CAPACITY NEED ANALYSIS AND

CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FOR BLUE SWIMMING CRAB
SUSTAINABLE FISHERY
COMMITTEE LAMPUNG
PROVINCE
REPORT

Prepared by:
Coral Triangle Center

Submitted to:
The Packard Foundation

March 2019
The Coral Triangle Center produced this report in support of the Blue Swimming Crab Sustainable
Fishery Initiatives (IPPRB) in Lampung Province and as part of deliverables to The Packard
Foundation.

This report is prepared by:

Denny Boy Mochran
Imam Syuhada
Hesti Widodo
I Nyoman Suardana
Silvianita Timotius

We would like to extend our sincere appreciation to the individuals who participated in this
capacity needs assessment.

For more information about this report, please contact:

Denny Boy Mochran and Imam Syuhada
Coral Triangle Center
http://www.coraltrianglecenter.org
Emails: dbmochran@coraltrianglecenter.org, isyuhada@coraltrianglecenter.org

Version March 2019

i
Executive Summary

This report provides a summary of findings from the capacity development needs
assessment conducted by CTC. The report provides an analysis of the following aspect:
current organizational capacity, organizational capacity needs, preferred training, and
technical assistance arrangements to the KPPRB members. In addition, we identified
several partners that can be a potential partner to collaborate with CTC.

The purpose of the capacity development needs assessment (CDNA) was to understand
the KPPRB members and other fishery stakeholder’s capacity, interests and needs to
inform the organization partners in general and CTC to develop training and technical
assistance to KPPRB members and other BSC stakeholders in Lampung province. CTC will
use the results to prioritize organizations’ interests and identify areas of need that can be
addressed through training, workshop and technical assistance.

On July 22 to 30th 2018, CTC conducted a survey in Tulang Bawang, Lampung Tengah and
Lampung Timur regency to collect information on:
1. Participation of each interviewee in the KPPRB collaborative work
2. Perception of the current fisher condition
3. The main issues and theme in fisheries resource management
4. Negotiation skills, managing changes, leadership style, and visioning
5. Previous involvement in capacity building
6. Methods and learning styles
7. Training provider.

We utilized a structured and semi-structured interview with an inquiry that combined a pre-
determined set of questions and open queries (Appendix 1) to explore themes or subject in BSC
management through one on one interview. We targeted the member of KPPRB, Fisheries
Extension Officer (FEO), fishers and mini plant owners or workers. The detail information of the
interviewee can be found in the Appendix 2a.

Survey respondents represented a variety of BSC stakeholders in Lampung with differing areas of
focus that cover government, private sectors and fishermen's perspective toward IPPRB and
capacity building needs to support BSC management. We interviewed 40 people in three regencies
whose half of the respondents were in current roles as organizational leadership in the provincial
Fisheries Agency (FA) as Civil servant followed by fishers or fisher association (HSNI) as many as
28% and the private sector as many as 22% (appendix 2b). Most of the respondents from FA holds
an undergraduate degree and even a master degree while the lowest education recorded was an
Elementary School degree held by one of the fishers.

ii
Table of Content

Executive Summary _________________________________________________________ ii

Table of Content ___________________________________________________________ iii
Background _______________________________________________________________ 4
Objectives ________________________________________________________________ 5
Methods __________________________________________________________________ 5
Expected Outcome__________________________________________________________ 5
Findings __________________________________________________________________ 5
Site Observation ________________________________________________________________5
Lampung Province ___________________________________________________________________ 5
Tulang Bawang regency _______________________________________________________________ 6
Lampung Tengah regency _____________________________________________________________ 6
Lampung Timur regency ______________________________________________________________ 6
Reliability test to the questionnaire _________________________________________________7
Organizational Capacity Needs Themes/Topics ________________________________________7
Top Trainings ___________________________________________________________________8
Priority Training Topics ___________________________________________________________8
Preferred Learning Method and Style _______________________________________________9
Training Formats_____________________________________________________________________ 9
Effective ways to deliver the training and workshop ________________________________________ 9
Preferred Training Logistics _______________________________________________________10
Suggested Timing ___________________________________________________________________ 10
Training provider and training location __________________________________________________ 10
Key Considerations _____________________________________________________________11
Perception toward IPPRB ____________________________________________________________ 11
Perception toward BSC environmental and fishery ________________________________________ 12
Recommendations and Follow up ____________________________________________ 12
Focus Group Discussion Result ____________________________________________________13
Appendix 1: Questionnaire _______________________________________________________16
Appendix 2a: Respondents’ Profile _________________________________________________25
Appendix 2b: Respondent summary________________________________________________26
Appendix 3: Lampung province map _______________________________________________27
Appendix 5: Brief description of three target villages in Tulang Bawang Regency____________28
Appendix 7: The Lampung Timur Regency map _______________________________________29

iii
Background

Aiming to support the implementation of effective fishery management in Indonesia, CTC

envisions conducting capacity development in relations to the establishment and management of
nearshore fisheries management body and building capacity and leadership in Indonesia targeting
key individuals, institutions, networks, and across the whole fisheries management stakeholders
identified at provincial level. To better understand on capacity development needs in this instance,
CTC will conduct an assessment targeting provincial leaders and institutions engaged in fisheries
management, including current initiatives that are in place to learn on key competencies (skill sets)
needed (such as economics, local leadership, and communications) that may potentially help
provincial leaders to establish, manage, and strengthen fishery collaborative management body.
Assessment led by CTC in close coordination with other partners which have been involved in
provincial level fishery project.

Following the assessment result, CTC will develop capacity curriculum and modules at national
level jointly with related-partners (i.e. CSF, EDF, and Starling Resources), training delivery via 2
training sessions, and scaling up capacity development for key executives at provincial level
(Echelon I and II of DKP, Planning Bureau, and Environment Office), local fisheries and MPA
managers and practitioners via 2 session leadership capacity development alignment at CTC’s Center
for Marine Conservation in Bali.

The Blue Swimming Crab Sustainable Fishery Initiatives (IPPRB) is a collaborative initiative led by
the Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries to support the management of crab fisheries in
Lampung Province. It aims to improve ecosystem health and sustainability of crab stock in and
improve the social and economic welfare of stakeholders along the supply chain. The initiative was
established under the Governor Decree No. 71/2017, which consist of 30 people and supported by
a secretariat team at the Marine and Fisheries Office in the provincial level.

The IPPRB team members came from numerous background such as university, government at
various levels, national and international organization, fishing community and fishers association
as well as the private sectors. The team is implementing the action plan for BSC management that
is ratified under Lampung Governor Regulation No: G/164/ V.19/HAKA/2018. The document clearly
stated the objective of IPPRB to achieve BSC sustainable fishery through a series of activities and
its adaptive monitoring and management system. The team of The Blue Swimming Crab
Sustainable Fishery Committee (KPPRB) is legalized under governor regulation No:
/165/V.19/HAKA/2018.

As a newly established institution, IPPRB members need to have the same understanding on how
to achieve the fisheries management goals. As KPPRB members are diverse in terms of occupation
and education background, it is necessary to upgrade the understanding level and member’s
knowledge in basic fishery science and management as well as their perspective on current
fisheries and environmental condition of BSC. Hence, it is important to deliver these needs to
KPPRB members in an effective way to ensure the effectiveness of training and workshops that
will be delivered to them.

In response to the need, CTC conducted The Capacity Development Needs Assessment (CDNA) to
collect information from KPPRB members and other fishery stakeholders to understand the
current needs in developing KPPRB member’s capacity, that will be considered to develop
curriculum and modules and design the type of training that is appropriate for KPPRB members.

4
Objectives
The purpose of the capacity development needs assessment (CDNA) was to understand the KPPRB
members and other fishery stakeholder’s capacity, interests and needs to inform the organization
partners in general and CTC to develop training and technical assistance to KPPRB members and
other BSC stakeholders in Lampung province. CTC will use the results to prioritize organizations’
interests and identify areas of need that can be addressed through training, workshop and
technical assistance.

Methods
• Observation to series of council/committee meeting
• One-on-one semi-structured interview for government representatives and mini plant
representatives
• Focus group discussions for Blue Swimming Crab fishermen
• Questionnaires will be divided into sections
o Participation in collaborative work
o Perception on current fisheries condition
o Key themes in fisheries resources management
o Negotiation skill, managing change, leadership style, and visioning aspect
o Previous involvement in capacity development
o Learning method and style
o Training providers

Expected Outcome
• Comprehension on current need in council capacity development especially those target
group
• Recommendation for further curriculum and modules development and type of training
that fit in the need of those target groups
• Comprehension on training providers and potential collaboration

Findings
Site Observation
Lampung Province
Lampung is the southernmost province in Sumatra Island and it lies on 103º 40 '- 105º 50' North and
6º 45 '- 3º 45' South and its capital is Bandar Lampung. The province has 2 municipalities (Bandar
Lampung City and Metro) and 15 regencies. It has borders with Bengkulu and South Sumatra in the
northwest and north, respectively (Lampung map is provided in Appendix 3). Lampung Province
has two main harbors, Panjang and Bakauheni Harbor and several fishing ports such as Teluk
Betung, Tarahan, and Kalianda in Lampung Bay and Labuhan Maringgai and Ketapang in the side
of Java Sea. The primary airport is Radin Inten II and it has two pioneer airports, Mohammad Taufik
Kiemas and Gatot Soebroto Airport.

5
Tulang Bawang regency
Tulang Bawang Regency is located 120 Km north of Bandar Lampung, the capital province of
Lampung. It has an area of ± 4,361.83 square kilometers and consists of 15 Districts and 152 Villages.
Its capital district is Menggala. Tulang Bawang is accessible through a combination of air and land
transportation from Jakarta as well as water transport from Merak Bakauheni port. Tulang
Bawang Regency has a variety of potential natural resources and cultural diversity that are
potential to be developed to support the community’s livelihood. Our target villages are Kuala
Teladas, Way Dente and Sungai Burung village. The map Tulang Bawang Regency and the target
villages profile are provide in appendix 4 and 5, respectively.

Tulang Bawang area has four distinct topography that are:

• Land/terrestrial, this is the largest portion and utilized for agriculture.
• Swamp, it is located along the east coast with an elevation of zero to one m from sea level,
considered as a tidal-swamp area.
• The river basin, there are two main river basins, Tulang Bawang river basin, and other smaller
river basins.
• Alluvial, is located in the downstream of Tulang Bawang and Mesuji River and utilized for
ports.

Lampung Tengah regency

The Regency has an area of 4.789,82 kilometer square and its capital is Gunung Sugih. It is one of
the landlocked regency in the province of Lampung. The Regency is located around 57.85
kilometers from Bandar Lampung City and is accessible through land transportations by bus, car
or even motorcycle. This regency was once the second largest regency in Lampung Province until
the enactment of Law No. 12 of 1999, which divided this area into several other smaller regencies;
Lampung Timur and Metro municipality. Lampung Tengah regency is well connected with other
municipalities and regencies within the Lampung province as well as other provinces, thus makes
this area as a strategic location in the context regional development plan. The Lampung Tengah
map is provided in appendix 6.

Our target villages are Cabang and Sumber Agung village, they are located in Surabaya Sub-districts.
Fisher’s house and mini plants dominate the residential area and most of them are built inland.
Most of the fishers travel to Kuala Seputih in Tulang Bawang Province to catch crabs. Although
waste management system is unknown, mini-plants discard the waste from crab processing to the
nearby river.

Lampung Timur regency

The Regency has an area of 5.325,03 kilometer square and its capital is Sukadana. As a new regency,
Lampung Timur was established based on Law Number 12 of 1999 and inaugurated on April 27,
1999. It has 12 definitive sub-districts, 11 temporary sub-districts, and 232 villages. Sukadana District
is an old city, which was “Onder Afdeling” during the colonization of the Dutch East Indies. In the
past, Onder Afdeling or Sukadana sub-district comprised of several Marga/clans: Marga Sukadana,
Marga Subing, Marga Tiga, Marga Nuban, Marga Unyai.

Lampung Timur has borders with Lampung Tengah and Tulang Bawang regency in the North,
Lampung Selatan in the south, and Lampung Tengah in the west and the Java Sea to the east.
Lampung Timur contributes 15% of total Lampung Province area and consists of five distinct
topographic conditions, mountainous areas, hilly with slopes from 8% to 15%, alluvial, tidal swamp,
and watershed area. The map of Lampung Timur Regency is provided in appendix 7.

6
As a targeted survey location, Muara Gading Mas Village resident is mainly working in the
aquaculture and wild capture sectors. The village has the largest fish auction place compare to
others. The residential area is predominantly by fisher's house and mini-plant; they are built on land
in adjacent with the river. The mini-plants are built in the riverbanks to ease the unloading process
from the boat that are using traps and gillnets. Disposal of both solid and liquid waste is unknown.

Reliability test to the questionnaire

A reliability analysis was carried out on the four categories to explore the consistency of questions
in the questionnaire. Cronbach’s alpha showed the questionnaire to reach acceptable reliability,
with an α = 0.94, 0.88, 0.72, and 0.93 for key themes in fisheries management, management skill,
training delivery, learning method and style categories respectively. Most items appeared to be
worthy of retention in each category. The Cronbach’s alpha indicated an acceptable to excellent in
the internal consistency.

Organizational Capacity Needs Themes/Topics

The participants were asked to grade which capacity building themes are important for their
personal and organizational development in the next one to three years. From 40 participants only
25 persons state clearly their score for each theme. The bar chart in each theme presents the
average score with each score ranging from one (not important) to 10 (extremely important).
Generally, the participants consistently describe the Ecosystem Approach to Fishery Management
(EAFM) capacity building theme being the most desirable topic for KPPRB member (µ : 8.32, sd:
1.77) followed by marine spatial planning (µ : 8.12, sd: 2.24) and economic assessment of marine
resource (µ : 8.12, sd: 1.94).

7
Top Trainings
Based on the average score we observed that EAFM, marine spatial planning, and economic
valuation to the marine resource are among the top three topics that consistently received a high
score from the participants. Interestingly, we observed polarization of these three topics occur
only to the participants that hold college and advance degree. Although, these topics are not so
popular among the participants that hold a lower degree in education (high school or lower)
whose mostly fishers. The KPPRB members or other fishery stakeholders that hold high school
degree and lower are among the participants that were overlooked in this analysis due to their
absence in the scoring process.

Priority Training Topics

To consider the bias due to an inconsistency of the participants when they do not assign a score to
every topic because of various reasons, we have considered a deeper analysis to look at the profile
of the participants based on their education and current occupation. Our observation and analysis
suggested the following finding and recommendations:
• As consistently received a high score, EAFM, marine spatial planning, and economic
valuation for marine resource topics should be the top priority training topics for selected
participants.
• Training or workshop for these three topics will be appropriate to KPPRB members that
have an advanced college degree and most likely to have been exposed and involved in
fisheries management. This group consists mostly of the civil servant and fishing industry
participants.
• Fishers are among the participant that did not put score completely across the topics. It
could be that they don’t understand the topic completely or hesitance to put a score
toward something that they don’t fully understand hence appropriate preamble to
address the lack of knowledge on the given topic should be done prior the survey.
• Communication, leadership, and fisheries science and fisheries governance topics are
among the topic that received a response from fishers. Hence, we recommend delivering
these topics to the fishers and fishers association.
• A combination of training and technical assistance are most likely to be more effective for
KPPRB members rather than just in-class training given the diversity of KPPRB members.

8
 • Technical assistance in fishing gear aspect, fishery science, fisheries policy and
management should be considered and provided in a combination of workshop and
training, or delivered as a specific topic.
• We also recommend a training and workshop to enhance learning and KPPRB outcomes,
including organizational effectiveness and effective management of people in the
organization.

Preferred Learning Method and Style

Training Formats
To explore a theoretical concept of the training for KPPRB members, we proposed three training
formats to the participants to express their opinion, ranging from strongly disagree to strongly
agree across these following training formats:
1. Training should have one or two study cases from the field (real case) related to the
material (TF1).
2. Training should combine in-class learning and fieldwork activity (TF2).
3. Training should provide feedback to the participants in each phase/Learning stage (TF3).

Most of the participants (N: 24) expressed their opinion to strongly agree and agree with these
three training formats. We found a strong positive correlation (r: 0.4 and 0.6) between TF1 and TF2
and between TF2 and TF3 respectively. These finding suggested that the training provider should
consider a combination of mixed in-class delivery and fieldwork and provide feedback in every
learning stage when designing the training. To explore the technical delivery of the training, we
asked the participants to assign scores to nine learning styles and methods to assure the training
design suits the participant’s preference.

Effective ways to deliver the training and workshop

To further assess the participant's learning style and method, they were asked to score nine
proposed items, from 1 for most liked and 10 for most disliked learning methods. Participants were
more specific about their preferred learning method and style to guaranty an effective training set.
Most participants felt that in-person, field observation and fieldwork in dynamic training
workshops and sessions would be most effective for them to learn. Participants indicated that they
better retain and utilize information through media such as video, compared to games or group
discussion.

9
Preferred Training Logistics
Suggested Timing
We observed a positive response from the 12 participants who have attended training in the last 5
years. Regardless of the content of the training, whether fisheries related training or other topics,
they felt in person that the training was useful for them and they have benefited from it. The
duration of the training ranged from 3 to 7 days and vary from basic to advance training.
Considering this observation and considering our experience, we recommend limiting the number
of days on basic training to 3 days, 4 days for intermediate training and 7 days for advanced training.
We believe that this range of duration will ensure effective delivery of the training and assure the
acceptability time for the KPPRB members.

Training provider and training location

During the survey, the participants were asked if they are able to identify and suggested training
providers as well as training locations within their reach. Most of the participant identified some
technical directorates and Agencies under the Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fishery (MMAF) at
the Regency, Provincial and National level to be the most desired institution and location as they
hold an important role in BSC fisheries management. Other institutions such as University, NGO
(MSR, EDF-YBUL, and CTC), private institution and even an individual consultant were among the
institution mentioned by the participants.

During the interview, the participants emphasized more on the trainer profiles and requirement
rather than the institution, although trainer from competence and trustworthy institution are
highly recommended. The trainer should have excellent communication skill to adapt to the
various background of the participants (KPPRB members) so that the material can be delivered
effectively. Mastering the topics and able to present the training material not only at the
theoretical level but also at the application level is very important to consider when selecting a
trainer.

10
 Fisheries Training Providers:
- MMAF - DGCF Trainer criterias:
- Univeristy - Mastering theoretical and technical
concepts of BSC fishery
- Research Agency
- From competent institutions with funding
- YBUL-EDF, CTC, MSR support
- IPPRB - Professional and certified trainer
- Consultant - Mastering a crab processing knowledge
- Research Agency - Accepted by the target group
- Private training institution
- Crab processing company
- Marine Police/Navy

Key Considerations
Perception toward IPPRB
Nearly all participants believe their involvement in IPPBR is
important under several reasons. They expressed a strong will
to learn and contribute to the initiative based on their
expertise and their current job and represent their group.
Most of the participant (34 out of 36) are very optimistic that
they can contribute to IPPRB and BSC fishery in Lampung
province. Some of these participants have involved in one or
some IPPRB meetings.

11
Perception toward BSC environmental and fishery
We assessed the participant’s opinion
on the environmental condition in
Tulang Bawang and Lampung Timur
Regency for the last five years and
their prediction in the next five years.
The question was applied only to the
participants who live in the area. In
general, participants agreed that
condition of marine environmental
for the last five years were bad and it
is expected to be better in the next
five years due to better management
of BSC fishing through an
establishment of IPPRB. The
participants also agreed (73%) that
the current regulations supported the
development of BSC fishery toward
sustainability.

The participants believe that the

current condition of mangrove
ecosystem is in a bad condition. Even
though this assessment is only
measuring the mangrove condition
qualitatively, the result can be utilized
as a reference to further develop a
conservation program to improve the
mangrove condition in Lampung Province. Our assessment showed a mixed result in the current
condition of BSC fishery. Most participants observed a declining condition of BSC fishery due to
illegal fishing and environmental degradation. However, there is a positive attitude to implement
sustainable fishing practices through better management and enforcement.

Recommendations and Follow up

The CDNA survey has captured important information to develop a capacity-building plan for the
KPPRB members and other fishery stakeholders. A mix of structured and semi-structured survey
were able to explored participant’s opinion and suggestion to develop appropriate training theme,
learning style and method as well as training logistic.

EAFM, marine spatial planning, and economic valuation to the marine resource are among the top
three topics that consistently received a high score from the participants. However,
communication, leadership, and fisheries science and fisheries governance topics are among the
topic that received a good response from fishers. Hence, we recommend delivering these topics
to the fishers and fishers association. In addition, a training provider should consider a combination
of mixed in-class delivery and fieldwork and provide feedback in every learning stage when
delivering the training.

Focus group discussion (FGD) targeting key members of BSC Committee will be conducted to
complete information and detailing some capacity building topics to develop in 2019.

12
Focus Group Discussion Result

Upon the completion of CDNA survey and its analysis, CTC conducted Focus Group Discussion
(FGD) on March 15, 2019, to explore the result of the CDNA findings that need more explanation
beyond the statistical analysis. Eleven (11) KPPRB members from the provincial and three districts
Fisheries Agency attended the FGD. The open discussion process at the FGD has given the
opportunity for the participants to agree and disagree with each other perspective on certain
issues, range of ideas and opinion based on their experiences and current responsibilities at the
provincial and district Fisheries Office. This process provided CTC with insight and reason behind
their selected topics.

The FGD was structured into 6 steps to guide

the participants to reach consensus on the
most important topics to be delivered within
a year.

1. Step 1:
Participants received an explanation on CDNA
survey results and its limitations due to
polarization among participants who work as
Civil Servant (PNS), fishers and fishers
association and private sectors. Further, CTC
explained the description of each topic and its
possible sub-topics development that are
relevant.

2. Step 2:
Participants expressed and developed
relevant sub-topics under nine topics that
were asked during the survey. Most of the
participants generally agreed to each other,
although they expressed it in a different
word.

3. Step 3:
Participants clustered the subtopics into 12 sub-topic. This sub-topic are
a. Sustainable fisheries management
b. Fisheries governance
c. Community Organizing
d. Organizational management
e. Leadership
f. Blue economy
g. Communication Skills
h. Fisheries science
i. Fisheries data collection methods
j. Marine spatial planning
k. Fundamentals of GIS (Mapping)
l. Economic tools for fisheries & conservation policies

13
4. Step 4:
Further, the participants were asked to vote on which sub-topic are the most required
according to the current KPPRB capacity. Each participant assigned his/her vote on the
five most deeded sub-topics training.

The top 5 most required subtopics according to the KPPRB member in the FGD are
followed.

5. Step 5:
To measure the effectivess of the training, CTC team worked together with the FGD
partcipnats to set up the objective, target audience and succes indicators.

Subtopics Objective Target Indicators

particopants
Blue Economy To understand the KPPRB • For fishers and industry:
(TOT) blue economy members (all). Able to apply blue
concept in its It was specified economy principles in
application in BSC as Training of the BSC management.
fisheries Trainer type of • Participants are able to
training facilitate other
stakeholders to
understand the blue
economy
Sustainable To equip the new New KPPRB • Participants understand
Fisheries KPPRB members members the BSC fisheries
management on BSC fishery management principles.
management • 20% increase in
principals knowledge
Organizational To equip the • All KPPRB • participants are able to
management KPPRB members members formulate a Standard
with set of skill to Operating Procedures in
run the IPPRB KPPRB (i.e.
effectively Communication)

14
 • participants understand
how to lead, manage
and implement
programs
Leadership To build • All KPPRB • Change management,
confidence and members critical thinking, and the
paves the way for ability to build coalitions
future inspirational among KPPRB members
KPPRB leaders in and partner
government office, organizations
fishers community
and private sectors
Communication To improve • KPPRB Participants are able to
skills effective Members express their thought and
comunication • Sub-district idea, listen and share
among KPPRB extension knowledge and information
members officers / effectively
fisheries
officers

6. Step 6:

At this final step, the participants decided to review the entire process from the first
selection process (from 9 main topics) to step 5. Although the blue economy, sustainable
fisheries management, and organizational development are the top three according to the
selection process in step 5, the KPPRB members decided to select communication skills,
Sustainable Fisheries (SF) management and Organizational management as the first, second
and the third, respectively, to be delivered this year.

As it was highlighted at the FGD, the participants prefer to have local trainers who are able to
communicate effectively with broader KPPRB members. In addition, EDF, Starling Resources,
and CTC are among the NGO that KPPRB members suggested being the trainer institution.

15
 Appendices
Appendix 1: Questionnaire

Penilaian Kebutuhan Pengembangan Kapasitas

(Capacity Development Need Assessment)
Kuesioner

Kuesioner ini memiliki 7 bagian yang bertujuan untuk menilai kebutuhan akan aspek pengembangan
kapasitas untuk pengembangan kurikulum dan modul pelatihan di masa mendatang, menyesuiakan
pelatihan yang ada, mengidentifikasi topik potensial untuk meningkatkan manajemen perikanan di lokasi
target.

Lokasi kerja : (Desa/Kota)___________________________________________________________

I. Profil Peserta

Nama :
Pekerjaan : c 1. Pegawai Negeri Sipil (PNS)
c 2. Tenaga kontrak ___________________
c 3. Pembina kelompok nelayan
c 4. Nelayan
c 5. Karyawan swasta
c 6. Lainnya
__________________________________________.
Posisi/Jabatan :
Tipe jabatan : Struktural / Fungsional (coret yang bukan)
Lembaga :
Divisi :
e-Mail :
Telpon : ( )-
Telpon Selular : ( )-
Alamat tempat : _________________________________________________
tinggal _________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
Latar belakang : c 1. Sekolah Menengah
pendidikan ______________________________________________
c 2. Diploma, jurusan
______________________________________________
c 3. Sarjana/S1, jurusan
______________________________________________
c 4. Master/S2, jurusan
______________________________________________
c 5. Doktor/S3, jurusan
______________________________________________
c 6. Lainnya, tuliskan
______________________________________________

16
II. Keterlibatan dalam pekerjaan kolaborasi/bersama-sama
(Participation in Collaborative Work)

1) Kegiatan apa saja yang sudah diikuti selama terlibat dalam IPPRB?

2) Apakah Bapak/Ibu merasa bahwa keterlibatan dalam IPPRB penting?

a. Ya Karena ..

b. Tidak Karena ..

c. Ragu-ragu Karena..

3) Apakah Bapak/Ibu merasa percaya diri dapat berkontribusi pada IPPRB?

a. Ya Karena ..

b. Tidak Karena ..

c. Ragu-ragu Karena..

4) Apa saja kesulitan yang Bapak/Ibu dapatkan saat bertemu/ berbicara/berdiskusi/mendampingi

masyarakat terkait kegiatan-kegiatan yang direncanakan/dilaksanakan oleh IPPRB1*?

1*
Singkatan dari Inisiatif Pengelolaan Perikanan Rajungan Berkelanjutan

17
III. Persepsi Terhadap Kondisi Perikanan Saat Ini
(Perception towards Current Fisheries Condition)

5) Bagaimana Anda menilai kondisi bakau disekitar lokasi target kegiatan Anda (bagi yang di
pesisir pantai Tulang Bawang dan Lampung Timur).
1. Sangat Bagus Karena ..

2. Bagus Karena ..

3. Rusak Karena..

4. Sangat Rusak Karena..

5. Tidak tahu

6) Bagaimana Anda menilai kondisi lingkungan laut di sekitar lokasi target kegiatan Anda (bagi
yang di pesisir pantai Tulang Bawang dan Lampung Timur): lebih baik, sama saja, atau lebih
buruk dari 5 tahun lalu.
1. Lebih Baik Karena ..

2. Sama Saja Karena ..

3. Lebih Buruk Karena..

4. Tidak tahu

7) Menurut Anda bagaimana kondisi lingkungan laut di sekitar lokasi target kegiatan Anda (bagi
yang di pesisir pantai Tulang Bawang dan Lampung Timur) dalam 5 tahun mendatang
1. Menjadi Lebih Baik Karena ..

2. Sama Saja Karena ..

3. Menjadi Lebih Buruk Karena..

4. Tidak tahu

18
8) Menurut Anda apakah peraturan-peraturan atau kebijakan perikanan saat ini membantu
Anda untuk mempraktekkan kegiatan perikanan berkelanjutan.
Lingkari 1 (satu) jawaban saja

1. Sangat Membantu Karena …

2. Sama Saja Karena …

3. Tidak Membantu Karena…

9) Menurut pendapat Anda, bagaimana kondisi perikanan rajungan saat ini?

10) Menurut pendapat Anda, apakah banyak orang atau sedikit orang yang mengetahui kondisi
perikanan rajungan saat ini?
(a) Banyak orang yang mengetahui kondisi perikanan rajungan saat ini
(b) Hanya sedikit orang yang mengetahui kondisi perikanan rajungan saat ini
(c) Hampir tidak ada yang mengetahui kondisi perikanan rajungan saat ini
(d) Tidak tahu

IV. Tema-tema Kunci pada Pengelolaan Sumberdaya Perikanan

(Key themes in fisheries resources management)

11) Terdapat beberapa topik pengembangan kapasitas di bawah ini, mana yang menurut
Bapak/Ibu adalah prioritas dalam jangka waktu 1 – 3 tahun ke depan?
Petunjuk: Berikan ranking pada pilihan Bapak/Ibu, dengan melingkari salah satu angka
1 s/d 10. Angka 1 adalah terendah, angka 10 adalah tertinggi

a) Kepemimpinan/Leadership 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Usulan lokasi pelatihan /
:
penyelenggara pelatihan
b) Kelembagaan 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Usulan lokasi pelatihan /
:
penyelenggara pelatihan
c) Komunikasi Interpersonal 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Usulan lokasi pelatihan /
:
penyelenggara pelatihan
d) Ilmu Perikanan Dasar 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Usulan lokasi pelatihan /
:
penyelenggara pelatihan
e) Penerapan Ekonomi Biru 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

19
 Usulan lokasi pelatihan /
:
penyelenggara pelatihan
f) Pengelolaan Perikanan
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Berbasis Ekosistem
Usulan lokasi pelatihan /
:
penyelenggara pelatihan
g) Pengelolaan Ruang Laut 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Usulan lokasi pelatihan /
:
penyelenggara pelatihan
h) Pengorganisasian Masyarakat 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Usulan lokasi pelatihan /
:
penyelenggara pelatihan
i) Penilaian Ekonomi terhadap
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Sumber Daya Laut
Usulan lokasi pelatihan /
:
penyelenggara pelatihan
j) Sebutkan
……………………………… 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
………………………………
Usulan lokasi pelatihan /
:
penyelenggara pelatihan

V. Kemampuan Negosiasi, Manajemen Perubahan, Gaya Kepemimpinan,

dan Aspek Visi
(Negotiation skill, managing change, leadership style, and visioning aspect)

12) Untuk pertanyaan berikut ini mohon berikan pendapat Anda mulai dari Sangat Setuju (SS),
Setuju (S), Ragu-ragu (R), Tidak Setuju (TS), Sangat Tidak Setuju (STS).
13) Mohon Bapak/Ibu memberikan pendapat untuk setiap bagian berdasarkan pengalaman
Bapak/Ibu dalam berkelompok (berorganisasi).
A. Menegosiasikan ide-ide / Negotiating ideas (dalam konteks diskusi berkelompok)
A.1. Saya merasa percaya diri dalam menyampaikan ide-ide saya kepada orang SS – S - R – TS - STS
lain
A.2. Saya tetap merasa nyaman meskipun ide-ide saya ditolak oleh orang lain SS – S - R – TS - STS
A.3. Saya merasa gusar jika ide-ide saya dipertanyakan oleh orang lain SS – S - R – TS - STS
A.4. Saya mampu mengendalikan kegusaran saya menjadi pendapat yang SS – S - R – TS - STS
konstruktif
A.5 Saya percaya bahwa setiap orang mempunyai kemampuan bernegosiasi SS – S - R – TS - STS
A.6. Saya mempunyai kemampuan negosiasi dalam berdiskusi SS – S - R – TS - STS
A.7. Saya membutuhkan pelatihan untuk meningkatkan keterampilan saya SS – S - R – TS - STS
dalam bernegosiasi
A.8. Saya membutuhkan pendampingan dalam meningkatkan keterampilan SS – S - R – TS - STS
saya dalam bernegosiasi

B. Manajemen Perubahan (Managing change)

B.1. Perubahan adalah sesuatu yang wajar dalam sebuah organisasi SS – S - R – TS - STS

20
B.2. Saya harus selalu mempersiapkan diri dalam menghadapi perubahan- SS – S - R – TS - STS
perubahan dalam organisasi
B.3. Saya mudah panik dalam menghadapi perubahan dalam organisasi SS – S - R – TS - STS
B.4. Saya percaya bahwa anggota komite IPPRB akan mudah beradaptasi SS – S - R – TS - STS
dengan perubahan
B.5. Saya paham tentang tujuan pembentukan IPPRB SS – S - R – TS - STS
B.6. Saya yakin bahwa dengan menjadi anggota dalam IPPRB saya akan SS – S - R – TS - STS
memberikan kontribusi signifikan kepada keberlanjutan rantai pasok
rajungan
B.7. Saya yakin dengan berkelompok akan memberikan posisi tawar yang lebih SS – S - R – TS - STS
besar dalam bernegosiasi
B.8. Saya membutuhkan pelatihan yang dapat membantu saya mengantisipasi SS – S - R – TS - STS
perubahan dalam organisasi

C. Gaya Kepemimpinan (Leadership Style)

C.1. Saya merasa nyaman menjadi seorang pemimpin dalam kelompok SS – S - R – TS - STS
C.2. Saya merasa nyaman menjadi anggota kelompok SS – S - R – TS - STS
C.3. Saya merasa nyaman menyampaikan ide-ide saya secara terbuka dalam SS – S - R – TS - STS
kelompok
C.4. Saya merasa nyaman menyampaikan ide-ide saya secara personal SS – S - R – TS - STS
C.5. Dalam kondisi ketidakhadiran pemimpin, saya cenderung sukarela menjadi SS – S - R – TS - STS
pemimpin
C.6. Dalam beroganisasi saya harus selalu memahami persis tentang tujuan SS – S - R – TS - STS
besar yang ingin dicapai
C.7. Saya percaya diri dalam mengarahkan diskusi kelompok SS – S - R – TS - STS
C.8. Saya secara konstan menjadi pembangkit semangat dalam kelompok SS – S - R – TS - STS
C.9 Saya membutuhkan pelatihan untuk dapat memahami perbedaan gaya SS – S - R – TS - STS
kepemimpinan dalam komite IPPRB*

D. Visi dan Membuat Prioritas (Visioning and Make Priority)

D.1. Saya memahami penuh visi besar IPPRB* SS – S - R – TS - STS
D.2. Saya memahami penuh apa saja yang ingin dicapai dalam IPPRB SS – S - R – TS - STS
D.3. Saya mampu membuat prioritas dalam melakukan kegiatan di IPPRB SS – S - R – TS - STS
D.4. Saya mampu menerjemahkan visi IPPRB menjadi strategi intervensi SS – S - R – TS - STS
D.5. Saya secara reguler membuat prioritas dalam hidup saya SS – S - R – TS - STS
D.6. Saya mampu merancang langkah-langkah utama yang terukur SS – S - R – TS - STS
kerberhasilannya dalam mencapai tujuan besar IPPRB

21
VI. Keterlibatan Sebelumnya Pada Pengembangan Kapasitas
(Previous involvement in capacity development)
A. Mohon menyebutkan ragam pelatihan perikanan yang pernah diikuti dalam kurun waktu 5 tahun
terakhir ini (atau kira-kira sejak tahun 2013).
Tingkat (dasar/
Pelatihan Durasi Manfaat
menengah/mahir/ pelatih)
A.1. c Ya
c Tidak
c Ragu-ragu
A.2. c Ya
c Tidak
c Ragu-ragu

B. Pertanyaan terkait pelaksanaan pelatihan.

Tunjukkan tingkat persetujuan Anda sesuai dengan pernyataan berikut, Lingkari jawaban yang
sesuai, SS = Sangat Setuju, S = Setuju, R = Ragu-ragu, TS = Tidak Setuju, STS = Sangat Tidak Setuju.
B.1. Pelatihan yang baik harus terdapat satu atau dua kasus SS S R TS STS
pembelajaran dari lapangan (contoh nyata) terkait materi.
B.2. Pelatihan yang baik merupakan kombinasi di dalam kelas dan SS S R TS STS
kegiatan praktek lapangan.
B.3. Pelatihan yang baik harus dapat memberikan umpan balik SS S R TS STS
(masukan) pada peserta untuk setiap fase/tahapan
pembelajaran.

C. Keikutersertaan dalam pelatihan perikanan yang

diselenggarakan oleh beberapa lembaga
C.1. Direktorat Jenderal teknis Kementerian Kelautan dan Perikanan c Ya
c Tidak
C.2. Balai Pendidikan dan Pelatihan Perikanan Kelautan c Ya
c Tidak
C.3. Penyelenggara pelatihan internasional (seperti: NOAA, UNDP, c Ya
FAO, dll) c Tidak
C.4. Penyelenggara pelatihan regional (seperti: PEMSEA, SEAFDEC, c Ya
dll) c Tidak
C.5. Penyelenggara pelatihan nasional c Ya
c Tidak

22
VII. Metode dan Gaya Belajar (learning method and style)
A. Dari beberapa metode belajar berikut ini, berikan 1 = paling disukai
peringkat dari yang paling tidak disukai sampai 10 = paling tidak disukai
dengan yang paling disukai
A.1. Pemaparan di dalam kelas 1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 – 6 – 7 – 8 – 9 - 10
A.2. Pemaparan di luar kelas 1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 – 6 – 7 – 8 – 9 - 10
A.3. Kuis dan pembahasan kuis 1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 – 6 – 7 – 8 – 9 - 10
A.4. Permainan interaktif (games) 1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 – 6 – 7 – 8 – 9 - 10
A.5. Diskusi/kerja dalam kelompok 1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 – 6 – 7 – 8 – 9 - 10
A.6. Pengamatan obyek di lapangan 1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 – 6 – 7 – 8 – 9 - 10
A.7. Praktik kerja di lapangan 1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 – 6 – 7 – 8 – 9 - 10
A.8. Pembahasan studi kasus 1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 – 6 – 7 – 8 – 9 - 10
A.9 Pemutaran film/video terkait topik 1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 – 6 – 7 – 8 – 9 - 10

VIII. Penyedia Jasa Pelatihan (training providers)

A. Menurut Anda siapakah sebaiknya yang memberikan pelatihan/mentoring/pendampingan bidang
perikanan untuk IPPRB*?
Mohon jelaskan jawaban Anda.

B. Menurut Anda apa kriteria khusus yang harus dimiliki oleh penyelenggara
pelatihan/mentoring/pendampingan?
Mohon jelaskan jawaban Anda

C. Apakah Anda ingin merekomendasikan Lembaga/institusi pelatihan tertentu yang terkait

dengan perikanan dan kepemimpinan?
Mohon jelaskan jawaban Anda

D. Apakah Anda membutuhkan pelatihan berbasis kompetensi yang terstruktur?

c Ya
c Tidak
c Ragu-ragu
c Tidak tahu apa yang dimaksud dengan pelatihan berbasis kompetensi

23
E. Apakah Anda membutuhkan uji kompetensi (proses sertifikasi) untuk menguji kompetensi Anda pada
bidang-bidang pekerjaan terkait perikanan?
c Ya, perlu diuji kompetensi
c Tidak perlu diuji kompetensi saat ini
c Tidak saat ini
c Tidak tahu

~~~

24
Appendix 2a: Respondents’ Profile

No. Nama Pekerjaan Posisi/Jabatan Lembaga Pendidikan

1 Liza Aryantina Pegawai Negeri Kepala Bidang Dinas Perikanan Kabupaten Tulang Master/S2
Putri, S.Pi. M.IP Sipil (PNS) Bawang
2 Titin Ruskiawati Pegawai Negeri Kasi Penanganan Dinas Kelautan dan Perikanan Provinsi Master/S2
Sipil (PNS) Pelanggaran SDKP Lampung
3 Zainal Abidin, Pegawai Negeri JFU Bidang Perikanan Dinas Kelautan dan Perikanan Provinsi Master/S2
M.M Sipil (PNS) Tangkap Lampung
4 Arif Kurniawan Pegawai Negeri Kasubbag Perencanaan Dinas Kelautan dan Perikanan Provinsi Master/S2
Sipil (PNS) Lampung
5 Riri Aulya, S.Pi, Pegawai Negeri Kasi Penguatan Daya Saing Produk Kelautan dan Perikanan Sarjana/S1
M.M Sipil (PNS)
6 Doni Fakih Karyawan Manajer Area PT Kelola Mina Laut Sarjana/S1
Firmansyah Swasta
7 Adi Satra Karyawan Asst Manajer PT SJS Diploma
Wijaya Swasta
8 Andi Asnawi Diploma

9 Sukarsono Pegawai Negeri Kasi Pengawasan Pengelolaan Sumberdaya Kelautan dan Pesisir Sarjana/S1
Sipil (PNS)
10 Rudi Antoni Karyawan Manajer Lapangan PT Phillips Seafoods Indonesia, Diploma
swasta Lampung Plant
11 Gufron Nelayan Sekolah
Menengah
12 E. Kusmiaji Nelayan Wakil Ketua HNSI Himpunan Nelayan Seluruh Indonesia Sarjana/S1
(HNSI)
13 Hj. Nur Hayanti Pembina Pembina Kelompok Nelayan Sekolah
Kelompok Menengah
Nelayan
14 Ilyas, SE Sekretaris Dinas Dinas Perikanan dan Peternakan Sarjana/S1
Lampung Timur
15 Kusuwardi Pegawai Negeri Kepala Dinas Perikanan Pemda Lampung Tengah Sarjana/S1
Sipil (PNS)
16 I Gusti Ketut Pegawai Negeri Eselon III Sarjana/S1
Susilo, SP Sipil (PNS)
17 Besar Gutomo Pegawai Negeri Sipil (PNS) KSOP Kelas I Panjang Master/S2

18 Eva Novia Pegawai Negeri Petugas Pendaftaran Dan Kantor Kesyahbandaran dan Otoritas Sarjana/S1
Sipil (PNS) Balik Nama Kapal Pelabuhan Kelas I Panjang
19 Siti Istiqamah Karyawan Staf Qc Swasta Sarjana/S1
Swasta
20 Dra. Rita Pegawai Negeri Sipil (PNS) Dinas Kelautan dan Perikanan Provinsi Master/S2
Aprilianti, M.M Lampung
21 Makmur Pegawai Negeri Sipil (PNS) Dinas Kelautan dan Perikanan Provinsi Master/S2
Hidayat Lampung
22 Sudirman Nelayan Sekolah
Menengah
23 Tenrisau Karyawan Sekolah
Swasta Menengah
24 Anwar Nelayan Sekolah
Menengah
25 Ahmad Zainuri Nelayan Sekolah
Menengah
26 Titin Sumarni Pegawai Negeri Sipil (PNS) Pemda Kabupaten Lampung Tengah Sarjana/S1

27 Bambang A. Karyawan APRI Board Secretary APRI Sarjana/S1

Nugraha Swasta
28 Bayu Witara Karyawan Ketua Himpunan Nelayan Seluruh Indonesia Diploma
Swasta (HNSI)
29 Tukimin Karyawan Staff Pembelian PT. Bumi Menara Internusa Sarjana/S1
Swasta
30 Reanggun Pegawai Negeri Kasi Sarana & Prasarana UPTD Pangkalan PKP Sarjana/S1
Bariki, S.Pi. Sipil (PNS)
31 Sadariah Pegawai Negeri Kasi Konservasi Dinas Kelautan dan Perikanan Provinsi Master/S2
Sipil (PNS) Lampung
32 Chandra Murni Pegawai Negeri Kepala Bidang Dinas Kelautan dan Perikanan Provinsi Master/S2
Sipil (PNS) Lampung

25
No. Nama Pekerjaan Posisi/Jabatan Lembaga Pendidikan

33 Ridho Hafid Pembina Kelompok Nelayan KPPRB Sekolah

Menengah
34 Andri Agus Lainnya Pemilik Diploma

35 Endang Nelayan Pokja KPPRB Lainnya,

36 Ambo Allang Pembina Kelompok Nelayan Sekolah

Menengah
37 Sujiman, A.Pj., Pegawai Negeri Kabid Perikanan Tangkap Dinas Perikanan Kab. Lampung Master/S2
MM Sipil (PNS) Tengah
38 Ambo Asshe Ketua Himpunan Nelayan Seluruh Indonesia Sekolah
(HNSI) Menengah
39 M. Aprizal Pegawai Negeri Plt Kasi PSDI Bidang Dinas Kelautan dan Perikanan Provinsi Master/S2
Arsyita Sipil (PNS) Perikanan Tangkap Lampung
40 Zarachman Pegawai Negeri Perekayasa Utama BBPI - DJPT KKP Master/S2
Sipil (PNS) Perikanan Tangkap

Appendix 2b: Respondent summary

26
Appendix 3: Lampung province map

http://peta-kota.blogspot.com/2016/12/peta-provinsi-lampung.html

Appendix 4: Tulang Bawang regency map

27
Appendix 5: Brief description of three target villages in Tulang Bawang Regency

village Condition
Kuala Teladas village The residential area is predominantly by fisher's house and
mini-plant, they are built above water (coastal and river are).
Water is supplied from other area and from the collection of
rainwater. There is no treatment of solid and liquid waste
disposal and discarded directly into the river/sea. The catch
is landed at their house.
Way Dente village The residential area is predominantly by fisher's house and
mini-plant; they are built on land and above the water
respectively. Water is supplied from other area there is no
treatment of solid and liquid waste disposal and discarded
directly into the river/sea. The catch is landed directly to the
mini plant and small port along the river.
Sungai Burung The residential area is predominantly by fisher's house and
mini-plant, they are built above water (coastal and river are).
Water is supplied from other area and from the collection of
rainwater. There is no treatment of solid and liquid waste
disposal and discarded directly into the river/sea. The catch
is landed at their house.

Appendix 6: The Lampung Tengah Regency map

28
Appendix 7: The Lampung Timur Regency map

29