case study: Zambia aquaculture value chain

malcolm beveridge and jocelyn runnebaum

WORKSHOP

WorldFish Center, Penang18-22 July 2011

purpose

to determine:

• value chain maps

• social and economic services provided to society

• employment

• trends and drivers

• steps 1-2

methodology

• mixed study-type/participatory approach

– production statistics (FAO, DoF)

– field visits

• participatory workshops with producers and NGO extension workers

– key informant interviews, using semi-structured interviews

• seed and feed producers, producers, traders, retailers, exporters

• DoF, NGOs, HEIssource: Peace Corps, Zambia

Women farmers in Peace Corps project, Eastern Province

methodology – advantages/disadvantages

advantages

• cheap and cheerful

• provides foundation for future work

disadvantages

• subjective

– quality of final analysis dependent on who is spoken to and who participates in workshops

fish farm, Katete, Eastern Province

source: ZedCan

outputs

reliance on resources

Subsistence Farmers

Large Enterprises

Small Enterprises

MediumEnterprises

Produce fish mostly for home

consumption; remainder sold

for income; intermittent

manuring and feeding; no fixed

harvest cycle

Produce fish for sale; either have a pond dedicated to home consum-ption or consume what’s left after

sale; produce own fingerlings;

sell excess fingerlings

manure and feed regularly; more

consistentharvest cycle

Produce fish for sale; little to

none used for home

consumption; purchase

fingerlings and feed;,

manure and feed regularly planned

harvest cycle

Produce fish for sale; produce

own fingerlings, using sex reversal

technology; purchase feeds,

manure and feed regularly;

planned harvest cycle

Produce fish for sale; produce

own fingerlings and purchase

additional fingerlings; use

sex reversal technology;

purchase feeds, manure and feed

regularly; planned harvest

cycle

Zambian aquaculture typology

Fish Ponds

Informal Traders

Purchased Inputs Farm Traders

Production Zone Consumption Zone

Fingerlings from Harvest

Manure produced on or

off Farm

Home Consumption

subsistence farmers

Pond Side Sales

Government Hatchery

Retailers

Mobile sales via

bike

Private or Public

Hatchery

Feed Mills

Fish Ponds

ProcessorLarge

Traders

Informal Traders

Farm Traders Processors

Production Zone Consumption Zone

Manure produced on or

off Farm

Retailers

Retail outlets

Small Enterprise Value Chain

Purchased Inputs

Other Fish Farmers

Fingerlings

Farm Gate

Medium/ Large

EnterprisesFish

Home consumers

Feed Mills

Fish Ponds

Processor

Large Traders

Informal Traders

Purchased Inputs Farm Traders Processors

Production Zone Consumption Zone

On Farm Hatchery

Electricity/Diesel/Petrol

Manure produced on or off Farm

Retailers

Retail outlets

Medium Enterprise

Farm Gate

Private Hatchery

Feed MillsFish

PondsProcessor

Large Traders

Informal Traders

Purchased Inputs Farm Traders Processing

Production Zone Consumption Zone

On Farm Hatchery

Energy Commodities

Manure produced on or

off Farm

Retailers

Retail outlets

Large Enterprise

summaryFarm system Labor per farm System

yields(t/ha/y)

Number of farm units

Extrapolated total production per system (t)

People employed

Subsistence farming Family 2 5000 - 13000 300 - 780 5000 – 13,000

Small-enterprise 2-3 part time employees <3 500 150 1000-1500

Medium-enterprise 5-20 employees <10 14 1400 70-280

Large-enterprise 20-90 employees >11 1 800 (2010) 85

TOTAL 2650 – 3130*

6155 – 14,865

• one third of government estimate of 10,000 t

• 2,000 employed in production, plus 1000 in upstream and down activities; women engaged primarily in subsistence farming and trading

fin