March 26, 2018

 

Aquaculture a boon for poor consumers

 

 

Aquaculture has benefited poor consumers more than ever thought, according to findings of a research.

 

The authors (Ben Belton, assistant professor of International Development, Michigan State University; Dave Little, professor of Aquatic Resources Development, University of Stirling; and Simon Bush, professor and chair of Environmental Policy, Wageningen University) said that much research on aquaculture has emphasised production for export, especially of shrimp, salmon and Vietnamese pangasius, which account for less than 10% of global farmed fish production. 

 

"This focus has led scholars to question whether aquaculture contributes to the food security of poorer people in producing countries. Many have concluded it does not", the researchers said.

 

"This bias reflects the priorities and concerns of developed countries that fund research, as well as civil society organisations that work to promote sustainable aquaculture production through international trade", they said.

 

They said their research found that the vast majority of farmed fish is in fact consumed in developing countries where it is produced, and is widely accessible to poorer consumers in these markets.

 

A myth

 

Because many scholars assume that this small group of internationally traded species is representative of global aquaculture, they believe that fish farmed in developing nations is mainly exported to wealthy countries, the researchers said.

 

"The literature also suggests that fish farmers find it most profitable to grow species with a high market value, generating little benefit for poorer consumers", they added.

 

Based on their analysis, the researchers found that export trade from such countries as Thailand, China and Vietnam is relatively insignificant, with 89% of their farmed fish such as shrimp, tilapia and pangasius catfish remaining in their domestic markets.

 

Consumption of farmed fish by poorer households increased, more than offsetting a decline in the quantity of wild fish eaten.

 

"These trends imply that the expansion of fish farming has been good for the poor. Low-income households in the countries that we studied would eat less fish of any kind today, wild or farmed, were it not for the growth of aquaculture", the researchers said.-Rick Alberto