Reviews in Aquaculture (2009) 1, 2–9
doi: 10.1111/j.1753-5131.2008.01002.x
Global aquaculture and its role in sustainable development
Rohana Subasinghe, Doris Soto and Jiansan Jia
Aquaculture Management and Conservation Service, Fisheries and Aquaculture Department, Food and Agriculture Organization
of the United Nations, Rome, Italy
Correspondence
Rohana Subasinghe, Room F506, Aquaculture
Management and Conservation Service,
Fisheries and Aquaculture Department,
Food and Agriculture Organization of
the United Nations, Viale delle Terme di
Caracalla, 00153 Rome, Italy.
Email:
[email protected]
Received 15 August 2008; accepted
17 September 2008.
Abstract
Aquaculture is the fastest growing food-producing sector in the world. It is
developing, expanding and intensifying in almost all regions of the world. The
global population is increasing, thus, the demand for aquatic food products is
also increasing. Production from capture fisheries has levelled off and most of
the main fishing areas have reached their maximum potential. Sustaining fish
supplies from capture fisheries will, therefore, not be able to meet the growing
global demand for aquatic food and aquaculture is considered to be an opportunity to bridge the supply and demand gap of aquatic food in most regions of
the world. However, in our efforts to achieve this potential, the sector will face
significant challenges. Key development trends indicate that the sector continues to intensify and diversify and is continuing to use new species and modify
its systems and practices. Markets, trade and consumption preferences strongly
influence the growth of the sector, with clear demands for the production of
safe and quality products. As a consequence, increasing emphasis is placed on
enhanced enforcement of regulation and better governance of the sector. It is
increasingly realized that sustainable development and responsible production
of aquaculture, in the long run, cannot be achieved without the full participation of the producers in the decision-making and regulation process, which has
led to efforts to empower farmers and their associations and move toward
increasing self-regulation. These factors are all contributing to an improvement
in the management of the sector, typically through the promotion of ‘better
management’ practices of producers. This review discusses the role of aquaculture, as at large a small-scale farmer driven production sector, in the quest for
sustainable development, reducing poverty and improving food security on a
global scale.
Key words: aquaculture, fish, fishfarming, mariculture, seafood, sustainability.
Introduction
Global production of fish from aquaculture has grown
rapidly over the past four decades, contributing significant quantities to the world’s supply of fish for human
consumption. Aquaculture now accounts for almost half
(45%) of the world’s food fish (note that ‘food fish’ or
simply ‘fish’ in this document refers to production of
aquatic animals [fish, crustaceans, molluscs, echinoderms,
amphibians]). Aquatic plants are considered separately.
With its continued growth, it is expected that aquaculture
2
will, in the near future, produce more fish for direct
human consumption than capture fisheries.
Aquaculture, which started as primarily an Asian freshwater food production system, has now spread to all continents, encompassing all aquatic environments and using
a range of aquatic species. From an activity that was principally small scale, non-commercial and family based,
aquaculture now includes large-scale commercial and
industrial production of high-value species that are traded
at national, regional and international levels. Although
production remains predominantly Asian and is still
ª 2009 Blackwell Publishing Asia Pty Ltd
Aquaculture and sustainable development
largely based on small-scale operations, there is a wide
consensus that aquaculture has the potential to meet the
growing global demand for nutritious food fish and to
contribute to the growth of national economies, while
supporting the sustainable livelihoods of many communities (FAO 2006a).
Production trends
120
50.0
100
40.0
80
30.0
60
20.0
40
10.0
20
0
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
Year
1995
Figure 1 Contribution to food-fish supply.
, AQ share.
capture;
Reviews in Aquaculture (2009) 1, 2–9
ª 2009 Blackwell Publishing Asia Pty Ltd
2000
Percentage (%)
Million tonnes
World aquaculture has grown tremendously over the past
50 years from a production of less than one million tonnes
in the early 1950s to 48.1 million tonnes in 2005 (all
production data provided in this document are based on
2005 production statistics given in FAO FishStat+ 2007
database); an average annual growth rate of 8.8% (Fig. 1).
Current production had a farm-gate value of US$70.3
billion, increasing significantly in value as farmed products
move along the market chain to consumers. Of this
production, 32.4 million tonnes (or 67.3%) was produced
in the People’s Republic of China (hereafter referred to as
China) and 22.3% from the rest of the Asia–Pacific region
(Table 1). Western Europe contributed 4.2% with 2.0
million tonnes (valued at US$6.2 billion), while Central
and Eastern Europe contributed 270 000 tonnes or 0.6%.
Latin America and the Caribbean and North America contributed 2.9 and 1.3%, respectively. Finally, production
from the Near East and North Africa and sub-Saharan
Africa accounted for 1.2 and 0.2%, respectively, of the global total for 2005 (Table 2). In addition to fish production,
aquaculture activities in 2005 produced 14.8 million tonnes
of aquatic plants worth US$7.1 billion. The vast majority
of aquatic plant production (99.8%) came from the Asia–
Pacific. The projection of future food supply from aquaculture in Figure 1 might be conservative and it is possible
that aquaculture will reach 50% of the total supply in the
next biennium.
Production within each region is diverse. In the Asia–
Pacific, aquaculture production from South Asia, China
and most of South-East Asia consists of cyprinids, whereas
0.0
2005
, Aquaculture;
,
Table 1
Top 20 food fish aquaculture producing countries
Country
Production
(1000 tonnes)
Percentage
Cumulative
percentage
China
India
Viet Nam
Indonesia
Thailand
Bangladesh
Japan
Chile
Norway
Philippines
Egypt
Myanmar
United States of America
Republic of Korea
Taiwan, Prov. of China
France
Brazil
Spain
Italy
Malaysia
32 414
2838
1437
1197
1144
882
746
698
657
557
540
475
472
436
305
258
258
222
181
176
67.3
5.9
3.0
2.5
2.4
1.8
1.5
1.5
1.4
1.2
1.1
1.0
1.0
0.9
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.4
67.3
73.2
76.2
78.7
81.1
82.9
84.4
85.9
87.3
88.4
89.5
90.5
91.5
92.4
93.0
93.6
94.1
94.6
94.9
95.3
Rest of the world
World total
2257
48 150
4.7
100.0
100.0
production from the rest of East Asia consists of high-value
marine fish. In global terms, 97.5% of cyprinids, 88.6% of
penaeids and 95.0% of oysters come from the Asia–Pacific
region. Meanwhile, 53.1% of the world’s farmed salmonids
come mainly from the northern part of Western Europe
(FAO 2007a) and almost 45% comes from South America.
Carp, however, dominate in Central and Eastern Europe,
both in quantity and in value (FAO 2007b).
In North America, channel catfish and salmon are the
top aquaculture species (FAO 2006d). In Latin America
and in the Caribbean region, over the past decade, salmonids have overtaken shrimp as the top aquaculture species
group. This trend was partly influenced by disease outbreaks in major shrimp-producing countries in Latin
America and by rapid growth in salmon production in
Chile (FAO 2006c).
Although sub-Saharan Africa has significant water and
land resources, it has, to date, been only a minor player
in aquaculture development for a variety of reasons (FAO
2006e). Although some improvements are taking place,
the situation in sub-Saharan Africa highlights that economics, human demand and interest, institutional aspects
and a wide variety of other factors unrelated to the
resource potential, are all contributing to this situation.
Near East and North African aquaculture is confined to a
few countries; in particular, Egypt dominates the production of tilapia, making a significant contribution to the
regional production (FAO 2006f).
3
R. Subasinghe et al.
Table 2 Aquaculture production (volume and value) in 2005 in different regions of the world
Country ⁄ region
China
Rest of the Asia–Pacific
Western Europe
Latin American and the Caribbean
North America
Near East and North Africa
Central and Eastern Europe
Sub-Saharan Africa
World total
Production volume
(million tonnes)
Production
volume (%)
32.4
10.7
2
1.4
0.6
0.6
0.3
0.1
48.1
67.3
22.3
4.2
2.9
1.3
1.2
0.6
0.2
100
Production value
(billion US$)
Production
value (%)
Value
(US$) ⁄ tonne
35.99
20.6
5.42
5.24
1.3
0.83
0.67
0.25
70.3
51.2
29.3
7.72
7.47
1.86
1.19
0.91
0.36
100
1111
1925
2710
3743
2167
1383
2233
2500
1462
For easy reference, the Asia–Pacific region has been separated into China and the rest of the Asia–Pacific.
The value of aquaculture production also varies significantly among regions (Table 2), and in some cases it can
be much greater than the value of fisheries exports, for
example, in Latin America aquaculture represents only 7%
of the total fish production, but this is 57% of the
total export value of fish products (FAO 2007d). This difference among regions is influenced by the value of certain
commodity products, such as salmon and shrimp, which
are mainly produced for export markets.
Contribution to food security, nutritional
well-being, poverty reduction and economic
growth
Aquaculture plays an important role in global efforts to
eliminate hunger and malnutrition by supplying fish and
other aquatic products rich in protein, essential fatty
acids, vitamins and minerals. Aquaculture can also make
significant contributions to development by improving
incomes, providing employment opportunities and
increasing the returns on resource use. According to FAO
figures, aquaculture directly created 12 million full-time
employment positions in Asia in 2004 (FAO 2006b). It
significantly contributes to the national gross domestic
product in many developing countries in Asia and Latin
America (FAO 2006c). With appropriate management,
the sector appears ready to meet the expected shortfalls
in fish supplies for the coming decades and to improve
global food security.
The availability of sufficient and good-quality food,
access to this food by households and individuals, and its
utilization for nutritious diets and good health are interdependent dimensions of food security. With respect to
food availability, aquaculture contributes to the quantity
of food through the supply of aquatic products from
domestic farming and through the supply of food purchased using foreign exchanges. Aquaculture contributes
to food quality by providing nutritious and energetic
4
aquatic food products that are high in protein, essential
fatty acids, vitamins and minerals. The health benefits
associated with the consumption of fish products are particularly important for the prevention of heart-related diseases and for many vulnerable groups, such as pregnant
and lactating women, infants and pre-school children. In
this respect, aquaculture contributes to nutritional wellbeing. Understanding the benefits of fish products has
triggered a substantial increase in consumption, particularly in developed nations, but not so much in developing
countries. By 2002 fish (fisheries and aquaculture) products contributed 12% of the total protein for human consumption (FAO 2006g), although there are no detailed
global statistics on the provision of other essential minerals and components.
The availability of food is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for food security. Affordability is a major
aspect of food access. By providing farmers with revenues
obtained through the sale of their produce and by creating employment, aquaculture enhances a household’s
disposable income and its ability to purchase food.
Increasing the availability of aquatic products to domestic
markets can lower the price of these products, thereby
making them affordable and more accessible to local consumers. Beyond individuals and households, at a macroeconomic level, aquaculture can also contribute to a
country’s economic performance and growth by generating profits and producing tax and export revenues. Good
infrastructure and investments in human capital will
improve the productivity of labour and capital, benefiting
local businesses and enhancing the development of rural
communities.
With existing resources and technological advances,
food fish production from aquaculture can be further
expanded in a more sustainable manner. This is only possible if the sector’s socio-economic benefits accrue to a
large social spectrum. Thus, the main challenge for policy
makers and development agents is to create an ‘enabling
Reviews in Aquaculture (2009) 1, 2–9
ª 2009 Blackwell Publishing Asia Pty Ltd
Aquaculture and sustainable development
environment’ for the aquaculture sector to maintain its
growth, while meeting societal needs and preserving the
natural resource base it needs. This enabling environment
is multi-faceted and requires significant political will, sustained policy, public sector support and investment.
Addressing environmental and social issues and
other risks within the sector
The environmental impacts of aquaculture development
have received a high degree of attention over the past two
decades, typically in cases where societal benefits were
negatively affected by the consequences of unregulated
aquaculture development. This attention is likely to
become more pronounced in the coming decades, and
will be constantly triggered by the increasing demand for
products and services in a situation of increasing competition for land and water with other sectors ⁄ users and the
diminishing feed resources for aquaculture. Such a scenario could also be enhanced by climatic change of varying degrees among regions (Handisyde et al. 2007).
With weak or improper regulations for the allocation
and use of natural resources, there is always a tendency
for conflicts to emerge between resource users. Invariably,
less influential and disadvantaged stakeholders are denied
access to these resources. Unregulated or improperly
regulated aquaculture development also results in a high
discounting rate on the use of natural resources and,
therefore, encourages practices that exploit these resources
beyond their carrying capacity.
As a result of strong public scrutiny on the environmental impacts of some forms of inconsiderate aquaculture development, starting approximately 10 years ago
and gathering considerable momentum over the past
5 years, significant progress in addressing many of the
key concerns in the environmental management of aquaculture has been made. This public pressure and continued commercial necessity have led the aquaculture sector
to make great efforts to reduce and mitigate its environmental impacts and led governments to increasingly
recognize that aquaculture, when well planned and
well managed, can yield broad societal benefits without
concomitant environmental degradation.
Indeed, it is now increasingly recognized that aquaculture can make a positive contribution (e.g. mitigation) to
the environment by helping to reduce the negative impacts
of other industries and activities (FAO 2006a). There are
aquaculture systems that contribute to environmental rehabilitation or mitigate the impacts of effluents from other
agricultural and even industrial operations. Well known
are the integrated farming systems, such as rice-fish farming and fish farming in irrigated systems and the rehabilitation of endangered populations through stocking. The use
Reviews in Aquaculture (2009) 1, 2–9
ª 2009 Blackwell Publishing Asia Pty Ltd
of mollusc culture to improve carbon sequestering and seaweed culture in coastal areas to reduce aquatic nutrient
loadings are also good examples of where aquaculture practices can serve as environmental sentinels, while at the
same time contributing to socio-economic development.
Despite recent progress, there is no room for complacency. Continuing improvements, interventions and
investments are required to ensure a higher degree of
environmental sustainability and economic viability in the
sector as pressures on the natural resource base and
public awareness of environmental issues are reaching
unprecedented levels. An ecosystem approach to aquaculture development can help reconcile the human and environmental objectives of sustainable development.
Aquaculture does not take place in isolation and in
most cases it is not the only human activity in any given
ecosystem, and it is possible that this food sector leads to
smaller impacts on water bodies than other human activities (e.g. agriculture and industry). Although aquaculture
has attracted much attention with regard to its potential
environmental impacts we often forget that most terrestrial food-producing systems have been achieved after
drastically transforming landscapes; however, historically
society has grown used to this while aquaculture is a
rather new development worldwide.
Because producing food for human needs (particularly
intensive production) always has an environmental cost,
these costs must be internalized in the accountings of the
production process. It is also important to consider that
aquaculture might be less costly than other protein products and a comparative evaluation of the environmental
costs could be useful for making decisions on development
options and improving management (Bartley et al. 2007).
Aquaculture needs an enabling policy environment to
grow in a sustainable manner and to be integrated into
the agro-ecosystems (when appropriate) or to other
coastal zone uses, while minimizing conflict occurrence.
In addition, the interactions between aquaculture and the
larger system, in particular, the influence of the surrounding natural and social environment on aquaculture practices and results must also be taken into consideration.
An ecosystem approach for aquaculture is a strategic
approach to the development and management of the
sector that aims to integrate aquaculture into the wider
ecosystem, such that it is equitable and promotes the sustainability of interlinked social–ecological systems (Soto
et al. 2008). Therefore, ecological, social and economic
issues must be addressed at the proper scales: the farm,
the watershed (e.g. containing clusters of aquaculture
farms in interaction with other sectors) and the global
market scale. The two latter scales often require policies
and agreements beyond political boundaries (e.g. between
countries or regions).
5
R. Subasinghe et al.
Coping with globalization, food safety, trade
and markets
In 2005, approximately 40% (live weight equivalent) of
world food fish production was internationally traded,
with a value of US$78.4 billion. New markets are emerging worldwide. As high-value species are increasingly
exported (intra-regionally or inter-regionally) and lowvalue products are imported, a particular trend in Asia,
where, for example, shrimp are exported and canned pilchards are imported, there is a clear need by aquaculture
farmers to improve the quality and safety of their products to gain a wider access to the export markets (FAO
2007c). However, with the more stringent requirements
of export markets, small-scale farmers are facing difficulties in producing for export. As these farmers strive to
meet export consumer requirements, they might become
uncompetitive. This lack of competitiveness could drive
them out of the sector. Empowering small farmers to
become competitive in the global trade is becoming
urgent and, perhaps, a significant corporate social responsibility.
Through trade and market access, globalization is
increasingly playing an important role in aquaculture
development. Its requirements are twofold: (i) strengthening of national, inter-provincial or inter-state, as well as
regional and international, biosecurity and food safety
measures; and (ii) enhancing ability, through training,
legislation, codes of practice, certification, traceability
schemes of governments and producers, to comply with
trade and market access requirements for safe and quality
products. These requirements are creating a considerable
drive for importing and exporting countries to collectively
harmonize standards and protocols and to address issues
of certification of products and processors.
Certification in aquaculture can have positive effects by
spurring new competitive advantages and investments,
but it can also disguise underlying intentions to protect
domestic industries and restrict market access. Compliance for some certification requirements could be costly
and difficult for small farmers. As certification programmes proliferate, questions will be raised about which
certification programmes best serve consumer protection,
the environment, the public and the producers. Addressing these issues requires the promotion of harmonization
and equivalence in the certification schemes and simplified compliance procedures.
As a consequence, there is a need for policy makers to
emphasize these aspects when improving the governance
of the sector. They must be aware that policies can be
much more effective if producers participate in the decision making and regulation processes. Such recognition
has already led many governments to build national
6
capacities to assist producers and processors in complying
with mandatory food safety regulations, while empowering farmers and their associations to move toward greater
self-regulation. This move is contributing to an improvement in the management of the sector at the farm level,
typically through the promotion of ‘better management’
practices and ‘codes of practice’ in well-organized associated producers.
The challenge of good governance
Changing resource availability, the regulatory environment, economics and increasing demand for fish and fishery products are forcing the aquaculture sector to
intensify. Of these factors, the declining availability of
suitable locations and constraints imposed by competition
for water and increased regulation on discharges and
abstraction appear to be the main driving forces.
In addition to calling for intensification, these constraints create opportunities elsewhere. For example, there
is an increasing trend towards sea farming, with many
countries experimenting with offshore and open-ocean
aquaculture. The challenge is for policy makers to properly regulate the sector to ensure its orderly development
and to discourage high discount rates on the use of natural resources and, thus, their exploitation beyond carrying
capacity, while ensuring maximum benefits to society.
One of the prerequisites enabling aquaculture to make
a contribution to sustainable development lies with a government’s commitment to providing appropriate support
to the sector. This commitment is expressed in the form
of clear articulation of policies, plans and strategies and
the availability of adequate funding and capacity building
for their implementation. One of the main challenges is
to avoid a trend seen across the agricultural sector where
such commitment falters because of shifting government
development priorities. The organization of government
institutions is also relevant; in some cases the aquaculture
sector is managed under fisheries institutions and in other
cases under agriculture and food production institutions.
Such organization must respond to the actual conditions
and physical areas used by the aquaculture sector as well
as to the orientation of the sector (e.g. production is for
local markets or exports), and should promote the integration of aquaculture to other sectors ⁄ users of the
coastal zones.
Although a government’s commitment is necessary for
aquaculture development, it is not sufficient to ensure
sustainability. The aquaculture sector needs to operate
under sound macro-economic, institutional and legal
frameworks. Most successful aquaculture is driven by private sector investments. Private investments are vulnerable to political and legal instabilities, albeit external to
Reviews in Aquaculture (2009) 1, 2–9
ª 2009 Blackwell Publishing Asia Pty Ltd
Aquaculture and sustainable development
the sector, and these factors seriously affect institutional
development and deter private entrepreneurs.
Increasing flow of information and networking
In recent years, with the rapid growth of the aquaculture
sector, the demand for reliable and timely information on
the status and trends of aquaculture has greatly increased
along with the need to expand the implementation of
new technologies and management approaches. The
demand stems from the need to formulate and monitor
sound policies and development plans, respond to the
reporting requirements of international agreements and
respond to public demand for transparency and accountability. There have been many attempts to improve the
information base on aquaculture globally. In Asia,
improvement of the information base has been made possible through more formal networking among countries
and institutions (e.g. Network of Aquaculture Centres in
the Asia–Pacific; http://www.enaca.org). There is a push
to establish more of these networks in other parts of the
world.
Many networks of producer associations and groups
do exist and have contributed significantly to the sector
development. From aquaculture self-help groups, including women’s groups in poor villages in Asia, to the more
formal regional and international associations with their
headquarters in Europe and the United States of America,
producer groups have increasingly been playing a major
role in global aquaculture development.
Special consideration for Africa
As noted above, a counterpoint to the rapid development
of global aquaculture is its limited development in subSaharan Africa. This is the only region where the per capita consumption of fish has dropped, a trend we can ill
afford to see continue or worsen, particularly when the
decline in fish consumption has not been offset by an
increase in the consumption of other animal proteins.
Sub-Saharan Africa is also the only region where the contribution to the world aquaculture output remains below
1% (Table 2). There is a strong belief that Africa has the
full resource potential for aquaculture growth. Our experience shows that aquaculture is slowly finding its niche
in many countries in Africa, particularly cage aquaculture.
Commercial cage culture is currently developing in
Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe,
with variable but slowly increasing success (Blow &
Leonard 2007). Despite these recent developments, the
overall contribution could be improved considerably,
making Africa a high-priority region for aquaculture
development.
Reviews in Aquaculture (2009) 1, 2–9
ª 2009 Blackwell Publishing Asia Pty Ltd
Therefore, there is a need for development agents and
institutions to join hands to ensure that aquaculture and
fish production in sub-Saharan Africa becomes part of
the overall development process for the continent. Most
countries in sub-Saharan Africa have limited resources to
deliver quality public goods and services and many have a
private sector (albeit under-developed) that could operate
in its stead. Thus, there is a need for renewed and longterm focussed assistance to Africa’s aquaculture sector,
with a novel approach for development, making public–
private partnerships possible, which builds on lessons
learned from past mistakes and capitalizes on the emerging potential of the private sector. In addition, experiences in other regions and inter-regional cooperation can
be most useful for this purpose. Relevant current initiatives involve international cooperation, benefiting several
countries, to produce genetically improved tilapia seed,
one of the bottlenecks to aquaculture growth in Africa,
together with the production of quality feeds.
Future prospects
The aquaculture sector is expected to contribute more
effectively to global food security, nutritional well-being,
poverty reduction and economic development by producing, with minimum impact on the environment and maximum benefit to society, 85 million tonnes of aquatic
food by 2030, an increase of 37 million tonnes over the
level recorded in 2005.
Identifiable trends in the development of the aquaculture sector are: (i) continuing intensification of aquaculture production; (ii) continuing diversification of the
species used; (iii) continuing diversification of production
systems and practices; (iv) increasing influence of markets, trade and consumers; (v) enhancing regulation and
improving governance of the sector; and (vi) increasing
attention on better management of the sector. These
trends do not apply equally to all regions because of
intra-regional and inter-regional differences in the stages
of aquaculture development, but they do reflect the
behaviour of the sector in those countries where aquaculture is well established. It is possible that in some regions
and countries mariculture will develop at a faster rate as
freshwater aquaculture might encounter more restrictions
owing to increasing competition for water resources, particularly in a global warming scenario. In addition, offshore mariculture is an option that avoids conflicting
uses of coastal areas, while also avoiding and minimizing
pollution of coastal environments. However, offshore
farming possesses great challenges with regard to technological and economic investments that might restrict and
slow down the use of this technology in certain regions
and countries, at least initially.
7
R. Subasinghe et al.
Even with the expected increases in aquaculture production, the question remains whether the industry can
grow fast and sustainably enough to meet the projected
levels necessary to maintain fish supply while preserving
the natural resource base required for it to thrive. Assuming a sustained demand for fish (i.e. the world is prepared
to pay for fish as a desirable food product), there are
plenty of unexplored opportunities that could enable
aquaculture to significantly contribute to a country’s sustainable development. These include: (i) the application
of innovative capacity enhancement programmes by producers; (ii) the search for new production systems and
technologies; and (iii) the development of new aquatic
products and markets and integration into the eco-tourism, agriculture and fisheries sectors. Although some of
the areas are not strictly unexplored, considerable support
is required to realize their full potential.
Although there are indications that aquaculture can
cover the gap between the expected demand and food fish
supply from capture fisheries, there are constraints that
could dampen or even stall production increases, thereby
preventing the aquaculture supply from meeting the
expected demand in decades to come. Aquaculture will
fail to contribute further to sustainable development globally in general, and in fish farming nations in particular,
should the supply decrease or stall.
There is a concern that the available marine resources
(e.g. fishmeal and fish oil) might not be sufficient to meet
the demand of the projected aquaculture production.
Although the production of these resources from capture
fisheries has remained stagnant over the past decade and
any significant increase is not anticipated in the foreseeable future, there will be a substantial decrease in the
amount of fishmeal used by the animal production sector.
Furthermore, it is also expected that the proportion of
fishmeal aquafeeds will be substantially reduced by the
increasing use of vegetable-based protein and by greater
efficiencies in feeding (Hasan et al. 2007). However, great
efforts are needed, particularly in appropriate research
and technological advances, to make this a reality, for
example, to find a full replacement for fish oils. Current
aquaculture literature shows that there is increasing interest from private feed companies and research institutions.
Under these scenarios, it is unlikely that the supply of
fishmeal and fish oil will be a major limiting factor in
aquaculture feeding.
One of the greatest constraints could be the impact of
climate change on aquaculture. At this stage, climate
change presents non-quantifiable threats of changing temperatures, weather, water quality and supply. A recent
report examines general predictive models and suggests
important differences among regions regarding the magnitude and types of impact on aquaculture (Handisyde
8
et al. 2007). The report opens the door to the relevant
research needed on this topic and emphasizes the ability
to adapt as a major advantage to be developed by countries and regions. There is a need for the aquaculture sector to join other economic sectors in preparing to address
the potential impacts of the planet’s warming. One of the
practical responses to climate change for aquaculture
could be to strengthen the adaptive capacity and resilience of the sector, particularly that of small farmers and
aquatic resource users. Increased resilience is a desirable
feature of any sector; it can mitigate the future impact of
unforeseen events (e.g. economic change, disease epidemics and tsunamis), including those related to climate.
There is some knowledge and experience from aquaculture itself and from the broader area of agriculture and
natural resource management that can be used to increase
our understanding. Aquaculture and particularly mariculture can in fact provide adaptation opportunities to produce good-quality protein when freshwater is scarce. In
contrast, freshwater aquaculture can produce protein with
a higher water saving than other animal production
sectors (Verdegem et al. 2006).
Science can be useful in understanding and reducing
risks, uncertainties and vulnerabilities, but unwavering
government will and support are essential elements in
enhancing aquaculture development. Although the level
of commitment will inevitably vary within and among
regions, according to the importance of aquaculture to
the national economy, it is expected that in countries
where aquaculture contributes, or has the potential to
contribute, substantially to food security, nutritional wellbeing, poverty reduction and economic growth, the commitment will hold and the level of support is expected to
increase.
References
Bartley DM, Brugère C, Soto D, Gerber P, Harvey BJ (2007)
Comparative assessment of the environmental costs of aquaculture and other food production sectors: methods for
meaningful comparisons. FAO Fisheries Proceedings No. 10.
FAO ⁄ WFT Expert Workshop, pp. 25–36; 24–28 April 2006,
Vancouver, Canada. FAO, Rome.
Blow P, Leonard S (2007) A review of cage aquaculture: subSaharan Africa. In: Halwart M, Soto D, Arthur JR (eds) Cage
Aquaculture – Regional Reviews and Global Overview. FAO
Fisheries Technical Paper No. 498, pp. 188–207. FAO, Rome.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations) (2006a) State of World Aquaculture: 2006. FAO,
Rome.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations) (2006b) Regional Review on Aquaculture Development. 3. Asia and the Pacific – 2005. FAO, Rome.
Reviews in Aquaculture (2009) 1, 2–9
ª 2009 Blackwell Publishing Asia Pty Ltd
Aquaculture and sustainable development
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations) (2006c) Regional Review on Aquaculture Development. 1. Latin America and the Caribbean – 2005. FAO, Rome.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations) (2006d) Regional Review on Aquaculture Development. 7. North America – 2005. FAO, Rome.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations) (2006e) Regional Review on Aquaculture Development. 4. Sub-Saharan Africa – 2005. FAO, Rome.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations) (2006f) Regional Review on Aquaculture Development. 2. Near East and North Africa – 2005. FAO, Rome.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations) (2006g) FAO Agriculture Statistical Database. Available from URL: http://faostat.fao.org/default.aspx. FAO, Rome.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations) (2007a) Regional Review on Aquaculture Development. 6. Western Europe – 2005. FAO, Rome.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations) (2007b) Regional Review on Aquaculture Development. 5. Central and Eastern Europe – 2005. FAO, Rome.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations) (2007c) The State of World Fisheries and Aquacul-
Reviews in Aquaculture (2009) 1, 2–9
ª 2009 Blackwell Publishing Asia Pty Ltd
ture 2006. FAO Fisheries Department, Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations, Rome.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations) (2007d) FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Statistical
Database. Available from URL: http://www.fao.org/fishery/
statistics/global-aquaculture-production/en. FAO, Rome.
Handisyde NT, Ross LG, Badkeck M-C, Allison EH (2007)
The Effects of Climate Change on World Aquaculture: a Global Perspective. Department for International Development,
London.
Hasan MR, Hecht T, De Silva SS, Tacon ADJ (eds) (2007)
Study and Analysis of Feeds and Fertilizers for Sustainable
Aquaculture Development. FAO Technical Paper 497, p. 512.
FAO, Rome.
Soto D, Aguilar-Manjarrez J, Hishamunda N (eds) (2008)
Building an Ecosystem Approach to Aquaculture. FAO ⁄
Universitat de les Illes Balears Expert Workshop, 7–11 May
2007, Palma de Mallorca, Spain. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Proceeding, No. 14. Available from URL: ftp://
ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/011/i0339e/i0339e.pdf. FAO, Rome.
Verdegem MCJ, Bosma RH, Verreth JAV (2006) Reducing
water use for animal production through aquaculture. Water
Resources Development 22: 101–113.
9