In spite of the estimated potential production of more than 250,000 t/yr for warm water aquaculture, there are physical limitations in the region. Water is one determining factor; it can limit the possible growth of any aquaculture system. Recurring droughts increase the risk of producers who enter the sector. Temperatures limit all-year growth of warm water species in most areas. While culture systems for warm waters are well known, specially for the tilapias, suitable species and culture systems are not developed in the region for temperate species. The only frequently used species is common carp, an exotic. Cold water species in the region include the trouts, also exotic species.
Water and temperature limitations restrict commonly used culture methods in large areas to one growing season per year, adding to the cost per kg of produced fish.
The physical limitations can to a large degree be overcome by technical innovations. However, these add to the costs for investment and management, which are beyond the means of most present and prospective fish farmers. The added production cost must, in turn, be borne by a market willing to pay a certain price for the fish produced.
Wijkstrom (1991) analyzed the outcome of the ALCOM-supported socio-economic surveys in Zambia. Similar surveys in Tanzania (ALCOM), Malawi (ICLARM), and Zimbabwe (Agritex) gave the same overall results. Wijkstrom presents a theory on the role of small-scale rural fish farming in economic growth. An analysis is carried out for two economic situations:
The theory argues that the highest contribution to economic growth per kg of cultured fish occurs in the first situation. Thus, the more farmers who, using their labour and idle resources of land and water, produce fish the greater the contribution to economic growth as no resources have been sacrificed to grow fish. In the second situation the opportunity costs for land, water, and labour have increased, and the contribution to economic growth is the difference between the income earned from fish culture and the income earned for any other alternative use of the resources. Thus, the contribution fish farming makes towards economic growth will be less than in an economy with idle resources.
If these conclusions are accepted, the prevailing patterns for rural fish farming expansion in the region where the only input, land is idle, means that increased production through expanding the area under water makes sense.
In the ten year perspective for aquaculture development, the Working Group anticipates that the economic recession will be overcome and that the economies of the region will expand. Intensification of aquaculture production will be an important feature. While methods and techniques for the present situation are well demonstrated, more emphasis should be given the latter in forward looking planning and interventions.
The trends in aquaculture development will inevitably be affected by the rapid changes in macro-economic policies in the SADC region. These changes are trade liberalization, free markets, reduction of subsidies, retrenchment of government workers etc. All these will affect the economic viability of existing and planned aquaculture. The effects have not been studied in detail, but policy makers and planners need to take them into account.
Freer markets and economic integration in the SADC region are affecting the distribution and consumption of fresh, frozen and processed freshwater and marine fish. For the fisheries and aquaculture sector as a whole, the effects should be positive as availability of fish will be improved and more markets will become accessible to producers. In the short run, inland aquaculture will be adversely affected as countries with more low and high-value marine fish resources (e.g. Angola, Namibia, Tanzania, Mozambique and South Africa) enter the market. However, in the long term perspective the effects should be positive. Increasing the availability of cheap fish will mean that more consumers will become familiar with cooking and eating fish. The long term demand for fish may increase, offering opportunities for fish farmers, provided their prices are competitive and supplies of fish from capture fisheries become limited. Imports of frozen horse mackerel from Namibia are already increasing their share of the market in Zimbabwe, because of their low price. The short-term impact is negative for local fish producers. Prices for bream have fallen, and the stocks of frozen fish are increasing as wholesalers face falling orders. Local producers are now looking for ways to adjust to this new competition and may have to reconsider the culture system they are using. Some producers may opt to abandon fish farming. For consumers in rural areas the changed situation may be positive. Dried kapenta does not sell as easily as before in urban areas (which are the first to receive the frozen horse mackerel). Therefore kapenta dealers are now diverting a larger portion to rural areas, which are getting a better access to cheap fish.
Retrenchment of government employees and rationalization of government departments may mean fewer resources allocated to extension in economically less important sectors. Extension workers specifically for aquaculture may no longer be available, so that other extension workers, particularly in agriculture, will have to take on these tasks.
It should be noted that the above discussion is speculative, since no detailed studies of the effects have been undertaken. The Working Group, however, considers these changes as important considerations for any long-term planning for aquaculture.
A reduction in input subsidies will increase the costs of all farming operations. Depending on the particular circumstances, this can have both a positive and a negative effect on inland aquaculture.
Reduced subsidies on inputs will mean that there will be a change in the relative profitability of different on-farm activities. Market prices of inputs will be closer to their opportunity costs, so that farmers will have to make choices on which activities will yield the highest returns. As a result, fish farming may become a more profitable enterprise compared to other farming activities. On the other hand, a reduction in input subsidies may have a negative effect on existing fish farming operations which use purchased inputs. Depending on the prices of fish and the farmers' own priorities, these farmers may choose to stop using these inputs and adopt a more extensive, less costly, culture system, leading to a decrease in their fish production.
The Working Group concludes that the rapid changes in the region call for much more emphasis on macro and micro-economic considerations in the future for the planning for the sector and for any extension system to provide information on fish farming to producers.
The Working Group also concludes that, although rural subsistence fish farming at present may produce relatively cheap protein for the producing household, any aquaculture system aiming at higher productivity is unlikely in the ten-year perspective to produce “cheap” fish. Thus, the focus for rural fish farming development should be on areas with good physical conditions and with a product for which there is a market willing to pay the price.
Anticipating that the present trends in the macro-economic situation continue over the ten-year period considered by the Working Group, the objectives for fish farming development need to be revised. The dual objectives of increasing the income of the fish farmer and improving nutritional well-being may be contradictory. If fish farming cannot produce cheap protein (compared to capture fisheries for example) the nutritional impact will be indirect, and nutrition considerations cannot be used as operational objectives. Any intervention has to focus on measurable indicators for the economics of the producing unit (integrated farm or separate fish farms) and its contribution to national economic growth.
Taking the above considerations into account, the Working Group sees the development of inland fish farming for the next 10 years along the following lines
Small-scale subsistence-oriented fish farming will continue to expand in areas where physical conditions for warm water aquaculture are good and which have not as yet been affected by macro-economic changes. Extensive production of tilapias will continue. In areas penetrated by change, farmers with fish ponds may go on with extensive production so long as ponds do not require heavy inputs for repairs etc. When this happens, they may opt to abandon fish production.
A more intensive small-scale fish farming sub-sector may develop in areas close to markets, provided profitable culture systems with species in demand on the market can be identified.
For the large-scale commercial sub-sector, two lines of development can be anticipated. The first is that some farms producing fish for the domestic market, which is now competing with cheaper imported fish products, may abandon production or attempt to enter the export market. New entrants will look for efficient culture systems for high-value products on the domestic and export markets.
In this period of rapid change the scenarios discussed above are speculative. Although the outlook is uncertain, the Working Group concludes that any future development of inland fish culture in the region will be highly market-oriented.
