Planning for
Sustainable
Aquaculture
Tilapia Farming in the United States, China and Honduras
Marcella Bondie & Anna Wolf
February 3, 2013
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
1.0 Introduction
In 2006, an international group of scientists, ecologists, and economists concluded “29% of all
fished species had collapsed” due to overfishing, and that this collapse will ultimately lead to the
collapse of many other species (Eilperin, 2006). Although others in the scientific community disagreed
with this finding, and despite continuing unsustainable subsidies for commercial fisheries, there has
been a significant global shift from “capture fishing” to aquaculture operations (Eilperin, 2006).
According to the 2012 report on the State of World Aquaculture, put forth by the Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), aquaculture production has increased from 47.3
millions of tons in 2006 to 63.6 millions of tons in 2011, whereas capture production has remained
constant from 2006-2011, at around 90.4 millions of tons (FAO, 2012). As aquaculture methods and
practices are further improved and applied, they can help reduce pressure on wild fish populations.
However, aquaculture can also create new farmed-food production problems.
This paper compares global aquaculture practices and policies, reviews sustainable aquaculture
certification programs, and suggests planning and policy mechanisms to support sustainable
aquaculture. The following section describes the general practices and impacts resulting from
aquaculture production of the tilapia fish. Because aquaculture practices vary by species, tilapia was
chosen as the focus of this paper, given the species’ widespread popularity in the global fish market.
Subsequently, aquaculture policies and practices for the United States, China and Honduras are
compared; these three nations represent prominent producers or consumers of tilapia.
2.0 Aquaculture Practices and Impacts
There are numerous aquaculture methods currently in use. This section will explain common
types of aquaculture systems and explore the resulting environmental, economic, and social impacts.
Page 2
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
2.1 Aquaculture Systems
Aquaculture refers to the controlled farming of aquatic organisms. Traditional aquaculture
operations are generally classified as extensive, semi-intensive, or intensive. The differences between
the classifications lie mainly in the species stocking density and amount of feed applied to the system.
Extensive cultures are characterized by production that uses the natural food web that exists
in the pond, lake, or reservoir (fishcount.org.uk, 2012). Extensive operations will occasionally
incorporate nutrient inputs from inorganic fertilizer or organic manure (ibid).
Semi-intensive operations also rely heavily on the surrounding ecosystem’s natural food web to
obtain nutrients, but fish are given supplementary feed to enable higher stocking densities and faster
growth (fishcount.org.uk, 2012). Semi-intensive operations are sometimes paired with other
agricultural systems, such as a poultry farm, rice paddy, or other plant farming. Semi-intensive
operations may also exist as a pond that is integrated with an industrial farm; the aquaculture operation
uses the farm’s runoff as nutrients for the fish (ibid).
Intensive operations rely almost entirely on manufactured feed to provide the fish with
necessary nutrients, as the farms are too crowded to be supported by the local ecosystem
(fishcount.org.uk, 2012). Most intensive aquaculture operations take place in large net pens or cages, or
in monoculture pond systems (ibid).
More advanced aquaculture technology includes Recirculating Aquaculture Systems (RAS) and
aquaponics. RAS reuse the farm’s water after it has been mechanically and/or biologically filtered
(Martins et al, 2011). According to Martins et al., research has suggested that recirculating the water
may lead to bioaccumulation of hormones released by stressed fish, although they did not find
conclusive evidence that this negatively impacts fish welfare (2011).
Aquaponics systems do not require much additional application of feed, but stocking densities
are generally higher than those in extensive and semi-intensive systems (GrowingPower, 2012).
Page 3
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
Aquaponics pairs hydroponic vegetable farming (e.g., micro greens) with fish farming (GrowingPower,
2012): as water moves from the fish tank into the hydroponics bed, the vegetation uses the fish waste as
a source of nutrients; the cleaned water is then returned to the fish tank (ibid). Both RAS and
aquaponics attempt to create a closed loop, zero-waste system.
It is important to distinguish between artisanal aquaculture that is produced for local
consumption, and industrial aquaculture that is intended for international trade and subject to the
regulations of the receiving market. There are also fundamental differences in aquaculture in developed
and developing countries, as developed countries generally use “capital intensive and relatively
concentrated” methods and produce mainly finfish and mollusks, while developing countries generally
use “small scale and extensive” methods and produce mainly carp, tilapia and shrimp (Organisation for
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2010). As we will discuss, these differences in
aquaculture operation, scale, and culture result in varying environmental, social and economic impacts.
2.2 Aquaculture Impacts
In this paper, the sustainability of aquaculture practices is evaluated using the “triple-bottom
line” approach, which requires assessment of impacts on environmental, economic and societal
systems. Fish are crucial components of their environment, and it is therefore equally crucial for
humans involved in the production of fish to understand and respect these systems.
2.2.1 Environmental Impacts
Aquaculture shares some of the environmental concerns that accompany other traditional
terrestrial farming practices. In general, small farms have potential to be highly sustainable, while larger
farms are more likely to create adverse impacts such as high use of fossil fuels, additives and
medicaments; degraded water quality and habitat destruction; and fish disease (Grigorakis, K., & Rigos,
G. 2011).
Page 4
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
Fossil fuel is used to manufacture fish feed and transport fish to market (Li et al., 2007). When
semi-intensive and intensive aquaculture systems are used, the fish require large amounts of
manufactured feed. The fish feed may be made of corn, soy, or wild caught fish (Rosenthal, 2011). The
use of small aquatic species as fishmeal contributes to the ongoing overfishing of the seas. However,
because tilapia can survive on a vegetarian diet, tilapia aquaculture does not significantly contribute to
overfishing issues (Rosenthal, 2010).
Water quality can be degraded through the use of automated feed systems that place excess
amounts of nutrient into the farm (Grigorakis, 2011). Crowded farms also create high levels of fish
waste, which can overflow into adjacent bodies of water and create dead zones caused by the excess
nitrogen and phosphorous (Rosenthal, 2010).
Biodiversity is threatened when non-native species are used by the aquaculture farm. Tilapia,
which are native to Africa, are omnivorous and extremely adaptive (Rosenthal, 2010). They have a high
potential to out-compete native species. There are a number of documented instances in which pondfarmed tilapia escaped the farm and destroyed the structure of the surrounding aquatic ecosystem.
Farms can attempt to control fish populations through the installation of well-designed cages (FAO,
2012), choosing native species, or hydrologically isolating the farm.
Biodiversity can also be threatened by diseased farms, when escaped fish infect the surrounding
ecosystem (Grigorakis, 2011). Disease is a common aquaculture problem, due to the crowded conditions
of tilapia farms. Much like the corn blight incident in the American Midwest in the 1970s, disease
spreads rapidly in a concentrated monoculture system. Aquaculture operations can prevent disease by
reducing the stocking density or by using a filtration method. Unfortunately, to keep up with the
increasing global demand for fish, many farms have resorted to the liberal application of antibiotics
(Walsh, 2011).
Finally, the construction of aquaculture operations can lead to habitat destruction, as wetland
Page 5
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
or other sensitive aquatic areas are converted to fishponds. Documented cases of habitat destruction
have occurred in Central America and Asia (International Resource Group, 2009; Walsh, 2011).
Belton et al. suggest that extensive and semi-intensive cultures are the least fuel-intensive and
have the lowest risk for environmental degradation, because fish waste is either able to assimilate into
the ecosystem or is reused as nutrients for other livestock or vegetables (2009). Alternatively, closedloop systems such as RAS and aquaponics circumvent many environmental problems by eliminating
farm pollution discharges, but the initial capital investment is large, and so they may not be feasible for
producers in developing countries (Jenner, 2010).
2.2.2 Social Impacts
Aquaculture provides both social benefits and threats concerning public health and worker
conditions. Aquaculture provides a source of relatively cheap protein, important to low-income
individuals in both developing and developed nations (Dey & Ahmed, 2005; Baughman, 2011). In
developing Asian countries, urban aquaculture has been documented to fill an important domestic food
security role, as the short marketing chain and lower transportation cost results in a reliable, relatively
inexpensive supply of fresh food (Bon, Parrot, & Moustier, 2010).
Furthermore, worker conditions in aquaculture firms appear to be comparable to or somewhat
better than local standards, and women can be empowered through employment or informal homebased farms (Stanley, 2002). When cities sprawl towards farming areas, agriculture supplements the
cities’ limited industrial and service jobs, and small-scale farming shifts from subsistence to capitalistic
operations (Bon, Parrot, & Moustier, 2010). Urban agriculture can also create market-supported
landscape and open space (i.e., a public good) and a place of social inclusion (Bon, Parrot, & Moustier,
2010), although this is less true for RAS and aquaponics systems.
However, research suggests that farmed tilapia have less nutritional benefit than other types of
fish, particularly concerning omega-3 fatty acids (Rosenthal, 2011). Because intensively-farmed tilapia
Page 6
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
are fed manufactured feed, rather than their more nutrient-rich natural diet, they have lower levels of
omega-3 fatty acids (Rosenthal, 2011). More importantly, food contamination is a documented problem
(Walsh, 2011). Therefore, a number of national food safety legislation and international agreements
have been created for aquaculture industry. As the OECD (2010) stated, “Aquaculture destined for trade
is different as it is subject to stringent sanitary and hygiene rules to be able to enter those markets.”
Finally, the mental health implications should be considered for aquaculture workers. Some of
the health effects of working in an abattoir include depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, an
increase in domestic violence, an increase in drug and alcohol abuse, social withdrawal, desensitization
to violence and other crimes (Williams, 2011). Though much of the literature on the psychological
effects of working in abattoir refers to those housing pigs, cattle, and poultry fish are slaughtered in
mass quantity, with some factories paying workers based on how many fish he or she kill and process in
a certain time frame (Einhorn, 2010). Artisanal farms are not typically prone to these types of mental
health effects, due to more ethical kill methods, and thus less human exposure to animal suffering
and/or pain (fishcount.org.uk, 2011).
2.2.3 Economic Impacts
When assessing the economic impact of aquaculture, it is important to separate regional
economic growth from national growth trends. Industry officials contend that aquaculture allows for the
utilization of unemployed labor and land, with multiplier effects on development, while critics argue
that it results in few permanent jobs, disproportionate land and income distribution, environmental
degradation, and displacement of the traditional activities performed by artisanal families (Stanley,
2002).
Stanley (2002) presents regional economic indicators as a series of linkages, based on economic
base theory, to determine whether the export industry promotes a “growth pole” resulting in multipliers
that create additional economic activity and employment in other geographic areas, or “enclave
Page 7
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
development” that does not create these multipliers and retains little revenue in the area. A growth
pole industry will use large amounts of local inputs and processing, pay substantial local and national
taxes, distribute proportionate compensation to high- and low-skilled workers, have mostly local
shareholders, reinvest profits in mostly local areas, provide transferable skills training, and undertake
corporate responsibility actions that assist local community development efforts. In Stanley’s findings
for one region of Honduras, the shrimp aquaculture industry typified an enclave development pattern.
This methodology could be used to analyze the tilapia aquaculture industry in other producer regions.
Finally, fish farms, because of farm siting practices and densely stocked systems, are particularly
susceptible to economic loss due to disasters. China has suffered major production losses as a result of
natural disasters, disease outbreaks, and pollution (FAO, 2012). In Honduras, one study reported the
loss of all of broodstock 1 due to a natural disaster, forcing the farmer to sell the farm (Martinez et al
2005). In addition to natural disasters, such as extreme storms, droughts, tsunamis, and landslides,
farms are also extremely sensitive to human- caused disasters, especially oil and chemical spills.
In summary, aquaculture often results in some level of environmental degradation, although
both the technologically advanced closed-loop systems and the traditional extensive systems (e.g., rice
paddy-fish system) have lesser environmental impacts. While aquaculture provides important social
benefits such as food security, potential adverse effects include food contamination and mental health
issues. Aquaculture can also be used as a strategy to reduce poverty and diversify household economies,
but it is unclear whether international aquaculture firms provide true economic growth in the regions
where farms are located. The following section will provide a more detailed examination of aquaculture
in the United States, Honduras and China.
1
Broodstock refer to fish used for breeding purposes.
Page 8
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
2.3 Regional Tilapia Aquaculture Practices and Policies
The specific aquaculture practices of a country have implications for policy-making, regulation,
planning, and sustainability assessment. This paper focuses on the United States, China, and Honduras,
which were chosen due to their importance to international aquaculture trade and established
involvement in the aquaculture industry. Table 1 summarizes China’s and Honduras’s export patterns to
the United States. China has been the leading exporter of fish since 2002 (FAO, 2012), and is responsible
for the majority of the increase in global fish consumption, due in part to its increasingly widespread use
of aquaculture systems (FAO, 2012). In 2011, Honduras surpassed Ecuador as the largest supplier of
fresh tilapia to the United States (FAO GlobeFish, 2012). The United States is the largest importer of
tilapia outside of Asia (FAO, 2012), and is arguably driving the increasing international aquaculture trade
market. American domestic production supplies approximately 16% of the U.S. market for tilapia; the
remaining 84% is imported.
Table 1. U.S. Tilapia Imports, Volume by Selected Sources (1,000 Pounds)
Total U.S. Imports
% of Fresh
% of Frozen
China
N/A*
42%
2000
89,202
Honduras
14%
N/A
China
N/A
65%
2011
425,168
Honduras
39%
N/A
*N/A refers to negligible data
Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. 11/13/2012
% of Total
33%
3%
75%
4%
As of 2012, tilapia are approximately 11% of the freshwater fish traded internationally, and have
a high market value (FAO, 2012). In the 1990s, tilapia filled the growing demand for “mild whitefish”
(Monterey Bay Aquarium, 2009-20011, pp. 20-25). Between 1995 and 2010, the growth in tilapia
production and consumption was dramatic, and the species quickly secured a spot among the top five
most popular seafood species (Monterey Bay Aquarium, 2009-2011).
In addition to their economic value, tilapia are a popular choice for aquaculture because of their
Page 9
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
adaptability to farm environments. The species tolerates concentrated farming operations, thrives on a
vegetarian diet (Rosenthal, 2011), and grows quickly, making it easy to raise and an economically viable
crop for various socioeconomic groups. They are native to Africa and do very well in tropical climates,
and many of the most prolific farms are found in Asia and South America FAO, 2012). However, tilapia
are also farmed, with increasing prevalence, in the United States.
2.3.1 United States
American aquaculture operations range in size and type, from large-scale federally mandated
hatcheries required to mitigate the effects of dam projects (NOAA, 1998), to small-scale operations in
urban centers. While not all U.S. farms are small-scale, most operations occur in closed environments
due to the climate requirements for tilapia. Though pond aquaculture systems can be used in the
southwest United States, much of the country’s domestic production comes from RAS and aquaponics
(Fitzsimmons, 2000). The indoor production of tilapia in unfavorable climates may reflect the relative
availability of capital intensive technology, the highly urbanized national landscape, and an American
consumer preference for mild fish.
The United States is a leader in aquaculture technology advancement. Recently, innovative
urban aquaculture projects have been developed as a means to combat social problems such as food
deserts and unemployment. According to Martin Schreibman, an aquaculture farmer in Brooklyn, New
York, “[urban aquaculture] is the future,” and will continue to grow as consumers become more aware
of the unsustainable practices of large-scale wild catch and aquaculture operations (Baughman, 2011).
Schreibman utilizes an aquaponics system to support the locavore movement in his neighborhood and,
though admitting that these systems are sometimes prohibitively expensive, suggests that increasing
their presence in the local food market will make systems more economically feasible (Baughman,
2011). In another example, the Urban Food Lab of Philadelphia transformed an abandoned storefront
into an experimental urban aquaculture facility. The community’s residents are primarily South and
Page 10
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
Central American, and they “crave fresh tilapia” but only have access to frozen fish (Schaefer, 2012).
This operation not only makes use of previously abandoned space, but educates and encourages
involvement from community members, supports the local food economy and culture, and encourages
transparency in the food production and distribution process.
American aquaculture operations are supported and controlled by a number of environmental
and food policies and regulations. The U.S. National Aquaculture Development Act of 1980 created a
national aquaculture policy, declaring, “Congress declares that aquaculture has the potential for
reducing the United States trade deficit in fisheries products, for augmenting existing commercial and
recreational fisheries and for producing other renewable resources, thereby assisting the United States
in meeting its future food needs and contributing to the solution of world resource problems. It is,
therefore, in the national interest, and it is the national policy, to encourage the development of
aquaculture in the United States.” As stated, the emphasis is on the trade deficit, resource use, and food
security. However, as shown by the current trade balance, these goals have not yet been met.
Numerous international agreements and federal and state regulations control the American
aquaculture industry. Access to land and water resources are mainly obtained through state and local
procedures, with the exception of federal lands. Aquaculture facilities are subject to environmental and
other requirements of the Clean Water Act (CWA); the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service; the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); and the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) (U.S. EPA, 2006), and other associated regulations. The United States Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) strongly regulates environmental discharges such as aquaculture effluent. In 2004, EPA
issued standards for wastewater discharges from concentrated aquatic animal production facilities,
defined as 100,000 pounds or more of aquatic animals per year Concentrated aquatic animal production
point source category, 2012). Effluent limitation guidelines, or ELGs, are individually issued to specific
facilities, and “require management practices and record-keeping activities, rather than numerical
Page 11
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
limits” (U.S. EPA, 2006, p. 2-2). Additional limits may be set by the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit program or other regulations. Although the Marine Protection
Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (Ocean Dumping Act) bans municipal waste, a permit is not
required for dumping fish waste “except when waste would be deposited into harbors or other
protected coastal waters, or where the EPA finds a potential danger to human health, the environment,
or ecological systems” (FAO, 2006). This appears to be an important oversight of the regulations,
especially given the high nutrient load, and possibly additive and medicatements, found in fish waste.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible for regulating transport, inspection,
animal feed and drugs, and other food safety issues for aquaculture fish products, primarily under the
Federal Food Drug & Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) and Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA) (FAO, 2006).
The FDA’s requirements apply to imported fish product, and therefore all producer nations must comply
with these regulations. The FDA requires seafood processors to implement a Hazard Analysis Critical
Control Point (HACCP) plan that identifies specific hazards for each fish species and process (FAO, 2006).
The FDA is also responsible for the regulations of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). It is currently
reviewing a proposal to genetically engineer salmon to shorten maturation time, against the concerns of
environmental groups that the GMO fish could escape aquaculture facilities and eventually out-compete
wild fish (Walsh, 2011).
The U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Aquaculture Policy of 1998
identified several gaps hindering the sustainable development of the U.S. aquaculture industry,
including the need for national environmental standards and regulation, advancements in open ocean
and urban aquaculture technology, management tools for natural resource user conflicts, and a survey
of suitable aquaculture areas. NOAA indicated that U.S. aquaculture development has also been stunted
by a lack of investment capital (1998). While progress has been made in some areas, particularly
technology development and the creation of specific environmental standards, the remaining
Page 12
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
recommendations remain largely unimplemented.
2.3.2 China
Unlike the United States, which mainly imports fish product despite using advanced aquaculture
technology, China is the largest global producer of fish product but lacks the aquaculture technology
advancements and skills found in other leading producer countries (Li et al, 2011). This is, in part, due to
the high investment that comes with the adoption of new technology. It may also stem from poor
aquaculture planning on a local, municipal, and state level, as well as directly relating to the ratio of
small farms to large farms. Small farms are less likely to have the capital to invest in new technology.
Thus, they do not have access to genetic improvement technology, high quality feed (resulting in the
increased application of antibiotics and fertilizers), and new, more environmentally sound vaccines and
drugs to apply to systems in which disease might prove problematic (Li et al, 2011). This is especially
problematic because over 80% of the aquaculture systems are open-water (Li et al, 2011), suggesting
that these low-quality feeds are prone to leach into surrounding ecosystems. These issues are selfperpetuating: without access to genetic improvement technology, these systems may have to apply
unsafe chemicals to the farms to prevent disease outbreaks, leading to lower products values, and
again, less access to new technology.
In addition to the environmental, social, and economic impacts that stem from lack of access to
new technology, there are number of other problems that accompany China’s position at the top of the
aquaculture production food chain. Many Chinese aquaculture systems are intensive, relying on the
heavy application of manufactured feed and a high stocking density. Though tilapia can survive in
crowded environments, disease spreads quickly and aggressively in these conditions, requiring “heavy
application of antibiotics to prevent potential devastating disease outbreaks (Rosenthal, 2011). For
example, Chinese farmed fish exports periodically show evidence of the banned potential carcinogen
Page 13
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
malachite green, an antifungal agent (Walsh, 2011). These impacts have led to the decision of
some American distributors, namely Costco, to only purchase non-Chinese tilapia, and others require
third-party certification of the fish in order to ensure adequate food quality.
Other unsustainable aquaculture practices have come to light. According to one American
aquaculture company, admittedly one in competition with Chinese aquaculture operations, there have
been cases of rural Chinese farmers cutting costs by withholding manufactured feed until tilapia reach
maturity (Einhorn, 2010). These farmers have purportedly thrown manure into the pond cultures when
the fish were young, allowing fish to feed from the algal bloom (or eutrophication) that results from the
excess nitrogen and phosphorous (Einhorn, 2010). The president of the American aquaculture company
has spoken out about these unfair advantages, due to the fact that his company cannot participate in
these cost-cutting tactics while following international certification standards (Einhorn, 2010).
However, a number of small-scale aquaculture operations have been successful in China,
especially systems which integrates fish ponds with rice paddies (FAO, 2012). The fish-paddy system
covers about 1.3 million hectares of rice fields, producing 1.2 million tons of fish in 2010 (FAO, 2012).
Furthermore, there may be signs of improved food safety in response to more stringent internal
standards. According to a study performed by a Dutch company promoting investment in Chinese
aquaculture, the Chinese government has focused its attentions on the following issues:
•
Educating rural farmers on food safety and the appropriate use of antibiotics and chemicals in
fisheries; in some cases, local governments have held educational sessions for those in the region
(NBSO, 2010).
•
Building a traceability system to increase accountability and increase the transparency between
producers and suppliers; products are given lot numbers, which can be traced back to specific
farms, and the supply chain for many aquaculture operations has changed
from farmers to brokers to processors to farmers to processors, encouraging accountability of
Page 14
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
product (NBSO, 2010).
•
Improved testing and monitoring for food safety (NBSO, 2010).
Given China’s strong economic interest in aquaculture, it is unsurprising that it is a leader in
supportive aquaculture policy. China’s Fisheries Law of 2000 (amended 2004) requires a national policy
of simultaneously developing capture fishing and aquaculture industries. The Bureau of Fisheries is the
central government body responsible for overseeing fisheries and aquaculture, as directed by the
Fisheries Law and associated regulations (FAO, 2004). The Sea Area Use Management Law of 2002
provides for the creation of Marine Functional Zonation Schemes to define uses of sea areas, including
aquaculture.
Access to land and water, all of which are State-owned, is granted under the Land
Administration Law of 1997 and Water Law of 1988 (amended 2002), as administered by the Ministry of
Land and Natural Resources and the Ministry of Water Resources, respectively (FAO, 2004). The
Regulation for the Implementation of the Fisheries Law requires State and collectively-owned units to
apply to the county-level people’s government for a license to perform aquaculture in state owned
water bodies and tidal flats; water rights conflicts between counties are resolved through consultation
or the next highest level of government (FAO, 2004). Thirty-year “peasant contracts” can be issued to
individual farmers for specific land parcels, and withdrawal permits are issued for water resources.
However, natural spawning, breeding and feeding grounds and migration passages of aquatic animals
and plants may not be used for aquaculture.
Chinese aquaculture is regulated under the Environmental Protection Law of 1989, the Law on
the Prevention and Control of Water Pollution of 1984 (amended 2008), the Marine Environment
Protection Law of 1982 (amended 1999), and the Environmental Impact Assessment Law of 2002, and
the associated regulations (FAO, 2004). The Water Quality Standards for Fisheries (1989) provide
numerical standards for water pollution in fishing areas. Environmental standards may also be set by the
Page 15
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities; environmental monitoring is performed by the State
Oceanic Administration (SOA) and State Environmental Protection Authority (SEPA). The Bureau of
Animal Production and Health, under the Ministry of Agriculture, and local government bodies
implement laws to control animal disease, feed and drugs (FAO, 2004). The Department of Public Health
administers the Food Hygiene Law of 1995 and associated regulations (FAO, 2004). However, as we have
seen, implementation and compliance with regulations can be weak, particularly when aquaculture
operations are small-scale and decentralized.
2.3.3 Honduras
The evolution of aquaculture in Honduras is rather different from both the United States and
China. In the 1960s and 1970s, Honduran aquaculture farms were developed as a cheap domestic
protein source meant to encourage food security (Fitzsimmons, 2000). Farms often formed as a cluster
of communities, such as the example of the Olancho region. Olancho initially consisted of individual
subsistence farmers in regions that were geographically amenable to tilapia production (Martinez et al,
2004). Olancho became a cluster of small-scale semi-intensive and intensive farms producing for the
domestic market. The community eventually formed something akin to a cooperative, in which some
farmers were in charge of raising the fingerlings and broodstock, while others sold their farms to start a
local restaurant, supporting the remaining farms in the region. The success of this cluster community
enabled a dissemination of technical information, as regional and international non-governmental
organizations and universities began provided research and development support for Honduran
aquaculture (Martinez et al, pp. 287-288).
In addition to economic benefits, the Honduran cluster farm approach provides other
community resilience benefits. Despite the devastation that many Honduran fish operations
experienced after Hurricane Mitch in 1998, national production surpassed pre-hurricane levels by 2000
(Fitzsimmons, 2000), due in large part to the cluster communities and cooperatives that share costs and
Page 16
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
allow for localized technology transfers (Martinez et al, 2004). As climate change science predicts
increased extreme storm events in the future, this type of planning will be an important adaptation
strategy.
Honduras is also the home of first tilapia farm to attain a third-party certification of sustainable
practices through the international Aquaculture Stewardship Council (SeafoodSource, 2010). This
vertically-integrated farm, Aquafinca, is owned by an American fisheries company whose mission is to
present business as an “effective long-term goal for healthy development” (Regal Springs, 2003-2012).
The farm is internationally recognized for its clean, large-scale cage-raised tilapia production methods
and ethical employee management (Chuck, 2008). The farm’s production manager stated, “We try to do
basically everything to make [the thousands of employees] feel like they are partners not workers.
Everybody is on bonus system [sic]; everyone can basically gain more from the company’s success, so
everybody feels like it’s their project” (Chuck, 2008). The firm states it emits zero net waste to the lake
where the fish are farmed (Chuck, 2008), and they use all parts of the fish for various products (Regal
Springs, 2003-2012).
Honduran aquaculture operations are affected by a number of policies and laws. The General
Environmental Law of 1993 created the Secretariat of Natural Resources and Environment (SERNA), an
Environmental Prosecutors Office, and established the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process
(Cordero & Carabaguías, 2004). Other relevant laws include the Water Law of 1927, the Health Code,
and the Potable Water and Sanitation Sector Framework Law (Cordero & Carabaguías, 2004)
However, a 2004 report to the United States Agency for International Development (USAID)
characterized the General Environmental Law as lacking implementation mechanisms, resulting in weak
compliance (2004). Similarly, SERNA, which is charged with developing and implementing environmental
policies performed a self-evaluation in 2007 and identified several institutional weaknesses, including
the omission of wetlands from the Honduran National Environmental Policy, scarce federal funding for
Page 17
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
conservation, and the lack of a Honduran university-level program in limnology, freshwater ecology and
marine biology (International Resource Group, 2009). Furthermore, SERNA’s Directorate of
Environmental Quality (DECA) lacks the resources to effectively monitor the implementation of ongoing
environmental mitigation activities, and focuses instead on reviewing EIAs of proposed projects.
Likewise, local governments, which were required by the Municipality Law of 1990 to take a larger role
in protecting and enhancing their natural resources, lack the necessary technical and financial resources.
A lack of governmental coordination is apparent in the structuring of agency responsibilities.
The Honduras Secretary of Agriculture and Livestock (SAG) contains the Directorate General of Fisheries
and Aquaculture (DIGEPESCA) (Bustillo Pon, 2001). However, mangroves are administered by the
Secretariat of Tourism, which has historically authorized the conversion of mangroves for shrimp
aquaculture (International Resource Group, 2009). The National Institute of Conservation and Forests,
Protected Areas and Wildlife Development (ICF) has authority over marine protected areas, although it
is primarily a forestry organization without special expertise in marine ecology (International Resource
Group, 2009).
Other challenges concern the distribution of land. Land use is governed by the Land Zoning Act
and the General Planning and Human Settlement Act for Sustainable Development, which is intended to
incorporate environmental concerns into land use decision making (Cordero & Carabaguías, 2004). The
2004 report to USAID indicates that there are ongoing land rights challenges from the indigenous
peoples and campesinos movements (2004).
2.4 Sustainability Analysis
Each of the three country’s aquaculture practices and policies have been evaluated through a
high-level Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) analysis. As shown in Figure 1, the
strengths of the tilapia aquaculture in the U.S. include high-technology systems, particularly in closedloop and urban aquaculture. U.S. aquaculture is also characterized by high food safety and limited
Page 18
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
environmental pollution, due in large part to comprehensive regulations and strong enforcement. The
industry also benefits from strong domestic food distribution networks and immediate proximity to one
of the world’s largest seafood markets. Finally, the U.S. has a growing niche food culture that is willing to
pay premium for locally-produced and sustainably farmed food.
However, as a developed nation with strong labor regulations, the U.S. has high labor costs in
comparison to developing nations. Furthermore, its innovative technology has been deployed mainly in
experimental small-scale domestic operations. The U.S.’ major trade deficit in the global fish market
creates low food security, and seafood prices are expected to be highly influenced by international
transportation costs. Furthermore, despite national policies supporting aquaculture, federal and state
agencies have followed recommendations to develop the domestic aquaculture industry, such as a
survey of suitable aquaculture sites and creation and resource conflict tools. Future threats include the
increasing use of energy-intensive soy and corn based fish feed, and the lower nutritional benefits
offered by farmed fish in comparison to wild-caught fish.
Though the U.S. domestic industry is underdeveloped, there are potential opportunities for
American aquaculture. The U.S. could invest in large-scale closed-loop systems, perhaps by taking
advantage of unutilized manufacturing sites and other brownfields.
Finally, the U.S., as a major consumer, has a unique ability to incentivize its suppliers to comply
with standards and sustainability certification programs. This position becomes especially relevant
within vertically integrated systems. 2 An increasing number of aquaculture companies are
headquartered in the United States and operate farms in developing nations, allowing greater control
2
Vertical integration refers to a business model in which one firm owns or controls all steps in the production and
distribution of a good or service. The primary benefit of this management style is that the owner has greater
control over its inputs and outputs (The Economist, Idea, 2009).
Page 19
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
over the production and distribution process. Many of the industrial scale aquaculture operations in
Honduras are owned by U.S. companies, and though not as prevalent within the Chinese aquaculture
market, some U.S. controlled operations exist (Einhorn, 2010).
Figure 1. SWOT Analysis, Tilapia Aquaculture in the U.S.
Figure 2 presents a SWOT analysis for the aquaculture industry in China. Strengths include low
labor costs, in comparison to developed nations, and an established industry that draws on China’s
historical fishing culture. As the world leader in fish production, China enjoys high food security and
strong food distribution networks. Aquaculture provides about one-third of China’s animal protein
supply, and has been especially effective in producing a source of income for rural farmers (Einhorn,
2010).
China’s policy and planning has been extremely supportive of the domestic aquaculture
industry. China has a balanced approach that explicitly forbids siting aquaculture farms in areas that will
negatively impact capture fisheries operations. Furthermore, because China’s land and water resources
are state-owned, user conflicts might be more easily minimized through central planning than they
might be in either the U.S. or Honduras.
Unfortunately, although China has policies and laws regarding environmental protection and
food safety, there have been ongoing problems with compliance. This may be due to the high economic
Page 20
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
demand for tilapia, which can outpace the ability of farmers to responsibly manage their operations.
Finally, given the distance to the United States, China has relatively high transportation costs to that
market. Of course, China also has much lower transportation costs to Asian markets.
Threats to China’s aquaculture industry include the environmental impact of China’s intensive
aquaculture farms. Because of limited environmental and animal health compliance, these farms can
suffer from disease outbreaks, and poorly sited and operated farms can introduce invasive species and
cause environmental degradation. Poorly sited farms are also susceptible to natural and man-made
disasters.
Opportunities for Chinese aquaculture primarily lie in the growing demand for seafood; China is
poised to maintain its dominant position in global fish trade. China can more sustainably meet demand
by taking advantage of technology transfer, such as closed-loop systems. If this technology became
better developed and less expensive, China could prevent many of its environmental degradation issues.
Furthermore, China could take advantage of the new certification schemes to move current operations
towards more sustainable methods. China can use multi-scale operations, from the small-scale fishpaddy to the vertically integrated firm, to include more people in its industry.
Figure 2. SWOT Analysis, Tilapia Aquaculture in the People's Republic of China
Lastly, Figure 3 presents an analysis of the Honduran aquaculture industry. Honduras’ analysis is
Page 21
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
very similar to China. This is somewhat unsurprising, as they are both developing nations with an
established aquaculture industry. The differences between China and Honduras are largely one of scale,
and result from similar issues with regulatory compliance.
Honduras does differ from China, however, in the relative prominence of large foreign-owned
aquaculture firms. This has important implications for the economic impacts of aquaculture. In an
evaluation of the shrimp aquaculture industry in one region of Honduras, Stanley found that income and
land distribution was skewed in favor of the large foreign firm and high-level foreign workers (2002).
Though the firm did provide benefits to the region and community as well, it was not perceived as
adequate compensation (2002). Stanley predicted that the industry will increasingly have to rely on
imported inputs in response to environmental degradation, disease and natural resource depletion,
which is aggravated by small operators forced to use marginal land such as wetlands.
Figure 3. SWOT Analysis, Tilapia Aquaculture in Honduras
3.0 Sustainability Assessment and Certification
Although a SWOT analysis of national trends can reveal the general sustainability of the
aquaculture industry in a given country, metrics-based assessment is necessary to evaluate specific
aquaculture operations. Therefore, a number of conservation organizations and academic professionals
have been at the forefront of the development of sustainability assessment and certification tools for
Page 22
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
aquaculture production.
3.1 Sustainability Assessment Tools
Life cycle assessment (LCA) and ecological footprint analysis (EF) are two prominent tools used
for assessing and monitoring aquaculture sustainability (Samuel-Fitwi et al. 2012). LCA measures
materials and energy flows in and out of the “life” of a good or service (Theis & Tomkin, 2011). In
aquaculture, LCA examines the incoming processes, such as fish feed, and the out-going flow, such as
pollution emissions and fish fillets. Properly performing an LCA requires the selection of appropriate
“impact categories” and a descriptive link between those categories and aquaculture impacts (SamuelFitwi et al. 2012). Samuel-Fitwi et al. (2012) recommend the following Impact categories:
•
Global warming
•
Acidification
•
Eutrophication
•
Aquatic/terrestrial/human (eco)toxicity
•
Energy use
•
Abiotic/biotic resource use
•
Ozone depletion
However, because the “diversity of culture species, the use of varied functional units, diverse farming
systems, and the influence of farm-level management practices,” influence the outcome of the LCA, this
method has limited use for aquaculture systems (Samuel-Fitwi et al., 2012, p. 187).
In a discussion of a related method, social lifecycle assessments (SLCA), Samuel-Fitwi et al.
suggest that aquaculture primarily supports a “local economy,” indicating the need to evaluate systems
with “regard to social impact, especially at a local level” (2012, p. 188). By combining LCA with SLCA,
one can evaluate the socio-economic impacts of aquaculture production, rather than only the
environmental impacts (Samuel-Fitwi et al., 2012). In general, efforts toward the successful
implementation of SCLA should “focus on the development of impact indicators” looking closely at
Page 23
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
“trade-offs between stakeholders” and the triple-bottom line (Samuel-Fitwi et al., 2012, p. 188).
The second method, EF, compares “the amount of human appropriation with the amount of
global bio-capacity to regenerate each year,” and when applied to aquaculture systems, reveals varying
impacts of different production systems (Samuel-Fitwi et al, 2012, pp. 184-186). For instance, semiintensive systems require much less space for phosphorous assimilation and oxygen production than
intensive systems. However, because EF analysis refers to product-specific land use, it is difficult to
predict levels of impact on ecologically and geographically different areas (Samuel-Fitwi et al., 2012).
Samuel-Fitwi et al. conclude that decision making in aquaculture should first and foremost be
location- and geography-specific, incorporating feedback and social learning processes (2012). They
suggest the concurrent use of multiple assessment methods to obtain a better evaluation of how farms
are performing (Samuel-Fitwi et al., 2012).
3.2 Sustainability Certification Programs
Metrics similar to those discussed above have been incorporated into voluntary sustainability
certification programs for the international aquaculture industry. Unlike fish produced for domestic
consumption in developing countries, where organic or integrated pest management (IPM) certifications
have been administered by local government or “eco-volunteer” organizations (Bon, Parrot, & Moustier,
2010), more formalized methods are needed when fish is produced for export and consumption in
developed countries. In the first case, the physical proximity between the farmer and buyer allows
consumers to exert more control over and have more confidence in food production methods. But when
fish is shipped to another country, this consumer confidence disappears. Proponents and opponents of
aquaculture alike have argued that, “an internationally recognized certification scheme…is urgently
needed to alert consumers to the sustainability (or otherwise) of the farmed fish that they are
eating…only then will it be clear how green is the blue revolution” (The Economist, 2003).
One of the most prominent certification programs is administered by the Aquaculture
Page 24
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
Stewardship Council (ASC). The ASC aquaculture certification program uses independent fish farm
inspections based on species-specific standards to determine whether to award the label “responsibly
farmed” (Rosenthal, 2011). The certification requirements were developed in compliance with Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) guidelines that identify minimum criteria for
credible aquaculture certification programs in the areas of animal health and welfare, food safety,
environmental management, and socioeconomic concerns (Aquaculture Stewardship Council, 2012a;
FAO Technical Guidelines on Aquaculture Certification, 2011).
The ASC certification program provides sustainability indicators for a number of aquaculture
planning, development and operation issues. According to the ASC (2012a), “Planning includes farm
siting; resource use or extraction; and assessment of environmental, social and cumulative impacts.
Development includes construction, habitat alteration and access to public areas by other resource
users. Operation includes effluent discharge, working conditions, use of antibiotics and other chemicals,
as well as feed composition and use.” The ASC certification standard for tilapia aquaculture (2012b)
requires documentation for the following indicators:
•
National and local legal compliance for land and water use (e.g., permits’ lease), taxes, labor laws
and regulations, and water quality impacts permits and regulations
•
Environmental Impact Assessment of farm siting/ expansion
•
Tilapia population is native or was historically established
•
Ongoing water quality sampling for receiving waters and groundwater, with results within
established parameters
•
No wetland conversion
•
Quantity of phosphorous and nitrogen applied to and released from the operation
•
Methods to prevent escape and mating of tilapia in receiving waters
•
No transgenic tilapia culture
•
No killing of predator species
•
Fish Feed Equivalency Ratio: the amount of wild fish used in feed, per quantity of fish produced
•
No use of endangered species in fish meal and fish oil
Page 25
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
•
Use of feed from sustainable manufacturers
•
Ongoing monitoring of energy consumption
•
Fish health management, including mortality rate, therapeutants prescribed by a fish health
professional, and no banned chemical/therapeutants or prophylactic antibiotics
•
No child labor, no workplace discrimination, no abuse of overtime/ workhours, and no forced,
bonded or compulsory labor
•
Health and safety worker training, incident reporting and employer insurance for workplace
accidents; presence of emergency response plan
•
Employee wages meet “basic needs”; employee housing is “clean, sanitary and safe”
•
Employee freedom to associate and bargain collectively
•
No abusive disciplinary actions
•
No restriction of community access to public land or water resources
Additional details concerning the quantification and rationale of the indicators are included in the ASC
standard.
Ben Belton et al. (2009) criticize the ASC certification program’s near-exclusion of socioeconomic
issues. However, though only one of ASC’s seven principles applies to socioeconomic concerns, (“Be
Socially Responsible”), this principle contains one-third of the total sustainability criteria and 18 of the
61 sustainability indicators. Belton et al. (2009) also criticize the ASC program for catering to large-scale
producers, to the exclusion of small-scale farmers. The ASC program is admittedly intended for
internationally traded fish (Aquaculture Stewardship Council, 2012b). However, fish farmers in
developing nations, producing for domestic markets, may not find this type of intensive third-party
certification economically necessary.
The Sustainable Livelihoods Approach, promulgated by the Department of International
Development, is proposed by Belton et al. (2009), as an alternative to the ASC certification program. This
method is a measure of “social resilience,” meaning whether a livelihood “can cope with and recover
from stresses and shocks and maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets, without undermining the
natural resource base” (Belton, Little, & Grady, 2009). Belton et al. (2009) proposes the use of these
Page 26
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
financial indicators for sustainable livelihoods:
•
Land area
•
Product yield
•
Product value
•
Input costs such as feed, labor and equipment
•
Initial construction costs
•
Risk of product loss, as determined by aquaculture method
•
Opportunity cost
•
Diversification of product
•
Market demand
According to this model, more economically sustainable livelihoods will create a higher return
on investment with lower exposure to product loss, fluctuations in market value and demand, and
opportunity cost. However, Belton et al. (2009) acknowledge that this method is prone to
overemphasize the household economy, at the expense of the larger economic impact.
3.3 Towards a Comprehensive Assessment of Aquaculture Sustainability
Based on the review of available sustainability assessment tools, it appears that there are
significant opportunities for improvement. The globalization of the fish trade market has encouraged
fish farms to adopt more environmentally sensitive methods and seek sustainability certifications
(Rosenthal, 2011). However, these sustainability assessment tools do not address in detail how to plan
for sustainable aquaculture. One major weakness of the ASC’s program is that it does not provide full
guidance on how the farm should be integrated into the fabric of the surrounding community and
region. For example, while it requires an EIA for the watershed, it does not require a specific alternative
selection process or state how the findings will be judged.
Therefore, it is clear that ASC’s program would benefit from a more robust incorporation of
social and economic indicators. Currently, ASC’s standard requires only the minimum conditions needed
for a firm to be considered non-exploitive and abusive of its workers. The economic and social analysis
Page 27
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
performed by Stanley (2002) would complement ASC’s biophysical indicators by shedding light on the
regional impacts of the aquaculture farm. This would enable consumers to consider whether the
products meet “fair trade” standards. Specifically, certification standards should consider incorporating
an evaluation of how much of the farm inputs are obtained locally; how much of the farm produce is
processed locally; the amount of local and national taxes are paid by the firm; whether the payroll is
well-distributed among all workers; whether profits are retained by local investors; whether workers
acquire transferable skills; and whether the firm assists in larger community efforts (Stanley, 2002).
The Sustainable Livelihoods Approach championed by Belton et al. (2009), while less suitable for
certification purposes, would be very useful for local planning efforts. Since SLA is geared towards
determining whether aquaculture would be likely to succeed long-term for a small producer, it could be
used successfully to evaluate operations such as the Olancho cluster community. This would help
municipalities and regions determine whether and how to invest in the aquaculture industry.
Finally, though highly involved methods such as LCA and EF are not feasible for a certification
process, they can illuminate the ways in which a full accounting of global food trade can have both
positive and negative environmental, economic and social consequences. In particular, these methods
would provide detailed insight into previously unvalued environmental costs and benefits. Firms may
find the methods useful when seeking ways to increase sustainability and find inefficiencies in the
product chain.
4.0 Planning and Policymaking for Sustainable Aquaculture
The final section of this paper will address the underlying planning and policies that may support
a more sustainable aquaculture industry. One of the primary shortfalls evident in the literature on global
aquaculture production is the “business as usual” approach taken by most large producers, distributors,
and research groups. In fact, many of the reviewed studies (Fitzsimmons, 2000; Food and Agriculture
Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, 2004; Einhorn, 2010; Dey and Ahmed, 2005; Aquaculture
Page 28
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
Stewardship Council, 2012) describe the growing global demand for fish protein and the resulting
unsustainable practices of large scale aquaculture operations, but offer no discussion questioning the
continuation of this large consumption of fish protein. This is particularly egregious in the United States,
where many have relatively cheap and easy access to different types of animal protein. The United
States has maintained its position as the third highest consumer of all animal protein per capita,
preceded only by Luxembourg and Hong Kong (FAO, 2009).
According to an FAO publication on global meat consumption, impoverished young children and
women in developing nations do not consume enough animal-based product, while, unsurprisingly,
people in developed nations consume too much (FAO, 2009). These data are not new, and numerous
global poverty and hunger eradication programs exist, some of which encourage local aquaculture
operations (Fitzsimmons, 2000). However, the overconsumption of animal-based products in developed
nations must be addressed also.
As many studies assert, the United States is the largest Western importer of tilapia, China is the
largest global exporter of tilapia, and both will continue to be so into the future. This suggests that
contemporary food systems are primarily influenced by global market forces and large food distributors,
such as Wal-Mart and Costco. These distributors, though in a position to incentivize aquaculture
producers to practice sustainable methods, merely react to current unsustainable practices, rather than
taking a proactive approach to avoiding unsustainable practices at the start.
To counter this trend of importing unsustainably farmed fish, countries that have the economic
means and the need to increase food security should encourage legislation that enables municipalities
and regional areas to participate in the creation and support of local aquaculture systems. The growth
of small, local aquaculture operations will allow consumers a healthy supply of fish protein and may
reduce the global market share of Chinese aquaculture. This is likely to result in reducing the oftenunavoidable unsustainable practices that stem from large-scale production and export of fish product.
Page 29
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
4.1 Regional Aquaculture Opportunities and Challenges
Regional growth in aquaculture production can be accomplished through several methods,
dependent upon the current constraints on local production. Production can be increased by using
improved technology, more efficiently using current resources, and intensifying inputs (i.e., feed) (Dey &
Ahmed, 2005). However, industry growth may be in conflict with sustainability goals, as increased
production can create environmental degradation and may not be financially feasible for low-income
farmers (Dey & Ahmed, 2005). Furthermore, climate change science predicts major impacts on coastal
areas (United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) & World Trade Organization (WTO), 2009),
which suggests that land-based pond or recirculating systems will be most resilient to future climate
impacts. Therefore, it is recommended that producing regions promote the use of these types of
systems. Through policies supporting public and private investment, the United States can be a leader in
global equity and sustainability by developing and transferring affordable closed-loop systems to
developing producer nations.
Small-scale aquaculture farmers seeking to join the global fish trade face additional challenges.
These small-scale extensive systems, which are the majority of the world’s producers, represent a
significant opportunity to promote economic development through highly environmentally sustainable
aquaculture practices. Supportive policies are needed to help these producers meet stringent
international regulations, trade requirements and certification standards (Dey & Ahmed, 2005).
Domestic or international development organizations assist artisanal producers by clustering small
farms and building co-operative marketing centers, developing suitable finance mechanisms such as
microfinance banks, offering creating extension services that offer technical support, and improving
transportation and storage facilities (OECD, 2010). It is important to remember, however, that the
interests of domestic food security and international trade must be balanced when making policy and
Page 30
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
investment decisions in aquaculture.
4.2 Local Planning for Sustainable Aquaculture
Urban aquaculture can provide several public health, economic, social and
environmental benefits to a community. All these benefits must be considered if the public sector is to
perform a full-cost accounting to determine whether urban land should be developed or farmed. Local
governments and planners should work with community farmers and other stakeholders to plan for
aquaculture systems, by preparing an inventory, land suitability analysis, market analysis, goals,
objectives, action strategies, zoning ordinances, capital improvement programs and a development
review process.
Planning should begin with an inventory of the community. Local community planners
should gather information regarding the current state of aquaculture in the area. The inventory should
include a comprehensive list of farms, their size and culture types, the site locations, the current supply
chain, and the distribution of the farms. Mapping software, such as Geographic Information Systems
(GIS), can be very useful in visually organizing these data to inform future aquaculture planning
ventures.
The results of the inventory can be evaluated by performing a land suitability analysis to
determine which land area is viable for aquaculture systems. The land suitability analysis should be used
to inform the EIA process for specific aquaculture operations. The analysis will be very different when
evaluating indoor closed-loop facilities versus outdoor pond-based systems, for example. A land
suitability analysis should be performed in each case. For outdoor farms ponds or other bodies of
water, the factors influencing land use will be much more varied.
A market analysis should also be performed to identify current and future demand and
supply of aquaculture products in the local and regional market. The analysis should also identify
transportation networks and nodes that will provide for the distribution of products. In addition,
Page 31
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
opportunities for linkages to related business should be assessed.
The community should set sustainable aquaculture goals and objectives using best
practices such as the criteria put forth by the Aquaculture Stewardship Council or similar organization.
Goals and objectives for sustainable aquaculture development should aim to support the social and
economic livelihoods of all stakeholders involved in the process, maintain environmentally sound
practices, and produce a marketable, healthy fish product for local or global consumption. Before
permitting a farm, it should be required to clearly define their primary market and practices. Table 2 is
an example of a list of goals and objectives that might fulfil the four categories: Natural Resources, Land
Use, Economic Base, and Community Facilities.
Table 2. Sample Small-Scale Sustainable Aquaculture Operation Goals and Objectives
Natural Resources
Goal
Objective
Land Use
Goal
Objective
Economic Base
Goal
Objective
Community Facilities
Goal
Objective
To conserve the natural habitat within which the aquaculture system is to
be placed.
Use protective measures between the farm site and any environment it
may come into contact with: for instance, cages have been successful in
preventing tilapia from escaping into foreign pond environments.
To protect sensitive landscapes and promote compact development.
Aquaculture sites should be directed away from wetland areas, and
should ideally be incorporated with other agribusinesses, to minimize fish
effluents and maximize reuse of animal waste.
To support an equitable distribution of income and encourage the growth
of small local businesses.
Encourage clustering communities or cooperatives for farms that might
not otherwise be able to afford high technology costs and production
costs.
To protect the quality of the community water supply.
Regularly test water in the vicinity of aquaculture operations, to ensure no
contamination.
Following the preparation of goals and objectives, action strategies should be devised. These
strategies should provide specific suggestions on the implementation of aquaculture development for
Page 32
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
interested farmers, such as the following.
•
Hold public meetings to discuss the implications of a local aquaculture site
•
Educate interested individuals and empower community members to stay involved and active
throughout the local production process of a community protein source
•
Provide networking events for community farmers to share the realistic successes and
challenges of aquaculture operations
•
Engage networks of interested farmers cluster communities to help decrease start-up costs and
provide a support system for farmers
•
Adopt necessary zoning ordinances to increase success of operation
Municipalities should provide for urban aquaculture in the zoning map and ordinance.
Aquaculture operation should comply with all federal, state, and local zoning ordinances in place.
Municipal ordinances should also be coordinated with international requirements such as the Hazard
Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) process (Fitzsimmons, 2000). However, to continue to support
aquaculture development, zoning overlays can be used to diversify the zoned land use. If there are
multiple farms in fairly close proximity (2-4 miles), overlay zones allowing for food production and
distribution can help maintain the economic livelihoods of the farmers in the region. In urban settings,
zoning ordinances can allow for mixed-use space, and with proper health code law compliance, urban
dwellers can successfully implement aquaculture facilities.
Particular zoning and ordinance concerns include property and resource rights conflicts,
especially in areas where mega-cities sprawl towards the hinterlands and blur the distinction between
“rural” and “urban” (Bon, Parrot, & Moustier, 2010). Odor, health and waste concerns can be addressed
though municipal regulation of animal species and quantity, disease control methods, farm discharges
and cleaning, and water use (Bon, Parrot, & Moustier, 2010). Finally, in urban areas where
environmental emissions are highly regulated, the municipality may require the use of expensive but
low-pollution recirculating systems (Fitzsimmons, 2000).
Page 33
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
The development review process for proposed aquaculture operations should align with the
goals and objectives set by the community, and at a minimum meet the standards set by the ASC
certification program. Table 3 presents a checklist for compliance with zoning codes, and other
regulations.
Table 3. Checklist of Sustainable Aquaculture Issues in a Development Review
1 Does the farm comply with national and state land and water use?
2 Did the farm do a proper land suitability analysis, including EIA?
3 Is the farm sited away from wetland areas?
4 Will methods of feed applied to system cause ecosystem degradation?
Does the farmer cite proper measures he/she will take in keeping fish from escaping the
5
enclosed area (is it situated in a natural body of water)?
6 Is the farmer properly educated on best handling and farming techniques for aquaculture?
7 Has the farm attained the necessary permits for the farm site?
Is the farmer working with community members and other business owners to ensure proper
8
demand and participation in local food economy?
Finally, urban aquaculture can be supported through the municipality’s Capital Improvement
Program (CIP). For example, in more rural settings, CIPs can divert sewer systems and major roads away
from aquaculture operations, minimizing exposure to pollutants and human waste. Schools and other
public institutions could identify funding sources to develop water-recycling infrastructure that would
support the integration of recirculating aquaculture systems with greywater within buildings, or provide
land for educational aquaculture operations. Sustainable aquaculture operations can also be
encouraged by investing in technology research and transfer, providing marketing and local certification
schemes, and financial incentives and grants (Bon, Parrot, & Moustier, 2010). Public-private
partnerships, such as exchanging land for farm produce supplied to state-run facilities, multi-stakeholder
planning, and local urban agriculture zoning, have all been implemented successfully in Latin America
and Africa (Bon, Parrot, & Moustier, 2010). With proper planning and policy, sustainable aquaculture
can be developed in a wide range of rural and urban settings.
Page 34
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
References
Aqua Vita Farms. (2011). Aqua vita farms. Retrieved November, 2012, from:
http://www.aquavitafarms.com/index.php?Option=com_content&view=featured&Itemid=435
Aquaculture Stewardship Council. (2012a). ASC farm certification and accreditation
requirements version 1.0. The Netherlands: Aquaculture Stewardship Council.
Aquaculture Stewardship Council. (2012b). ASC tilapia standard version 1.0. The Netherlands:
Aquaculture Stewardship Council.
Ashley, P. J. (2007). Fish welfare: Current issues in aquaculture. Applied Animal Behaviour
Science, 104(3/4), 199.
Barboza, D. (December 15, 2007). In china, farming fish in toxic waters. The New York Times.
Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/15/world/asia/15fish.html?Pagewanted=all&_r=0
Baughman, Brent. (July 3, 2011). Urban Fish Farming: wave of the future? NPR-All Things
Considered. Accessed December 2012, from http://www.npr.org/2011/07/03/137588931/urban-fishfarming-wave-of-the-future.Belton, B., Little, D., & Grady, K. (2009). Is responsible aquaculture
sustainable aquaculture? WWF and the eco-certification of tilapia. Society and Natural Resources, 22(9),
840-855.
Blue Ridge Aquaculture, I. (2012). Blue ridge aquaculture: The World’s largest sustainable indoor
fisheries. Retrieved November, 2012, from: http://www.blueridgeaquaculture.com/index.cfm.
Bon, H., Parrot, L., & Moustier, P. (2010). Sustainable urban agriculture in developing countries.
A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 30(1), 21-32. Retrieved from
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?Direct=true&db=lhh&AN=20103088047&site=ehost-live;
http://www.edpsciences.org/agro/;
http://search.ebscohost.com.proxy.cc.uic.edu/login.aspx?Direct=true&db=lhh&AN=20103088047&site=
ehost-live
Brander, K. M. (Received for review, March 6, 2007). Global fish production and climate change.
Copenhagen V, Denmark: International Council for the Exploration of the Sea.
Bustillo Pon, J. (2001). Biodiversity assessment: USAID/honduras report. (). San Pedro Sula,
Honduras. Retrieved from:
http://transition.usaid.gov/locations/latin_america_caribbean/environment/docs/ho2002.pdf
Carsten Schulz, e. A. (2012). Sustainability assessment tools to support aquaculture
development. Journal of Cleaner Production, 33, 183.
Chuck. (September 25, 2008). Aquafinca Farms Fish in Honduras. Retrieved December 2012,
from: http://agwired.com/2008/09/25/aquafinca-farms-fish-in-honduras/.
Page 35
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
Concentrated aquatic animal production point source category, 40 CFR 451 (2012). Retrieved
from: http://www.lexisnexis.com.proxy.cc.uic.edu/lnacui2api/api/version1/getdoccui?Lni=56C9-22K0008H-01WS&csi=5154&hl=t&hv=t&hnsd=f&hns=t&hgn=t&oc=00240&perma=true
Cordero, P. M. C., & Carabaguías, L. C. M. (2004). Environmental policy analysis: Report on
honduran environmental laws and their real or potential impact on the intermediate result "improved
management and conservation of critical watershed" and the central america free trade agreement
(CAFTA) related activities. ( No. 2012). Tegucigalpa, Honduras: United States Agency for International
Development. Retrieved from: http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNADE453.pdf
Dey, M. M., & Ahmed, M. (2005). Aquaculture - food and livelihoods for the poor in asia: A brief
overview of the issues. Aquaculture Economics & Management, 9(1-2), 1-10. Doi:
10.1080/13657300591004970
News
Dirksen, K. (2012, June 25, 2012). Internet of food: Urban aquaponics in oakland. City Farmer
The Economist. (March 30, 2009). Vertical Integration. Ideas. Retrieved December 2012 from:
http://www.economist.com/node/13396061.
The Economist. (2003, August 7, 2003). The blue revolution: A new way to feed the world. The
Economist.
Eilperin, J. (2006, November 3, 2006). World’s fish supply running out, researchers warn.
Washington Post
Einhorn, B. (2010, October 21, 2010). From china, the future of fish. Bloombergbusinessweek
Magazine
FAO GlobeFish. (July 2012). Tilapia - July 2012. Retrieved November 2012 from:
http://www.globefish.org/tilapia-july-2012.html.
Fitzsimmons, K. (2000). Future trends of tilapia aquaculture in the Americas. Tilapia aquaculture
in the Americas, 2, 252-264. Retrieved from: http://www.bio-nica.info/biblioteca/fitzsimmonstilapia.pdf
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2004). In Spreij M. (Ed.), National
aquaculture legislation overview. China. National aquaculture legislation overview (NALO) fact sheets.
Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations. Retrieved from:
http://www.fao.org/fishery/legalframework/nalo_china/en
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2006). In King P. (Ed.), National
aquaculture legislation overview. United states of america. National aquaculture legislation overview
(NALO) fact sheets (http://www.fao.org/fishery/legalframework/nalo_usa/en ed.). Rome: Food and
Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, Retrieved from:
http://www.fao.org/fishery/legalframework/nalo_usa/en
Page 36
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, (2009), The State of Food and
Agriculture: Livestock in the Balance, 2009. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations. Retrieved December 23, 2012 from: http://www.fao.org/docrep/012/i0680e/i0680e.pdf
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2011). Technical guidelines on
aquaculture certification. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Retrieved
from: http://www.fao.org/docrep/015/i2296t/i2296t00.htm
Grigorakis, K., & Rigos, G. (2011). Aquaculture effects on environmental and public welfare – the
case of mediterranean mariculture. Chemosphere, 85(6), 899.
Hoque, S., Webb, J. B., & Danylchuk, A. J. (2012). Building integrated aquaculture. ASHRAE
Journal, 54(2), 16.
International Resource Group. (2009). Tropical forestry and biodiversity (FAA 118 and 119)
analyses: USAID-honduras report. United States Agency for International Development. Retrieved from:
http://transition.usaid.gov/locations/latin_america_caribbean/environment/docs/section_118/FAA_11
8-119_Assessment-Honduras-2008.pdf
Jenner, Andrew. (February 24, 2010). Recirculating aquaculture systems: The Future of Fish
Farming? From The Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved December 2012 from:
http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/2010/0224/Recirculating-aquaculture-systems-The-future-offish-farming.
Jory, D. E. (2011). Best aquaculture practices for the tilapia industry: Certification for greater
sustainability. (Presentation). St. Louis, Missouri: Global Aquaculture Alliance.
Li, X., Li, J., Wang, Y., Fu, L., Fu, Y., Li, B., & Jiao, B. (2011). Aquaculture industry in china: Current
state, challenges, and outlook. Reviews in Fisheries Science, 19(3), 187.
Lichtenstein, A. (2011, May 8, 2011). Tilapia, the starter fish. The New York Times
Martinez, P. R., Molnar, J., Trejos, E., Meyer, D., Meyer, S. T., & Tollner, W. (2004). Cluster
membership as a competitive advantage in aquacultural development: Case study of tilapia producers in
olancho, honduras. Aquaculture Economics & Management, 8(5-6), 281.
Martins, Catarina I. M.,Eding, Ep H., & Verreth, J. A. J. (2011). The effect of recirculating
aquaculture systems on the concentrations of heavy metals in culture water and tissues of nile tilapia
oreochromis niloticus. Food Chemistry, 126(3), 1001.
Martins, C. I., Eding, E. H., & Verreth, J. A. (2011). Stressing fish in recirculating aquaculture
systems (RAS): Does stress induced in one group of fish affect the feeding motivation of other fish
sharing the same RAS? Aquaculture Research, 42(9), 1378.
Mcginn, A. P.Blue revolution: The promises and pitfalls of fish farming. World Watch,
March/April 1998-10-19.
Page 37
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
Monterey Bay Aquarium. (2009, 2011). Turning the tide: The state of seafood. ( No. 2nd).
California: Monterey Bay Aquarium.
National Geographic. (April 2007). How to help: Safe seafood. National Geographic. Retrieved
December 2012 from: http://ocean.nationalgeographic.com/ocean/take-action/impact-ofseafood/#/seafood-decision-guide/
Netherlands Business Support Office (NBSO). (Spring 2010). An overview of China's Aquaculture.
Retrieved November 2012 from:
http://www.zakendoeninchina.org/binaries/content/assets/postenweb/c/china/zaken-doen-inchina/import/kansen_en_sectoren/agrofood/rapporten_over_agro_food/an-overview-of-chinasaquaculture.
NOAA's aquaculture policy, (1998). Retrieved from
http://permanent.access.gpo.gov/lps119804/17_noaaaqpolicy.pdf
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2010). Chapter 3.
Globalisation in fisheries and aquaculture. Globalisation in fisheries and aquaculture: Opportunities
and<br />Challenges (pp. 43-55) OECD Publishing. Doi: 10.1787/9789264074927-en
Permit application and special NPDES program requirements, 40 CFR 122.24 (2012). Retrieved
from: http://www.lexisnexis.com.proxy.cc.uic.edu/lnacui2api/api/version1/getdoccui?Lni=56C9-2250008H-01XF&csi=5154&hl=t&hv=t&hnsd=f&hns=t&hgn=t&oc=00240&perma=true
Read, e. A. (2001). The scientific principles underlying the monitoring of the environmental
impacts of aquaculture. Journal of Applied Ichthyology, 17(4), 181.
Schaefer, Mari A. (June 12, 2012). Aquaponics Farming Takes Root in Urban Food Desert. The
Inquirer. Retrieved December 2012 from: http://articles.philly.com/2012-0612/news/32175740_1_aquaponic-farming-urban-food-desert-urban-environment.
Regal Springs. (2003-2012). Regal springs: History, mission, and certifications. Retrieved
November, 2012 from: http://www.regalsprings.com/certifications/
A6.
Rosenthal, E. (2011, ). Another side of tilapia, the perfect factory fish. The New York Times, pp.
Samuel-Fitwi, B., Wuertz, S., Schroeder, J. P., & Schulz, C. (2012). Sustainability assessment tools
to support aquaculture development. Journal of Cleaner Production, 32, 183. Doi:
10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.03.037
Seafoodsource Staff.Honduras tilapia farm first to be compliant. Retrieved November, 2012
from: http://www.seafoodsource.com/newsarticledetail.aspx?Id=4294999661
Simpson, S. (2011). The blue food revolution. Scientific American, 304(2), 54.
Page 38
Bondie & Wolf
February 3, 2013
Tilapia Farming in the U.S., China & Honduras
UPP 570 Fall 2012
Stanley, D. L. (2002). The economic impact of mariculture on a small regional economy. World
Development, 31(1), 191-210. Doi: 10.1016/S0305-750X(02)00176-6
United States Department of Agriculture. (October 15, 2012). U.S. tilapia imports, volume by
selected sources - all years. Washington D.C.: USDA Economic Research Service.
U.S. EPA. (2006). Fact sheet: Effluent guidelines - aquatic animal production industry - guidance
for aquatic animal production facilities to assist in reducing the discharge of pollutants. Retrieved
11/16/2012, 2012 from: http://water.epa.gov/scitech/wastetech/guide/aquaculture/guidance-fs.cfm
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), & World Trade Organization (WTO). (2009).
Trade and climate change. Switzerland: WTO Secretariat. Retrieved from:
http://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/trade_climate_change_e.pdf
Walsh, B. (2011, The end of the line. TIME Magazine, Retrieved from:
http://www.cbsd.org/sites/teachers/hs/jucollins/Documents/Unit%202%20%20Oceanography/Article%20F%20-%20The%20End%20of%20the%20Line.pdf
World Wildlife Fund. (2011). Aquaculture stewardship council better management practices for
tilapia aquaculture: A tool to assist with compliance to the international standards for responsible tilapia
aquaculture. ( No. Version 1.0).World Wildlife Fund.
WorldFish. (2012). Policies and practices for resilience. Retrieved November, 2012 from:
http://www.worldfishcenter.org/our-research/research-focal-areas/policies-and-practice-resilience-0
Page 39