Small-scale cage culture is suited to poverty alleviation in Vietnam provided the necessary support is provided to farmers. One reason is the availability of natural resources suited for aquaculture and the lack of sufficient land for agriculture. This forces farmers to take up aquaculture as a supplementary activity, which, in fact, provides more income than agriculture. In the sample surveyed, 60 percent of the household income Was derived from cage aquaculture. In Vietnam, most typical households have land holdings that are very small. Where soils are poor and flooding and erosion is common, these holdings are inadequate to provide a decent livelihood. A second major factor is the flexibility of cage culture, especially in terms of investment requirements. Cage aquaculture can be started using a small cage and/or low stocking densities, with correspondingly low start-up costs. A range of species and systems is available from low investment/modest return to high investment/high return, which allows steady low-risk progression out of poverty. It is convenient for women and other family members to take part in various stages of cage cultivation. The returns from cage culture in terms of return on investment and, more importantly, for small scale enterprises and return on labor, compares well with most alternative activities. When farmers are able to afford a few cages, return on labor is much higher than alternatives. These various strengths are significant, especially given the very limited options for improving the livelihoods of poor farmers. Despite the clear potential of cage aquaculture for poverty alleviation, there remain some questions related to sustainability. Disease is a common problem of cage aquaculture throughout the world and, while this has not been a problem in the study area, it may well become an issue as production and stocking densities increase. Disease avoidance may be due to large numbers of poor families involved in cage aquaculture who do not practice intensive culture. The relatively low stocking densities used and the quality of water helps to maintain sustainability. 52 MARCH 2007 Closely related is the issue of environmental capacity. Any initiative to promote cage aquaculture must include strategies for disease prevention and management and for the assessment and allocation of environmental capacity. Currently, there are no easily discernible impacts from cage culture on the environment or coastal ecosystems. Cages are sited in areas of good water exchange and stocking densities are low. As the industry develops, it is probable that more marginal sites will be developed and intensified, together with increased risks of environmental degradation. A second important issue is the dependence on trash fish or fishmeal in more intensive systems and those rearing carnivorous species. If farmers are successful, there will be strong incentives to expand and intensify and the use of compound feeds with trash fish and/or fishmeal will almost certainly increase. The implications of this, in terms of resource use efficiency and the availability of low cost fish for poor people, deserve careful assessment. In the last five years, there has also been a major increase in the price of trash fish as a result of the increased demand for export, for fish sauce, for livestock feed and for aquaculture. The relationships are complex, and price data are inadequate to address the issue comprehensively, but it is clear from many perspectives, such as cost, disease and convenience, that a shift away from high dependence on trash fish would be desirable for the cage culture industry. In Vietnam, animals for stocking are collected from the wild. It is expensive, and will probably soon become limiting as aquaculture expands. Over-exploitation may lead to adverse impacts on capture fisheries. It is, therefore, essential that hatchery production is developed as soon as possible. While commercial operators are well placed to develop their own approaches to deal with these issues, poor farmers generally cannot. Improved planning and management of the new sector, coupled with appropriate extension and research funded by the respective governments with assistance from international aid, are still required to address these problems. There is no doubt that the barriers to entry are higher for the poor than for the rich, but this is true of entry into any new technology or enterprise; indeed, into any activity that might make the poor significantly better off. Eradicating poverty requires that government and aid organizations work to reduce the barriers that prevent the poor entering new and suitable enterprises increase the chances of success and reduce risk to a minimum. Notes 1 Researcher, Norwegian Institute for Water Research, Norway, PO.Box 173, Kjelsas, Oslo, N-0411, Norway. Telephone: +47 22 18 51 12; Fax: +47 22 18 52 00; e-mail: udaya.nagothu@niva.no References Aasen, B. 2000. Household Adaptation in Coastal Economies, A Paper Presented at the Scoping Meeting (23-25 May) for the Sustainable Aquaculture for Poverty Alleviation in Vietnam. Hanoi, Vietnam. Action Aid. 1999. Ha Tinh: A Participatory poverty assessment (in partnership with Ha Tinh province, World Bank and DFID, Hanoi, Vietnam. Boyd, C.E. 2001. Inland Shrimp farming and environment, World Aquaculture 32: 1 0-12. Edwards, P. and H. Demaine. 1997. Rural Aquaculture: Overview and Framework for Country Reviews, FAO/RAP, Bangkok, Thailand. Edwards, P. 2000. Aquaculture, Poverty Impacts and Livelihoods. Natural Resource Perspectives, Number 56, ODI, London, England. Hambrey, J., L.A. Tuan and T.K. Thuong. 2001. Aquaculture and poverty alleviation 2: cage culture in coastal waters of Vietnam. World Aquaculture 32: 3845. Homer-Dixon, T.F. 1994. Environmental scarcities and violent conflict, International Security 19(1):5-40. Le Than, Luu. 2000. Aquaculture for Rural Development in Vietnam, FAO, Hanoi, Vietnam. New, M.B. 1999. Sustainable Shrimp Farming in the tropics. World Aquaculture 30(4):34-43. UNDP. 1998. Expanding Choices for the Rural Poor: Human Development m Vietnam UNDP, Hanoi, Vietnam.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjExNDY=