3.1 The main types of aquaculture
3.2 Strategies for aquaculture development beyond 2000
3.3 Information for development
3.1.1 Rural aquaculture
3.1.2 Commercial aquaculture
The rapid progress of aquaculture during the past decades was measured in terms of the fast increase in volume and value of its production. Commercial aquaculture, particularly shrimp and salmon, made headlines. Small-scale aquaculture in China continued to add production to fishery statistics at an impressive annual rate. All these have formed the general impression about the trend and potential of aquaculture.
The term “aquaculture” embraces a broad meaning in terms of practices, locations, constraints, potentials and even objectives. According to FAO, aquaculture is the “farming of aquatic organisms, including fish, molluscs and crustaceans and aquatic plants”. With such a broad definition, both large- and small-scale and high- and low-input would be inclusive. It is noted that while the principal motivations of commercial aquaculture relate to productivity and profit, those of small-scale aquaculture could be anything from food security to income generation, farming diversification, even risk reduction. There are, of course, types of aquaculture between these two extremes; given their broad meaning, it would be meaningless and unnecessary to assign a name to every one of them.
The backyard ponds which some farming families in a rain-fed area maintain to store water frequently hold some fish, either from stocking or naturally. This is aquaculture of a kind, by definition. It is not a tradition of these pond owners to make any serious efforts to manage the pond solely for the production of fish. The ponds, as water storage devices, serve integrated farming as an assurance that all on-farm activities will do well. The fact that “water is life” cannot be ignored, not only in food production, but also in the way we lead our life in general. However, this fact is often overlooked.
Most small farmers anywhere in the world are likely to welcome an offer to have a pond dug somewhere on their farms, not necessarily to keep fish. Aquaculture extension workers often made this welcoming offer when they came with a scheme to promote aquaculture within a specified region and the support of earth-moving equipment, bags of fish seed and fertilizer, and the provision of a short training to familiarize farmers with the way to take care of fish. For most farmers in Asia, keeping fish for food is not something that needs to be taught since fish, by long tradition, is a staple. The use of fish in farmers’ daily meal may need some encouragement and demonstration only in places where people are traditional meat eaters.
The reason for having a pond dug on a farm should be clear, particularly where rain is either rare or unpredictable. In a region where rain-fed agriculture is practised, water is a critical factor which determines how much of a crop can be reaped. Having water storage is indeed a form of insurance against shortage. Rain-fed farmers diligently draw water from the pond to give to plants or animals in times of need. Wherever electricity is available or pumping is possible, smart farmers arrange some sort of irrigation to modernize their farming practice and thus save labour. The advantages a small pond provides are obvious. However, while enjoying the benefit of on-farm water storage, some farmers sometimes forget that their small volume of water may not last the entire dry season.
Dried-up farm ponds are a frequent sight in semi-arid farming areas, not simply because the farmers overestimated the amount of water in their ponds but also because evaporation and seepage conspired to dry them. Farmers know that evaporation is a function of the sun: the more sunshine, the faster the evaporation. So, to many of them, water plants such as water hyacinth or water crest come in handy to reduce evaporation by providing the ponds with some shade. So convinced are they of this that most fail to notice the ponds actually dry up faster. The fact is that water plants have a much larger leaf area than the pond surface they colonize; they draw pond water through their root systems and let it evaporate through the leaves to keep cool. Coupled with the low relative humidity and high wind, it takes only a few months for a pond to dry.
The loss of pond water through seepage is largely inconceivable to farmers in developing countries. It should be clear to them that porous soil does not keep water well. Where a good layer of clay or compact silt exists, farmers expect their ponds to be watertight. In some areas of countries such as Bangladesh, the majority of farms are located on vast tracks of the river delta. Clay or compact silt often overlays the porous layers of sand and gravel that once upon a time were carried from the watershed by big floods in some years. The plight of small farmers in those areas is a function of the volume of the pond and of the quantity of water which they wish to store: wherever horizontal expansion was difficult, they had the pond dug deeper into the earth, and sometimes hit the porous layers of sand below. Soil auguring to map the underlying soil layers was rarely performed before a pond was dug. This technique and its usefulness are still unknown in many parts of Asia. When soil auguring is not performed, digging runs the risk of rendering the pond useless for water storage.
The fish released earlier grows while there is still some water in the pond. The last fish is caught and cooked on the day the pond is about to dry up. Before then, fish has been hooked or trapped almost daily, and the farm family has enjoyed the additional provision of nutritious food. Of course, no record is kept of how much fish is taken and eaten. When aquaculture extension workers return to inquire about the performance of the pond in relation to its fish production, the farmers are embarrassed over the current state of the dried-up pond. The Asian Institute of Technology, in its Outreach programme, took such an aquaculture service to the field with a team of graduate students practicing participatory research. In an assessment of the aquaculture performance, they found most of the ponds that they had helped dig had dried up and there was no trace of any fish either. The group of overseas students could not comprehend the situation, given the problems in communication and differences in culture and tradition, and concluded that their outreach programme in North-eastern Thailand had failed to produce the anticipated results.
Given the skills of the AIT graduate students and the conclusions they drew, it should not come as a surprise that millions of these small farm ponds leave little trace in aquaculture statistics. According to an estimate made by FAO, the volume of fish produced by small farm ponds such as these may be as much as six times that officially reported. This gives us some idea of how much fishery statistics may have missed, but not of the total volume of aquaculture production since the base figures are not available.
The foregoing shows that commercial aquaculture does not necessarily represent the whole development sector by the sheer volume of its fish production. Much of the fish production from small farm ponds goes unreported, yet contributes directly and truly to food security. Commercial aquaculture produces a large volume of high-valued products destined for the well to do. It helps to generate more food supply for the world, but, by the nature of its consumers, its contribution to food security could be misconstrued.
Commercial aquaculture has formally represented aquaculture in terms of statistics, export and national policy support. It has also raised concern over its future potential, as by becoming one of the major natural-resource users, it would become unsustainable. Commercial aquaculture has already opened a new chapter by using biotechnology, particularly transgenic techniques to produce new fish strains that grow considerably faster than the natural stocks. A sudden change in lifestyle in certain rural areas was observed with due social concern, and conflicts between investors who are largely non-residents have flared up in many places. In various parts of the world, the dwindling areas under mangrove have claimed shrimp aquaculture as one of the culprits. In all, commercial aquaculture has brought to many rural communities around the world an upheaval, in terms of its ability to change a large number of inland and coastal landscapes, national fishery policies, export composition, rural lifestyles, and the use of modern technology such as biotechnology. Commercial aquaculture has also brought about many conflicts: incompatibility between marine shrimp and rice farming, pollution from marine shrimp aquaculture that affects other types of culture, pollution from other careless activities that affects shrimp farming, and so forth.
Commercial aquaculture does provide an additional supply of food fish in the world market; however, its contribution to food security may not be realized in the strict sense of the word. Similarly, its contribution by increasing employment and income is evident at the national level; poor and unskilled labour may only take a small share of the cake. Where the local well-off shrimp farmers dispose of their farm products in big lots, rural life may get busy and become disorderly thereafter. Like money, shrimp aquaculture can break many more happy families than poverty does.
As commercial aquaculture benefits directly from research, the private sector has begun to invest in it. For the funding and use of research by the public sector to become more effective and transparent, a careful assessment is required. Although the private sector could have contributed a relatively greater share than the public sector through income tax to fund aquaculture, a more direct tax deduction could provide it with stronger support.
Zoning serves as the means to alleviate problems faced by commercial aquaculture. It can also contribute to reduce the negative impact of shrimp aquaculture on the environment. Like aquaculture development in many Asian and South American countries, shrimp farming in Sri Lanka is only practiced on a commercial scale in its coastal zone. Much of the shrimp farming occurs in a regulatory vacuum and without concern for the local communities. The situation of shrimp farming in 1998 as reported by Charles Angell was uninviting: most farms were short of capital, poorly sited and managed by incompetent staff. There was a widespread clearance of mangrove in the North Western province, outbreaks of shrimp diseases, crop failures and poor production.
The geographic information system can be used to provide relevant information on physical, chemical, biological and sociological factors affecting coastal aquaculture. Detailed parameters, such as elevation, soil pH and soil texture, vegetation and land use, user conflicts, access to infrastructure, salinity and water quality, can be stored and displayed. This technical information is essential for policy decision, and can help identify the most suitable locations for aquaculture or other activities.
3.2.1 Acquiring new knowledge for those in need
3.2.2 Participatory research
If aquaculture is to contribute to the enhancement of the world’s food security, it should be apparent that the focus must be on small-scale and rural aquaculture. China has been very successful in integrating small-scale aquaculture into the Chinese farming systems and has had an impressive aquaculture output. Within the limitations of arable land and water, the future increase of aquaculture production in China could come from two main sources: a) by making fuller use of on-farm resources; and b) by practising continual thinning to keep the biomass of cultured stock at its highest rate of increase.
Two main scenarios should feature future commercial aquaculture operations in view of their high demand on basic natural resources. First, the development of new technology to make their use of natural resources highly efficient; second, the ability to demonstrate to the world market that the operations are “green” and “safe”.
Like its terrestrial counterpart, livestock, aquaculture was practised long before the present name was given to it. The Bangkok conference recognized aquaculture as “diverse” since it consists of a broad spectrum of users, systems, practices and species. The different forms of aquaculture would need a wide range of knowledge to satisfy one and all. Given current knowledge of aquaculture, the institutions of higher learning everywhere would find it a burden to satisfy everyone. Even if they were willing to render such a service, the application of knowledge would not occur easily.
Innovative methods of learning have been evolved in various corners of the world. Some - like the ones this consultant was taught - may not be employed and many could disappear. Learning is a complex process which cannot be reduced to taking pupils to class and expecting them to learn what they are taught.
3.2.2.1 Pragmatism of the multi-disciplinary approach
3.2.2.2 Making a net out of a pipe
Participatory research is a simple concept which can facilitate effective learning. The method is designed to select the right persons to work together, and while they share their experience, to have them learn something of common interest. When a researcher makes a scientific investigation in a rural area, his interest may fall on a topic of interest to villagers. If, for some reason, the researcher and the villagers were put to work together, they would perhaps find that they call an object or an idea by different names. If the object under investigation were of common interest, they would learn from one another the different names of something they know. Naming things is the simplest form of learning, which is known as “descriptive”. The participation of two or more individuals of different background in something of common interest could result in sharing useful experience. The learning process they could employ is in the form of experimentation or collection of empirical information to prove their hypothesis.
Due to a serious shortage of trained manpower, many developing countries cannot afford to send their researchers out in the field to do the “dirty work”. After the completion of their high education, they are sent to a lofty office for technical and subsequently administrative jobs. Such a loss of researchers to non-technical assignments was common in most developing countries in the early days when university graduates were few. Even when more scientists have become available, field research may not be viewed as a desirable assignment. These scientists end up doing all sorts of research, mainly in the laboratory or in other pleasant surroundings. Such a mentality can be taken as common.
To attract (or force) scientists to field investigation, for the kind of research likely to address actual rural problems, some mechanisms must be devised. The Land Grant and Sea Grant programmes evolved on this ground, and they are still implemented.
Participatory research in aquaculture can be deployed to address a huge number of research possibilities. A great number of aquatic organisms are awaiting aquaculture scientists’ explorations. Feeding needs not stop at dumping formulated feed into ponds: the methods by which different species of fish gather food are largely researchable.
The association of scientists and rural dwellers could bring benefits to both. The scientists are likely to gain in-depth knowledge of the background of the subject under investigation. The difficulties in explaining the scientific project in simple and non-technical terms could help them before they have to brief the policymakers in easily comprehensible terms. On the other hand, the rural dwellers would acquire a non-formal opportunity to learn something from the researchers about things of high relevance to them or to their community. In the learning process, they may master a few analytical techniques that they may employ later as a tool for lifelong learning.
A multi-disciplinary approach can enhance at different stages the effectiveness of research and the dissemination of its results. At the planning stage, each member of the multi-disciplinary research team can contribute his background, expertise and database to the planning, making it complete and comprehensive. Often, certain research objectives can be satisfied with the results of a discussion or multi-facetted analysis of the data provided by the members of the multi-disciplinary research team. This results not only in pooling existing knowledge at the planning stage, but also in a comprehensive research plan which saves time and the effort of gathering evidence in the field.
Each member of a multi-disciplinary research team can also contribute to the design of field data-gathering methodology. The survey form designed by such a research team is more likely to be comprehensive and better formulated. Social scientists on the team often help improve a questionnaire, making it more effective to solicit factual answers from respondents of different social backgrounds. A good question is more likely to obtain a good answer.
The gathering of field data is indeed costly, as it involves the physical preparation and logistics to facilitate the work of research personnel in the field. Seasonal factors have to be observed for both safety and research considerations. Well-designed research can often minimize fieldwork, resulting in less drudgery for the research personnel.
Multi-disciplinary analysis of field data often yields deeper knowledge of the object under study. No single-discipline scientist can derive the full meaning of a set of field data extracted from real life in a natural setting. Aquaculture, for example, does not concern exclusively the live of aquatic organisms under cultivation; it also concerns the life of the man who operates the farm. The fishery biologist is adept at interpreting fishery biology data and the physical benefits derived from such biology, whereas the social scientist can help interpret the motivations and concerned attributes to actions of the fish farm operator. A synthesis of these multi-disciplinary views would make a comprehensive analysis of the same set of field data, resulting in research of a better quality for a relatively low investment.
The results of multi-disciplinary research often aim at benefiting certain groups of beneficiaries, and the dissemination can very well be carried out in an effective manner. One important but often-neglected aspect of sharing research information is sharing among scientists who are members of a multi-disciplinary team. The exposure to research methodology, analysis, attributes, and interpretation of data by other scientific disciplines can contribute to better cross-sector communication among subject matter specialists. The assembly of a multi-disciplinary research team can therefore benefit in several ways: a) by formulating a broader-based research plan which addresses priority development issues better; b) by better sharing information already researched by different scientific disciplines, which the team members contribute at the planning stage; c) by minimizing time, efforts and cost in gathering new data; d) by a more complete interpretation of new data, leading to a better assessment of the development issues; e) by exposing each member of the research team to other scientific disciplines and gaining wider association with specialists, who by profession think differently, thus contributing to stronger professionalism; and f) at the national or international levels, by increasing the ability of team members to work together, and thus achieving the desirable intellectual strength necessary for effective development endeavours.
The traditional methods of dissemination of technical information to users chart three players in the game. Like most other technical disciplines, aquaculture has been supported by a) researchers who evolve technical know-how, b) extension workers who digest the technical information into a simpler and comprehensible form, and convey it to fish farmers or producers, and c) fish farmers, who acquire the technical information from extension workers and apply it to their farms. Researchers are expected to evolve a technology which can be translated by extension workers into useful and comprehensible information disseminated to fish farmers. In many developing countries where strong disparities remain in the social hierarchy, most researchers would have little interest in the lowly status of farmers and their welfare. Socially induced ignorance contributes to the irrelevance of their research work in relation to the prevailing problems faced by farmers, and consequently renders it useless even if the extension services continue to disseminate them. In such a social system, it is taken for granted that whatever is given from the top should be taken with gratitude. The information only flows from top to bottom, and since the farmers find no mechanism to voice their grievances to the researcher, nothing will flow back from bottom to top.
In countries where the social hierarchy has more or less dissolved, a farmer can walk into a public office to demand technical information relevant to his needs. Since employment in such a country can only be guaranteed by a high level of performance, it is the interest of the researcher or public office bearer to produce the kind of service that meet the user’s need. Attention must be paid to the welfare of farmers and fieldwork is viewed as an essential part of the job. The long tradition of a number of land-grant colleges and universities in the United States that have participated in offering programmes in agriculture, engineering and home economics to the public arose from the 1862 Morrill Act, which was expanded with funds for research under the Hatch Act in 1887. The close collaboration between researchers and farmers transforms the “pipe” into a network in which the extension can still serve as go-between playing both sides of the field.
Information is an asset. This is largely true in highly competitive societies where people are equipped to deal with logic or abstract ideas. Information is also an asset in commercial circles where the first person to acquire certain information can have a competitive edge. Information is highly valuable when it is a trade or military secret, since it can be used to harm or threaten others to advantage. Information on health is an asset since we can use it to stay in shape and avoid ailments. Information is valuable where an intellectual recipient can apply it to a good, gainful or intended purpose. Years of formal education expose students to the ways of logic, the ability to relate and digest certain informational attributes and to put it to work.
For those with less schooling, logic is something highly abstract and incomprehensible. Information often comes as signs, either statements on paper or sounds on the radio or pictures on television; it is also expressed by verbal or body language. Unless recipients can decipher the signs or signals efficiently, the information does not get through to the intended target. Nonetheless, information continues to be the only input that will generate analysis and resultant knowledge, and it must continue to be supplied. The point is whether supplying information to farmers and the poor is helpful; my view is that it is most unlikely that it would. Too much effort would be needed to give them back the schooling opportunities that they have missed. Too much effort would go into mere dissemination of information. The aim of supplying information should not be a technological transfer or the short-term increase of a farm produce: it is human resource development. The aim is to make people continue to learn from information they later seek. Learning is a lifelong endeavour.
