STATUS AND ECONOMICS OF FRESHWATER AQUACULTURE IN SELECTED COUNTRIES OF ASIA

Abstract

ABSTRACT The paper discusses the status of freshwater aquaculture, and the productivity and cost effectiveness of alternative technologies in the major fish producing countries in Asia, such as Bangladesh, China, India, Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam. The analysis is based on field survey data collected by the WorldFish Center and its partner research institutes, and supplemented by secondary information. The paper adopts descriptive techniques to compare the performance of each technology across the countries in terms of productivity, cost effectiveness and profitability. Results suggest that freshwater fish farming is generally profitable in Asia. The semi-intensive polyculture and monoculture of omnivorous and herbivorous species like carps and tilapia are likely to be more suitable for adoption by the poor farmers in Asia. Although the return from monoculture of carnivorous species such as prawn, snakehead and walking catfish is higher than that from culture of omnivorous and herbivorous species, it appears too capital intensive to be suitable for adoption by the resource poor farmers. The paper also performs econometric analysis to examine the determinants of fish production under polyculture and feed demand for the same. The results of the production function analysis reveal that further use of farm-based feed after a certain level of application cannot increase productivity as the law of diminishing marginal productivity sets in. Feed use is largely determined by the income and ownership status of the farmer. Provision of institutional credit and more secured access to the waterbodies would help poor farmers adopt appropriate aquaculture technologies. Keywords: Asiafreshwater aquaculturecost and returnstranslog production functionfeed use ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors would like to acknowledge the support and cooperation received from their partner institutes and collaborators. The primary data used in this paper were collected under the projects 'Genetic improvement of carp species in Asia' (ADB RETA 5711) and 'Strategies and options for increasing and sustaining fisheries and aquaculture production to benefit poor households in Asia' (ADB RETA 5945) partially funded by the Asian Development Bank. We are thankful to Dr. Mark Prein for his inputs, particularly for his advice on "classification of feed use". Roslina Kamaruddin and Jenny Chua Yu Chin deserve special thanks for their assistance in completing the paper. This is the WorldFish Center contribution number 1689. Notes Source: Dey et al. (2005). a The average total area refers to small-scale farms. For large-scale state-owned farms it is 131.80 ha. b The percentage of pond area refers to the water-spread area. Sources: 1unit area is ha for pond and 100 m2 for cage. 2Gross margin = gross return–total variable cost. 3Net return = gross return–total cost. 4Return on variable cost is equal to the return over variable cost divided by the total variable cost. 5Return on total cost is equal to the net return divided by the total cost of production. 6producer survey, Carp project ICLARM (2001). 7Dey and Bimbao (1998). 8Hossain and Humayon (Citation2001). 9Producers' survey, DEGITA project ICLARM (1998). 10Katiha (Citation2001), Katiha et al. (2005). 11Krismono et al. (1998). 12Office of Agricultural Economics, Thailand, DOF (2000). na: Data on fixed costs are not available. However, given the fact that the fixed cost of fish farming is low in Bangladesh (see for example, data on cage culture), this omission is not likely to affect the rigor of our analysis. Source: Original data are from Producers' Survey, Carp Project, ICLARM (2001). na = data not available. *Data on physical quantity of inputs are not available for China. 1Gross margin = gross return–total variable cost. 2Net return = gross return–total cost. 3Return on variable cost is equal to the return over variable cost divided by the total variable cost. 4Return on total cost is equal to the net return divided by the total cost of production. Source: Original data are from Producers' Survey, Carp Project, ICLARM (2001). *Significant at 10% level of significance; **Significant at 5% level of significance; ***Significant at 1% level of significance. *Significant at 10% level of significance; **Significant at 5% level of significance; ***Significant at 1% level of significance; DV refers to dependent variable. Source: ICLARM (2001); Hossain and Humayon (Citation2001); Miao et al. (Citation2001); Katiha (Citation2001); Ismayanti (2001); Lopes et al. (Citation2001); Piumsombun (Citation2001); Hao et al. (Citation2001). 1. Hatch and Chen (Citation1997) provided a review of the application of the production function analysis in aquaculture. 2. For ease of notation, no subscript or superscript for household was used in equations 1 to 6. 3. Usually six to seven carp species are stocked in the ponds at a rate of 5,000 to 10,000/ha with an expectation of producing 2–3 tonnes/ha (Wahab et al., 2001). 4. The CFC is regarded as a standard yield maximizing practice of carp culture. The technology, which was developed by the Central Inland Research Institute (CIFRI), Barrackpore received overwhelming response and tremendous boost (Upare, Citation1999). 5. This was studied and designed by the Central Institute of Freshwater Aquaculture (CIFA) (Saha and Paul, Citation2000). 6. The fish/shrimp pond contributes about 30–70% to the total income of the household although the proportion of pond area is smaller than the land area for agriculture (Luu, 1999; FAO, 2000). In most cases, fish is produced primarily for household consumption; the surplus is sold. 7. Estimated production of carp in fish pen was only 80 tonnes during 1993. It substantially increased to 18,945 tonnes in 2001. 8. In Bangladesh and in several countries in the region, fishponds are often excavated to get soil for constructing houses and/or raising the level of homestead above flood-level and have multiple uses (i.e., bathing, washing dishes and cloths, fish farming, etc.) (Currie, Citation2000; ICLARM, 2001; Alam, 2005). 9. Polyculture of Indian major carps or of Indian and exotic carps together can be classified into (a) low-input or fertilizer-based system (extensive/semi-intensive); (b) medium-input or fertilizer- and feed-based system (semi-intensive); (c) high-input or intensive feed and aeration-based system; (d) Sewage-fed water-based system; and (e) aquatic-weed-based system (Katiha et al., 2005). 10. Regional dummies have captured some of the effects of price variables. 11. This paper is based on analysis of data collected from Bangladesh, China, India, Indonesia, Thailand, and Vietnam. Therefore, the conclusions drawn in this and other sections are applicable for these countries only, not for other countries and territories such as Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan.