Seaweed cultivation is a large industry worldwide, but production in Europe is small compared to production in Asian countries. In the EU, the motivations for seaweed farming may be seen from two perspectives; one being economic growth through biomass production and the other being the provisioning of ecosystem services such as mitigating eutrophication. In this paper, we assess the economic potential of large-scale cultivation of kelp, Saccharina latissima, along the Swedish west coast, including the value of externalities. The findings suggest that seaweed farming has the potential of becoming a profitable industry in Sweden. Furthermore, large-scale seaweed farming can sequester a significant share of annual anthropogenic nitrogen and phosphorus inflows to the basins of the Swedish west coast (8% of N and 60% of P). Concerning the valuation of externalities, positive values generated from sequestration of nitrogen and phosphorus are potentially counteracted by negative values from interference with recreational values. Despite the large N and P uptake, the socioeconomic value of this sequestration is only a minor share of the potential financial value from biomass production. This suggests that e.g. payment schemes for nutrient uptake based on the socioeconomic values generated is not likely to be a tipping point for the industry. Additionally, seaweed cultivation is not a cost-efficient measure in itself to remove nutrients. Policy should thus be oriented towards industry development, as the market potential of the biomass will be the driver that may unlock these bioremediation opportunities.
Seaweed aquaculture predominantly takes place in Asia with China and Indonesia alone contributing 87% of the global supply, where food production and carrageenan extraction are two large industries12. In Europe production is currently small-scale but several drivers point towards an imminent expansion. The European Commission highlights seaweed aquaculture as having strategic potential as a contributor to blue growth by providing low-carbon and renewable products for the European bioeconomy13. Additionally, the Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management identifies seaweed cultivation as a possible contributing vector for achieving Good Environmental Status with respect to eutrophication according to the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (2008/56/EC)14. At a global scale, seaweed cultivation has been suggested as a means by which to contribute to the reversal of key planetary boundaries transgressions15. Many research projects and networks are now being developed to study this industry from a range of perspectives and to unlock its potential (e.g. Seabioplas, BioMara, MAB4, EnAlgae, Seafarm, etc.). The economic profit potential is currently one of several hurdles for the development of a European seaweed industry16.
small scale crayfish farming for food and profit pdf download
Download File: https://urlcod.com/2vI5dk
In this paper, we examine the economic potential of large-scale farming of kelp (Saccharina latissima) along the Swedish west coast, to (i) provide perspective on the potential balance between financial viability and externalities, and (ii) generate knowledge on potential profitability and tipping points in price and production costs. We focus on the production of seaweed for human consumption which already is a large industry in Asia. Previous studies that have assessed the profit potential for seaweed farming16,17,18 have not included the environmental impact of seaweed farming in the analysis. In this study we present a socioeconomic assessment that includes externalities from seaweed farming. In addition, we use case specific data which gives more reliable estimates of the financial flows and profitability of seaweed farming.
Our results show that seaweed cultivation has the potential to become a highly profitable industry in Sweden and that the monetary values of externalities are rather small compared to the financial values generated. Values forgone due to interference with recreation may however be substantial. Large-scale seaweed cultivation along the Swedish west coast is also an imaginable tool in future eutrophication combating. Our analysis suggests that large-scale seaweed cultivation may sequester 8 percent of annual anthropogenic net nitrogen and 60 percent of annual anthropogenic net phosphorus inflows to the basins on the Swedish West coast.
Consider the classic biomass value pyramid applied to seaweed biomass (see Fig. 3): the current global seaweed industry primarily produces seaweed as food for human consumption and some higher-value/lower-volume products, however, lower-value/higher-volume products such as seaweed-based biomaterials, bioenergy and fertilisers are not yet produced on a significant scale. Ultimately, the prospects of cultivated seaweed biomass to contribute to more sustainable futures will largely depend on the bottom lines of seaweed cultivation and downstream processing, and accordingly, the viability of replacing fossil-based products. Our model indicates that cultivated seaweed biomass sold for food can indeed be profitable, even comfortably profitable in a Scandinavian context. The biomass could possibly also be produced for lower-value/higher quantity products, and with continuing policy efforts to steer away from finite resources, the market for such products may develop into generating higher returns for producers. Given the urgent need to phase out fossil-based energy, materials and fertilisers, seaweed biomass may well be among the key bio-resources for the next decades.
Shrimp farming has changed from its traditional, small-scale form in Southeast Asia into a global industry. Technological advances have led to ever higher densities per unit area, and broodstock is shipped worldwide. Virtually all farmed shrimp are penaeids (i.e., shrimp of the family Penaeidae), and just two species of shrimp, the Pacific white shrimp and the giant tiger prawn, account for about 80% of all farmed shrimp. These industrial monocultures are very susceptible to disease, which has decimated shrimp populations across entire regions. Increasing ecological problems, repeated disease outbreaks, and pressure and criticism from both nongovernmental organizations and consumer countries led to changes in the industry in the late 1990s and generally stronger regulations. In 1999, governments, industry representatives, and environmental organizations initiated a program aimed at developing and promoting more sustainable farming practices through the Seafood Watch program.[39]
As the salmon farming industry expands, it requires more wild forage fish for feed, at a time when seventy-five percent of the world's monitored fisheries are already near to or have exceeded their maximum sustainable yield.[7] The industrial-scale extraction of wild forage fish for salmon farming then impacts the survivability of the wild predator fish who rely on them for food. An important step in reducing the impact of aquaculture on wild fish is shifting carnivorous species to plant-based feeds. Salmon feeds, for example, have gone from containing only fishmeal and oil to containing 40 percent plant protein.[93] The USDA has also experimented with using grain-based feeds for farmed trout.[94] When properly formulated (and often mixed with fishmeal or oil), plant-based feeds can provide proper nutrition and similar growth rates in carnivorous farmed fish.[95]
During 2020, the responses by fishers to confront the crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic varied from market strategies, inspired by the need of individuals and of the sector at large, to compensate their loss following the dramatic drop in demand for fish by local consumers (residents and tourists), to pro-social strategies, based on a behavior inspired by social preferences, or other motives (this is a behavior where individuals choose to act considering not only the consequences of their actions for themselves but for others as well; Bowles, 2009); to contribute to alleviate the impact of the crisis on people in distress. Both strategies impacted the Galapagos human community by changing fish consumption and household purchase patterns. They also helped shift public perceptions regarding the artisanal fishing sector. Furthermore, both strategies required leadership, coordination, and reorganization capacities, by individuals and cooperatives, for their implementation while everybody was facing unsettling conditions due to the health crisis. Consistently with the literature on uncertainty and small-scale fisheries (Finkbeiner et al., 2018), the timely adoption of these responses by local fishers also required trust and pro-social behavior among cooperative members as well as a high level of organization to show they can get up on their own feet and even help others. These traits, shown by the organized fishers, suggest they exhibit varied levels of resilience and adaptive capacity that made it possible to react and respond efficiently, and to adapt rapidly to the crisis scenario, allowing them to keep performing their role as seafood suppliers for the human community at large. Thus, we claim that it is very likely that this adapting capacity is rooted in pre-existing features, based on the social cohesion of the fishing community and on the social capital shared by fishers and their families that fueled those initiatives. In fact, their demonstration of reciprocity, altruism, and trust, elements that reflect on the concept of social capital, could have enabled fishers to engage in civic action and behave in a collective fashion, echoing the findings and results reported by Fowler and Etchegary (2008). These collective actions were taken to tackle aspects of the COVID-19 crisis that would have been likely impossible to overcome if fishers had acted individually. It is also possible that the adoption of these collective strategies with humanitarian aims (e.g., donating fish to families in economic distress) could be triggered and enhanced by the pandemic as the literature on natural disasters suggests (Cassar et al., 2017; Adger et al., 2005). Those actions also confirm the presence of a wide and solid social capital among fishers that allow them to respond promptly as a collective body. We claim the behavior and traits, shown by fishers, can become an asset for the Galapagos community at large, between both fishing and non-fishing-related sectors. In this way, authorities, aid agencies, and non-governmental organizations should focus on restoring and strengthening the framework that forms and maintains such social capital while enhancing the resilience of the islands.
2ff7e9595c
Comments