International Journal of

ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES

EISSN: 2313-3724, Print ISSN: 2313-626X

Frequency: 12
line decor
  
line decor

 Volume 8, Issue 12 (December 2021), Pages: 93-101

----------------------------------------------

 Original Research Paper

 Title: Potentials of associated traditional knowledge on marine resources for economic and general well-being among coastal communities in Terengganu, Malaysia

 Author(s): Ameer Farhan Mohd Arzaman 1, Hayatul Safrah Salleh 1, *, Nik Hazimah Nik Mat 1, Wan Izatul Asma Wan Talaat 2

 Affiliation(s):

 1Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Development, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Kuala Terengganu, Malaysia
 2Institute of Oceanography and Environment, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Kuala Terengganu, Malaysia

  Full Text - PDF          XML

 * Corresponding Author. 

  Corresponding author's ORCID profile: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7275-0570

 Digital Object Identifier: 

 https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2021.12.011

 Abstract:

This study was conducted to explore the potential of associated traditional knowledge on marine resources for the sustainability of economic and general well-being among coastal communities in Terengganu. Using a qualitative study, twenty-six interviews were conducted. The study used convenience and snowball sampling to identify the other potential participants who had knowledge and experience about the topic. The study used thematic analysis to identify the required themes according to the objectives. Drawing upon sustainable livelihood theory for data interpretation, the findings indicate that traditional knowledge of marine resources plays an essential role in achieving economic well-being for the coastal community in Terengganu. This is viewed from the aspect of increased living standards and improved health quality. Although exploration of traditional knowledge on marine resources is limited among the modern generation, the implications of this study highlight that identification of certain marine resources as traditional medicine for health problem solutions, selling fresh marine resources, and production of processed food from marine resources could offer ways to improve the economy of coastal communities. The study was carried out during the Covid-19 pandemic, which had limited the number of participants interviewed. Therefore, the sample size obtained is relatively small to find more significant results. Future studies can be expanded through quantitative approach methods among traditional medicine practitioners and other communities in different regions that use marine resources in their daily life. 

 © 2021 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords: Traditional knowledge, Marine resources, Economic well-being, General well-being, Coastal community

 Article History: Received 9 July 2021, Received in revised form 8 October 2021, Accepted 10 October 2021

 Acknowledgment 

This research was funded by the Ministry of Higher Education, Malaysia, under the Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (FRGS) [FRGS/1/2019/SS01/UMT/02/2].

 Compliance with ethical standards

 Conflict of interest: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

 Citation:

 Arzaman AFM, Salleh HS, aand Mat NHN et al. (2021). Potentials of associated traditional knowledge on marine resources for economic and general well-being among coastal communities in Terengganu, Malaysia. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 8(12): 93-101

 Permanent Link to this page

 Figures

 No Figure

 Tables

 Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4   

----------------------------------------------    

 References (28)

  1. Akbar DD, Santoso B, and Njatrijani R (2016). Perlindungan hukum terhadap pengetahuan tradisional (traditional knowledge) pada jenis obat-obatan tradisional asal indonesia. Diponegoro Law Journal, 5(3): 1-20.   [Google Scholar]
  2. Alonso EB (2015). The impact of culture, religion and traditional knowledge on food and nutrition security in developing countries (No. 2201-2019-1458). FOODSECURE Working paper no. 30.   [Google Scholar]
  3. Aryanto H (2014). PemanfaataN pengetahuan tradisional Indonesia berdasarkan potensi daerah sebagai modal pembangunan. Jurnal Hukum and Pembangunan, 44(2): 292-313. https://doi.org/10.21143/jhp.vol44.no2.24   [Google Scholar]
  4. Cavanagh RD, Broszeit S, Pilling GM, Grant SM, Murphy EJ, and Austen MC (2016). Valuing biodiversity and ecosystem services: A useful way to manage and conserve marine resources? Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 283(1844): 20161635. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2016.1635   [Google Scholar] PMid:27928037 PMCid:PMC5204147
  5. Chen S, De Bruyne C, and Bollempalli M (2020). Blue economy: Community case studies addressing the poverty–environment nexus in ocean and coastal management. Sustainability, 12(11): 4654. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12114654   [Google Scholar]
  6. Chun J (2014). A legal approach to induce the traditional knowledge of forest resources. Forest Policy and Economics, 38: 40-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2012.07.006   [Google Scholar]
  7. CSWE (2016). Working definition of economic well-being. Council on Social Work Education, Alexandria, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  8. Desmond DF and Taisin NJ (2018). Pengetahuan Lokal dalam Pertanian Masyarakat Kadazandusun di Sabah. Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 3(3): 122-130.   [Google Scholar]
  9. Finetti C (2011). Traditional knowledge and the patent system: Two worlds apart? World Patent Information, 33(1): 58-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wpi.2010.03.005   [Google Scholar]
  10. Fui LH, Haron N, Mustapha NM, Yusof N, Baharuddin IN, Lee TA, and Mohtar M (2014). Traditional knowledge documentation in Malaysia: Developing a comprehensive approach. EAS Strategic Options, 2014(20): 14-15.   [Google Scholar]
  11. Gibson J (2016). Community resources: Intellectual property, international trade and protection of traditional knowledge. Routledge, Oxfordshire, UK. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315259802   [Google Scholar]
  12. Luypaert T, Hagan JG, McCarthy ML, and Poti M (2020). Status of marine biodiversity in the Anthropocene. In: Jungblut S, Liebich V, and Bode-Dalby M (Eds.), YOUMARES 9-The Oceans: Our research, our future: 57-82. Springer, Cham, Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20389-4_4   [Google Scholar]
  13. Masnan AK (2012). Mengarusperdana Pemuliharaan Biodiversiti di Malaysia. Jurnal Pengurusan Awam: 85-101.   [Google Scholar]
  14. Masud MM (2019). Conservation of marine resources and sustainable coastal community development in Malaysia. Palgrave Macmillan, London, UK. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-9730-1   [Google Scholar]
  15. Masud MM, Aldakhil AM, Nassani AA, and Azam MN (2017). Community-based ecotourism management for sustainable development of marine protected areas in Malaysia. Ocean and Coastal Management, 136: 104-112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2016.11.023   [Google Scholar]
  16. Masud MM, Sackor AS, Alam AF, Al-Amin AQ, and Ghani ABA (2018). Community responses to flood risk management–An empirical Investigation of the Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in Malaysia. Marine Policy, 97: 119-126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2018.08.027   [Google Scholar]
  17. Nova P, Pimenta-Martins A, Laranjeira Silva J, Silva AM, Gomes AM, and Freitas AC (2020). Health benefits and bioavailability of marine resources components that contribute to health–What’s new? Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 60(21): 3680-3692. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2019.1704681   [Google Scholar] PMid:31920109
  18. OECD (2020). How's Life? 2020: Measuring well-being. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France.   [Google Scholar]
  19. Pauchard N (2017). Access and benefit sharing under the convention on biological diversity and its protocol: What can some numbers tell us about the effectiveness of the regulatory regime? Resources, 6(1): 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources6010011   [Google Scholar]
  20. Qodriyatun SN (2013). Peningkatan kesejahteraan masyarakat pesisir di Kota Batam melalui pemberdayaan masyarakat. Aspirasi: Jurnal Masalah-Masalah Sosial, 4(2): 91-100.   [Google Scholar]
  21. Raymond-Yakoubian J, Raymond-Yakoubian B, and Moncrieff C (2017). The incorporation of traditional knowledge into Alaska federal fisheries management. Marine Policy, 78: 132-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2016.12.024   [Google Scholar]
  22. Sangha KK, Preece L, Villarreal-Rosas J, Kegamba JJ, Paudyal K, Warmenhoven T, and RamaKrishnan PS (2018). An ecosystem services framework to evaluate Indigenous and local peoples’ connections with nature. Ecosystem Services, 31: 111-125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.017   [Google Scholar]
  23. Song M, Pan X, and Pan X (2020). Decoupling marine resources and economic development in China. In: Song M, Pan X, and Pan X (Eds.), Sustainable marine resource utilization in China: 173–192. Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-819911-4.00006-0   [Google Scholar]
  24. Sudayasa IP, Susanty S, Eso A, and Yuniar N (2016). Effectiveness utilization of marine biological resources for health in coastal communities Kendari city. Journal of Nursing and Health Science, 5(5): 11–14.   [Google Scholar]
  25. Sutinen JG, Clay P, Dyer CL, Edwards SF, Gates J, Grigalunas TA, and Walden JB (2000). A framework for monitoring and assessing socioeconomics and governance of large marine ecosystems. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE-158, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Washington, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  26. UNDB (2020). Global biodiversity outlook: Secretariat of the convention on biological diversity. United Nations Decade on Biodiversity, Paris, France.   [Google Scholar]
  27. Venables AJ (2016). Using natural resources for development: Why has it proven so difficult? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 30(1): 161-184. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.30.1.161   [Google Scholar]
  28. WIPO (2020). Genetic resources, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions. World Intellectual Property Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.   [Google Scholar]