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 jblumenthal@wri.org.

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