Table 3. Composition of the fishers’ network by community.
| |
| |
|
Type of Relationship |
Network Composition within Communities (%) |
|
Low Resource Scarcity |
|
High Resource Scarcity |
|
AV |
SN |
RM |
|
CZ |
JC |
LG |
EB |
| |
|
Kinship |
44 (57%) |
6 (29%) |
5 (56%) |
|
37 (32%) |
8 (100%) |
64 (56%) |
62 (54%) |
|
Friendship |
33 (43%) |
15 (71%) |
4 (44%) |
|
73 (63%) |
0 |
36 (31%) |
41 (36%) |
|
Acquaintance |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
5 (4%) |
0 |
6 (5%) |
7 (6%) |
Total within
community |
77 (100%) |
21 (100%) |
9 (100%) |
|
115 (100%) |
8 (100%) |
106 (100%) |
110 (100%) |
|
| |
|