extension activities. The DOF is supposed to promote the participation of the poor farmers in cage aquaculture, whereas, in practice, the farmers are rarely involved. The following indicate some of the existing constraints within the sector in the study area: ■ The emphasis of MOF is more on production and technological innovation and less on addressing problems of small farmers in cage aquaculture. ■ The DOF and related departments do not have adequate power and capacity or the motivation to address issues of sustainable development of aquaculture and poverty eradication within the region. ■ State institutions have limited technical capacity and financial resources to function as service providers to train farmers, given the sudden growth and rapid expansion of cage aquaculture in Vietnam. ■ Currently, the main target group of MOF is not the poorest section of farmers involved in cage aquaculture and, hence, they continue to remain vulnerable. ■ The Poverty Working Group does not see aquaculture as a source of livelihood for the poor, other than the nutritional value it contributes to the households. ■ Lack of proper secondary data related to cage farms operated by small farmers, because of the inherent difficulties in assessment of the farms and unaccounted produce, which is consumed by households. ■ Most poor households that are dependant on aquaculture are those farmers displaced from land-based agriculture. They do not have proper legal titles and their names are not on the list of beneficiaries of development programs, according to the data available from the DO F. ■ Some of the recent policy changes have limited the access to land and water resources to the poor. For example, the new Land Law in Vietnam increases inequality and limits the access of the poor to aquaculture (UNDP 1998). 50 MARCH 2007 ■ Overall, there is no integrated approach to address problems within aquaculture. Despite the constraints, farmers perceived cage aquaculture positively and intended to continue the practice. In their view, lack of financial credit was the most important constraint, followed by lack of access to technical knowledge and a weak institutional framework. Fingerling supply, market access and policy were all considered to be of lesser importance. Cage Aquaculture and Benefits for the Poor Direct benefits ■ Fish is a potential source of food of high nutritional value, reported by 52 percent of respondents, especially for vulnerable groups, such as women and children. ■ Cage aquaculture is seen as a family enterprise by households and provides self employment for women. ■ Cage culture is a main source of income or supplementary income earned through sale of relatively high value produce to 64 percent of the households contacted. ■ Poor farmers can adapt to cage aquaculture because of its flexibility with size, materials needed and other inputs. Indirect benefits ■ Cage aquaculture mcreases the availability of fish in local rural and urban markets, which keeps prices down for the benefit of local people. ■ Cage culture creates employment on larger farms, in fingerling supply networks, market chains and processing/manufacturing uni ts. ■ The practice provides benefits from common pool resources, particularly for the landless. ■ Cage culture provides increased farm sustainability, as small-scale supplementary enterprises. Discussion The study shows that majority of the farmers are poor with low income and a low level of literacy. The average family size is high compared to other countries in the region. As a result the per capita arable land and water acreage and per capita income are small. With regard to the average per capita arable land area, Vietnam is lowest in the world, with only 0. 1 ha per capita in 1993. The majority of the farmers are middle aged and have not studied beyond the secondary school level. Their skills in cage farming are based on informal knowledge that they have acquired from their nearest relatives. Most farmers interviewed do not hold titles to the land. This lack of titles to land or water deprives farmers of rural credit services and training programs. Besides, it increases the vulnerability of poor farmers exposed to natural disasters. To overcome some of the inherent problems in such situations, cage farmers tend to aggregate their cages. Aggregation of cages operated by small farmers is typical of the coastline of Khan Hoa province. The ownership and operation pattern is characteristic of marine cage aquaculture where farming of aquatic organisms is done by small-scale households using mainly extensive and semi-intensive husbandry for gaining income and, partly, for household consumption. Such low cost technologies may be appropriate given the limited resource base of poor farmers, but not as suitable for accessing to export markets and earning higher incomes. Small investments in cage materials lower the risk, a strategy suitable for poor farmers who constitute the majority and who often do not have access to credit institutions. Where risks are lower, fulltime labor is available and credit is available, larger cages may be preferable. According to Hambrey et al. (2001), starting with small cages and graduating to larger cages may be the best option in many situations. It may be that smaller cages could be introduced in Vietnam as a means of facilitating access of the poorest to the benefits of marine cage culture. However, technical issues are also important, inasmuch as some marine species may perform less well in smaller cages and make farmers less able to compete with large farm-
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjExNDY=