - or if not to speculate at least in the discussion or else it just dangles as a point.

 

Presentation

It is well written and easy to understand – really good to see te4h Spanish and English – it would be good for non-specialists to explain what Purse Seining is – I had to look it up!

Table 3 titles in the table need adjusting to fit the line

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We thank you for the opportunity to revise this manuscript. Overall we found your comments helpful, encouraging, and positive. We have incorporated most of them with our line-by -line responses in the attached document in red italics. We believe the manuscript has improved and look forward to its publication in the near future.

Best wishes,

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper uses survey data supported by data from ethnographic interviews with fishers in several coastal provinces of Ecuador to gauge their awareness of the weather cycle, its impacts on their livelihoods, and the adaptive responses they have made to try to mitigate these impacts. The survey respondents are distributed across several provinces corresponding to different fisheries habitats, which makes it possible to look for regional differences in awareness, impacts, and adaptive responses. In general, these Ecuadoran fishers seem to be less aware of La Niña’s impacts than El Niño’s. If they have multiple gear, they are likely to switch (e.g., from long lines to gill nets) and harvest shrimp instead of pelagic fish species during El Niño. Those who rely on mangrove cockles (shellfish) have fewer economic alternatives, and mangroves have proven to take longer to recover their salinity and turbulence-buffering plants. The authors conclude that while fishers have adapted to the extreme changes that ENSO cycles bring, some individuals and communities are more vulnerable and in need of more information about how they can better adapt, and government agencies would benefit from knowledge developed by fishers based on their close observations over many generations.

 

Methodologically, the survey data were collected by a public agency (Instituto Público de Investigación de Acuicultura y Pesca) in 30 communities across four of Ecuador’s five coastal provinces (it is not clear why no surveys were conducted in Santa Elena province, or in the Galapagos). The survey’s design was said to be guided by long-term ethnographic research, and additional ethnographic interviews were conducted with 35 individuals in two of the communities where the surveys were conducted (it is not clear whether these respondents had also completed the survey, nor is it clear how the ‘snowball sampling’ was used to select these respondents).

 

Survey analysis involved appropriate non-parametric tests (Chi-Square and contingency coefficient). No income data are reported, making it difficult to gauge the observed effects on livelihood diversification and resilience. Also, no data are presented concerning rural-urban migration, or cyclical migration patterns, so it is difficult to judge whether and to what extent moving to the city is one adaptive response considered by some fishers in some households, communities, or regions.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We thank you for the opportunity to revise this manuscript. Overall we found your comments helpful, encouraging, and positive. We have incorporated most of them with our line-by -line responses below in red italics pasted below and in the attached document. We believe the manuscript has improved and look forward to its publication in the near future.

Best wishes,

 

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper uses survey data supported by data from ethnographic interviews with fishers in several coastal provinces of Ecuador to gauge their awareness of the weather cycle, its impacts on their livelihoods, and the adaptive responses they have made to try to mitigate these impacts. The survey respondents are distributed across several provinces corresponding to different fisheries habitats, which makes it possible to look for regional differences in awareness, impacts, and adaptive responses. In general, these Ecuadoran fishers seem to be less aware of La Niña’s impacts than El Niño’s. If they have multiple gear, they are likely to switch (e.g., from long lines to gill nets) and harvest shrimp instead of pelagic fish species during El Niño. Those who rely on mangrove cockles (shellfish) have fewer economic alternatives, and mangroves have proven to take longer to recover their salinity and turbulence-buffering plants. The authors conclude that while fishers have adapted to the extreme changes that ENSO cycles bring, some individuals and communities are more vulnerable and in need of more information about how they can better adapt, and government agencies would benefit from knowledge developed by fishers based on their close observations over many generations.

 

Methodologically, the survey data were collected by a public agency (Instituto Público de Investigación de Acuicultura y Pesca) in 30 communities across four of Ecuador’s five coastal provinces (it is not clear why no surveys were conducted in Santa Elena province, or in the Galapagos). The survey’s design was said to be guided by long-term ethnographic research, and additional ethnographic interviews were conducted with 35 individuals in two of the communities where the surveys were conducted (it is not clear whether these respondents had also completed the survey, nor is it clear how the ‘snowball sampling’ was used to select these respondents).

 

Thank you for the comments. We have added a few sentences to the method section to address these concerns. We clarify that the chronology of our mixed-method approach was as follows: ethnographic research first in Esmeraldas and El Oro, then the surveys, followed by the 35 interviews in Machalilla in Manabi Province.We believe this has improved our description of the research design, questions, and argument. We Added a foot note to explain why Galapagos and Santa Elena were not included since the study was limited to mainland Ecuador and Santa Elena Province was excluded due to the dry climate and absence of mangroves since the focus of the project was on mangrove associated fisheries. 

 

Survey analysis involved appropriate non-parametric tests (Chi-Square and contingency coefficient). No income data are reported, making it difficult to gauge the observed effects on livelihood diversification and resilience. Also, no data are presented concerning rural-urban migration, or cyclical migration patterns, so it is difficult to judge whether and to what extent moving to the city is one adaptive response considered by some fishers in some households, communities, or regions.

 

Thank you for the comment. Our insights about livelihood diversification and resilience are predominantly derived from the qualitative and ethnographic components of the research. However, we agree these comments are good observations on the limitation of the survey and we have added this to our discussion of limitations.

 

Submission Date

09 April 2024

Date of this review

09 May 2024 17:07:09

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf