World Aquaculture 5 in aquaculture is a testimony to the now widespread interest in the role of better practices. Jason calls for an across-the-board doubling of efficiency in the use of every production input, including water, feed, fertilizer, and energy. This is a very high bar. Certainly the scope for doubling the efficiency of some inputs is better than others, but there is always room for improvement. Aquaculture faces limiting factors everywhere it is practiced. Once explicitly identified, producers have strong economic incentives to develop creative approaches to increase efficiency of limiting inputs. Occasionally policies such as subsidies can distort or mask the limitation, so policy reform may be necessary to enable improvement in input efficiency. Jason also calls for more use of degraded lands. Certainly aquaculture ponds can be built using saline soils and on marginal or unproductive land and managed effectively, assuming water is available, thereby reserving land with good soils for staple grains or other terrestrial crops. Aquaculture can also make increased use of degraded water, such as irrigation drainage, wastewater, or high-salinity groundwater. I am not convinced that using degraded lands is the best approach. One can also argue that degraded or unproductive land should be allowed to revert to nature and that more effort should be dedicated toward the responsible and ethical intensification of agriculture where production potential is greatest. Jason also included consideration of a social factor, the need for clear property rights and land tenure, especially in Africa. He sees this as a huge impediment to freezing the footprint of food. Landless or tenant farmers have little incentive to invest in improvements of their land. These investments could improve environmental performance, reduce waste, increase the efficiency of inputs, and improve farm income. This is clearly true with respect to converting land to fish ponds, which requires a substantial capital investment. Improving title to land would open the door for more potential fish farmers and improving practices on those farms that already exist. Jason identifies the huge losses that occur after crops are harvested as an area that needs attention. Obviously the products of aquaculture are highly perishable and maintaining product quality (and safety) has always been a primary concern in marketing. Given that most fish in aquaculture are low-value species marketed within the countries where they are produced, attention to preserving freshness after harvest will increase the availability of fish to low-income consumers. Although the focus of Jason’s article is on the major cereal crops, his suggestions have specific application to aquaculture. In the context of global agriculture, aquaculture production is a minor player. Nonetheless, the kinds of changes he suggests are relevant and will allow farmers to be more productive and less wasteful and will allow aquaculture to make a contribution to freezing the footprint of food. Before resources become limiting, we can slowly and deliberately work towards doing more with what we have now, while the broadest range of options remains open to us. — John Hargreaves Editor-in-Chief (Continued from page 2) Editor’s Note
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjExNDY=