ECONOMICS OF INTEGRATED MULTI-TROPHIC AQUACULTURE ADOPTION IN CANADA: AN OVERVIEW

H. Ayouqi*, D. Knowler, W. Haider, G.K. Reid, W. Yip, K. Irwin, P. Kitchen
 
*School of Resource and Environmental Management,
Simon Fraser University,
8888 University Drive,
Burnaby, British Columbia, V5A 1S6,
Canada,
Hossein.Ayouqi@sfu.ca

The Canadian Integrated Multi-Trophic Aquaculture Network (CIMTAN) was created to move IMTA from a common sense concept to commercialization. Our research program has addressed key economic aspects of the commercialization process in Canada, namely benefits for both consumers of aquaculture products and society at large, as well as potential producer benefits.

In the first case, extensive household surveying in the major consuming region (west coast, USA) demonstrated a clear willingness to pay more for IMTA products (e.g. salmon, shellfish) - averaging 9% more for IMTA versus conventional farmed salmon. Salmon consumers were also willing to pay more for IMTA products versus those from closed containment aquaculture (CCA). The reverse was true in the producing region (British Columbia, Canada) when the general public was asked about their willingness to pay to support the development of IMTA versus CCA: CCA attracted greater levels of support. In general, preferences for IMTA were stronger in the USA than in Canada (see figure below), while preferences for CCA were stronger in Canada than in the USA, where a small segment of consumers actually see CCA negatively.

On the producer side, our results are only just emerging. Earlier published economic studies suggested IMTA is more profitable than conventional salmon farming. But if this is true, why has it not been adopted more extensively? Earlier studies likely underestimated the added costs of IMTA production, such as the extra management costs and cost of risk associated with a more complex production system. Canada also lacks a regulatory and incentive structure that is IMTA friendly. For example, there is no reward for the potential biomitigation benefits stemming from IMTA, where these are verifiable. Interestingly, initial bioeconomic modeling of IMTA shows that, in some cases, these biomitigation benefits could encourage industry expansion and lead, counterintuitively, to increases in ambient nutrient levels. We are carrying out more rigorous modeling to investigate further and to factor in real world constraints, such as existing effluent standards and site licensing limits, and to investigate policy tools to promote IMTA.