RICHARD WAITE, MICHAEL PHILLIPS, AND RANDALL BRUMMETT Improving Productivity and Environmental Performance of Aquaculture Installment 5 of “Creating a Sustainable Food Future” 2013-14 World Resources Report Photo: WorldFish Bangladesh Office.
May 06, 2015
RICHARD WAITE, MICHAEL PHILLIPS, AND RANDALL BRUMMETT
Improving Productivity and Environmental Performance of AquacultureInstallment 5 of “Creating a Sustainable Food Future”2013-14 World Resources Report
Photo: WorldFish Bangladesh Office.
Mic & Speakers is usually the best audio option.
Submit your text questions and comments using the Questions Panel.
We will answer questions at the end of the presentation.
For more information, please email [email protected].
Note: Today’s presentation is being recorded and will be posted on WRI’s website within a week.
Your Participation
GoToWebinar Housekeeping
WRI.org/WRR
How can the world feed more than 9 billion people in 2050
in a manner that advances development and reduces pressure on the environment?
The world needs to close an “animal protein gap”Global annual animal protein availability, million tons
Source: WRI analysis based on Alexandratos and Bruinsma (2012).
Menu for a sustainable food future
Consumption Reduce food loss and waste Shift diets Achieve replacement level fertility Reduce biofuel demand for food crops
Production Sustainably increase crop yields - Boost yields through crop breeding- Improve soil and water management- Expand onto low-carbon degraded lands
Sustainably increase “livestock” productivity- Increase productivity of pasture and grazing lands- Reduce then stabilize wild fish catch- Improve productivity and environmental performance
of aquaculture
Production methods
Improve livestock feeding efficiency Increase the efficiency of fertilizer use Manage rice paddies to reduce emissions
Authors and partners
• Richard Waite (WRI)• Malcolm Beveridge (WorldFish)• Randall Brummett (World Bank)• Sarah Castine (WorldFish)• Nuttapon Chaiyawannakarn (Kasetsart University)• Sadasivam Kaushik (INRA)• Rattanawan Mungkung (Kasetsart University)• Supawat Nawapakpilai (Kasetsart University)• Michael Phillips (WorldFish)
Fish are important for food and nutrition securitySupply of animal-based protein (2009), percent (100% = 31 g / capita / day)
Source: FAO (2012).
But the wild fish catch has peaked…Million tons
Note: “Wild catch” includes finfish, mollusks, crustaceans, and other aquatic animals from marine and freshwater ecosystems. It excludes all aquaculture.
Source: FAO (2014).
…even while fishing effort continues to risePercentage of marine fish stocks assessed
Source: FAO (2014).
Aquaculture has emerged to meet fish demandMillion tons
Sources: FAO (2012a), FAO (2012b), FAO (2013), FAO (2014).
Aquaculture is diverse Production (2012), 100% = 66.6 million tons
Source: FAO (2014).
Nearly 90 percent of aquaculture production is in AsiaTons (2012)
Source: FAO (2014).
Aquaculture production must more than double by 2050 to satisfy projected fish demandMillion tons
Sources: Production data 1961–2010: FAO (2014a), FAO (2014b). Aquaculture production projections 2011–2050: Authors’ calculations assuming a linear growth rate of 2 Mt per year.
Aquaculture growth could close 14 percent of the “animal protein gap”Global annual animal protein availability, million tons
Source: WRI analysis based on Alexandratos and Bruinsma (2012).
Aquaculture growth to 140 Mt in 2050 could contribute to economic development
Source: Authors’ calculations based on FAO (2014) and World Bank, FAO, and IFPRI (2013).
Photo: WorldFish/Mike Lusmore/Duckrabbit.
$308BFarm gate value / year
Aquaculture growth to 140 Mt in 2050 could contribute to economic development
Source: Authors’ calculations based on FAO (2014).
Photo: WorldFish/Mike Lusmore/Duckrabbit.
176Mlivelihoods
Farmed fish convert feed to food efficientlyPercent or “units of edible output per 100 units of feed input”
Sources: Terrestrial animal products: Wirsenius et al. (2010), Wirsenius (2000). Finfish and shrimp: WRI analysis based on USDA (2013), NRC (2011), Tacon and Metian (2008), Wirsenius (2000), and FAO (1989).
Note: “Edible output” refers to the calorie and protein content of bone-free carcass.
But aquaculture also creates environmental impacts and is facing resource constraints
Image: ©2013 Google Earth, DigitalGlobe.
• Land• Water• Energy• Feed• Fish diseases• Fish escapes
Sustainable aquaculture growth entails…
Photo: WorldFish/Sakil.
Increasing farmed fish production per unit of:
• Land• Water• Feed• Energy
Minimizing:
• Water pollution• Fish diseases• Fish escapes
Life cycle assessment of global aquaculture production
Source: Hall et al. (2011).
Aquaculture’s environmental impacts in 2010
Direct land occupation (farms): 19 Mha
Indirect land occupation (feeds): 26 Mha
Wild fish used in feed: 20 Mt
Freshwater consumption: 201 km3
Freshwater eutrophication potential: 0.4 Mt P eq
Marine eutrophication potential: 1.4 Mt N eq
Greenhouse gas emissions: 332 Mt CO2e
Source: Mungkung et al. (2014).
“Business as usual” scenario in 2050Impacts relative to 2010 levels
Source: Mungkung et al. (2014).
Produc
tion
Land
occu
patio
n (dir
ect)
Land
occu
patio
n (ind
irect)
Wild fis
h use
d in f
eed
Freshw
ater c
onsu
mption
Freshw
ater e
utrop
hicati
on po
tentia
l
Marine
eutro
phica
tion p
otenti
al
GHG emiss
ions
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
2010
2050 BAU
“Significant intensification” scenario in 2050Impacts relative to 2010 levels
Produc
tion
Land
occu
patio
n (dir
ect)
Land
occu
patio
n (in
direc
t)
Wild fis
h use
d in f
eed
Freshw
ater c
onsu
mption
Freshw
ater e
utrop
hicati
on po
tentia
l
Marine
eutro
phica
tion p
otenti
al
GHG emiss
ions
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
2010
2050 BAU
Source: Mungkung et al. (2014).
“Shift to renewable energy” scenario in 2050Impacts relative to 2010 levels
Produc
tion
Land
occu
patio
n (dir
ect)
Land
occu
patio
n (ind
irect)
Wild fis
h use
d in f
eed
Freshw
ater c
onsu
mption
Freshw
ater e
utrop
hicati
on po
tentia
l
Marine
eutro
phica
tion p
otenti
al
GHG emiss
ions
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
2010
2050 BAU
Source: Mungkung et al. (2014).
“More efficient feeding” scenario in 2050Impacts relative to 2010 levels
Produc
tion
Land
occu
patio
n (dir
ect)
Land
occu
patio
n (ind
irect)
Wild fis
h use
d in f
eed
Freshw
ater c
onsu
mption
Freshw
ater e
utrop
hicati
on po
tentia
l
Marine
eutro
phica
tion p
otenti
al
GHG emiss
ions
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
2010
2050 BAU
Source: Mungkung et al. (2014).
Produc
tion
Land
occu
patio
n (dir
ect)
Land
occu
patio
n (ind
irect)
Wild fis
h use
d in f
eed
Freshw
ater c
onsu
mption
Freshw
ater e
utrop
hicati
on po
tentia
l
Marine
eutro
phica
tion p
otenti
al
GHG emiss
ions
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
2010
2050 BAU
“More farmed freshwater fish” scenario in 2050Impacts relative to 2010 levels
Source: Mungkung et al. (2014).
“Shift to more plant-based feeds” scenario in 2050Impacts relative to 2010 levels
Produc
tion
Land
occu
patio
n (di
rect)
Land
occu
patio
n (ind
irect)
Wild fis
h use
d in f
eed
Freshw
ater c
onsu
mption
Freshw
ater e
utrop
hicati
on po
tentia
l
Marine
eutro
phica
tion p
otenti
al
GHG emiss
ions
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
2010
2050 BAU
Source: Mungkung et al. (2014).
Comparison of aquaculture growth scenariosImpacts relative to 2010 levels
Source: Mungkung et al. (2014).
2050 Scenario Land occupation (direct)
Land occupation (indirect)
Wild fish used in feed
Freshwater consumption
Freshwater eutrophication potential
Marine eutrophication potential
GHG emissions
Business as usual
2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3
Significant intensification
1.6 2.1 2.6 2.0 2.3 2.6 3.0
Renewable energy
2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.1 2.3 1.0
More efficient feeding
2.3 2.1 1.8 2.3 2.3 2.1 2.2
More farmed freshwater fish
2.5 2.7 2.2 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.4
More plant-based feed
N/A 3.9 0.0 2.3 2.7 3.6 2.2
Impacts relative to 2050 “business as usual” Increase No change Decrease
Comparison of farmed species’ performance in 2010
Source: Calculated from Mungkung et al. (2014).
Species group Land use (ha / t edible protein)
Freshwater consumption (m3 / kg edible protein)
Wild fish used in feed
(fish-in/fish-out)
Eutrophication potential (kg P t edible protein)
GHG intensity (t CO2e / t edible protein)
Carps 12.0 61.4 0.2 97 47.2
Mollusks 0.0 0.0 0.0 -148 11.1
Shrimps 16.4 4.4 0.8 104 161.7
Tilapias 7.5 15.9 0.7 82 40.7
Catfish 9.5 52.2 0.4 97 134.8
Salmonids 2.4 0.0 1.9 48 9.8
The closest thing to a free lunch?
Photo: SantiMB.
Key findings
• Aquaculture production must more than double by 2050
• Aquaculture is a relatively efficient source of animal protein
• Aquaculture creates environmental impacts, is subject to resource constraints
• Environmental impacts vary by species• Intensification must continue – need to
manage tradeoffs
Recommendations
1. Increase investment in technological innovation and transfer
2. Use spatial planning and zoning to guide sustainable aquaculture growth
3. Shift incentives to reward sustainability
4. Shift consumption to low-trophic farmed fish species
How Will Aquaculture
Grow?
AQUACULTURE IS NOT A RAVENOUS INDUSTRIAL MONSTER DEVOURING THE PLANET TO FEED THE RICH
Small is beautiful…Region Aquaculture Employment
(thousands)Productivity
(2010)Tons of fish per farmer
Africa 8.59Asia 3.32Europe 29.68LAC 7.74
N America 164.00Oceania 30.67World Total 3.611990 1995 2000 2005 2010
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
but complicated!
Constraining Sustainable
Growth
Space & H2O
Technology
Capital
Capital ( Technology) ∴
is Constrained by Risk
• >90% Private Capital• Massive disease outbreaks • Reduced efficiency due to stress, inbreeding• Increasing operation costs
Asia: CrowdedLatin America: Some Potential
Africa: Cool and DryNorth America: mostly too cold
Europe: cold and crowdedMap: WorldFish
• Feed, breeding & management technology• Lower risk to attract investors • Governance for non-traditional sites & H2O
Overcoming Constraints
Source: Iliyasu et al. 2014; University of Victoria & Lenfest (2010)
• Asia: 0.64; US/Europe: 0.73
• Genetics: 12% Fish; 1% Land Animals
• FIFO: 0.6 in 2000; 0.3 in 2010
Technical & Ecological Efficiency
Plant Proteins
3% fishmeal + 40% SPC + 30% SBM 40% SPC + taurine 64% fishmeal
Fish Oil
1.0 2.0-2.5 2.5-3.0 3.0-3.5 3.5-4.00%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%Culture Capture
Trophic Level
Perc
ent o
f Tot
al b
y Su
b-Se
ctor
Source: FAO (2012), FishBase (2012)
Anchovies+
Farmed Salmon
Wild Salmon
Protecting Environments, Fish
Health & Investments
Ecological Issues• Siting – identify zones that are good for aquaculture; away or
downstream of important ecosystem and biodiversity assets.
• Carrying Capacity – measure how fast the ecosystem is moving towards the limit.
Institutional Issues• Setting Limits - set with the local community key criteria for impact
assessment.
• Enforcement - establish regulatory framework, local authority and trade association that represents the interests of the aquaculture value chain.
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
Back from the Brink:
Lessons from Chile
19861988
19901992
19941996
19982000
20022004
20062008
20102012
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
• Zones Easier to Implement
• Low Energy Systems
• No Land or Freshwater
• Established Hatchery & Culture Technology
• Turn Carnivores to Herbivores
• Keeping the small-scale players in the game?
Moving Off Shore
Thank You!
“Improving Productivity and Environmental Performance of
Aquaculture”
Download at: WRI.org/WRR
2013–2014 World Resources Report: Creating a Sustainable Food Future