Community-based climate change adaptation strategies forintegrated prawn–fish–rice farming in Bangladesh topromote social–ecological resilienceNesar Ahmed1,2, Stuart W. Bunting3, Sanzidur Rahman4 and Christopher J. Garforth5

1 Department of Fisheries Management, Bangladesh Agricultural University, Mymensingh, Bangladesh

2 SA Water Centre for Water Management and Reuse, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia

3 Essex Sustainability Institute, School of Biological Sciences, University of Essex, Colchester, UK

4 School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK

5 School of Agriculture, Policy and Development, University of Reading, Reading, UK

Correspondence

Stuart W. Bunting, School of Biological

Sciences, University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park,

Colchester CO4 3SQ, UK.

Email: swbunt@essex.ac.uk

Received 30 July 2012; accepted 4 December

2012.

Abstract

Farming freshwater prawns with fish in rice fields is widespread in the coastal

region of southwest Bangladesh because of favourable resources and ecological

conditions. This article provides an overview of an ecosystem-based approach to

integrated prawn–fish–rice farming in southwest Bangladesh. The practice of

prawn and fish farming in rice fields is a form of integrated aquaculture–agricul-ture, which provides a wide range of social, economic and environmental benefits.

Integrated prawn–fish–rice farming plays an important role in the economy of

Bangladesh, earning foreign exchange and increasing food production. However,

this unique farming system in coastal Bangladesh is particularly vulnerable to

climate change. We suggest that community-based adaptation strategies must

be developed to cope with the challenges. We propose that integrated prawn–fish–rice farming could be relocated from the coastal region to less vulnerable inland

areas, but caution that this will require appropriate adaptation strategies and an

enabling institutional environment.

Key words: Bangladesh, climate change adaptation, ecosystem-based management, prawn–fish–

rice, resilience.

Introduction

Farming freshwater prawns (Macrobrachium rosenbergii)

with fish in rice fields constitutes an important agro-eco-

logical landscape in the coastal region of southwest Bangla-

desh. The practice is widespread in this region due to the

availability of wild postlarvae and favourable biophysical

resources (Ahmed et al. 2008a). Spectacular development

of prawn farming has taken place in Bagerhat, Khulna and

Satkhira Districts (Fig. 1), where thousands of farmers have

converted their rice fields to prawn farms, locally known as

ghers. Prawn culture in Bangladesh is practised in both

ponds and ghers, although it was estimated that 71% of

farmers were using gher systems (Muir 2003). The total area

of prawn culture was estimated at 62 875 ha (DoF 2012),

but this is a small area in comparison with the 2.83 mil-

lion ha of seasonal rice-fields in the country (BRKB 2010).

Of the total area under prawn culture in Bangladesh it was

estimated that 30 000 ha are under integrated prawn–fish–rice farming (Ahmed & Garnett 2010) with over 75% of the

farms located in the southwest and the remainder in the

southeast region.

Average annual yields of prawns, fish and rice from inte-

grated systems have been estimated at 467, 986 and

2257 kg ha�1, respectively (Ahmed et al. 2010a). Owing to

higher dikes associated with gher farming systems prevent-

ing saline water intrusion from affecting rice production, it

has been estimated that rice yields may be 20–25% higher

than might otherwise be the case. Across the country the

average production levels for rice cultivation reported by

the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics for 2008 were cited at

2.74 t ha�1 (Islam et al. 2012). Integrated prawn–fish–riceculture can generate significant revenues, with small

(>0.2 ha), medium (0.21–0.4 ha) and large (>0.4 ha) farms

realizing net returns of US$ 1420, 1798 and 2426 ha�1 y�1,

respectively (Ahmed et al. 2010a). Capital and operating

© 2013 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd20

Reviews in Aquaculture (2014) 6, 20–35 doi: 10.1111/raq.12022

costs associated with integrated production are significantly

higher, however, and constitute a barrier to adoption for

poorer groups.

During the past three decades, integrated prawn–fish–rice culture has attracted considerable attention due to the

associated export potential. Prawns are a highly valued

product for international markets and thus most are

exported, especially to the USA and Europe. In the 2010–2011 fiscal year Bangladesh exported 54 891 t of prawns

and shrimps valued at US$446 million, of which 30% was

attributed to prawns (DoF 2012).

Innovation of integrated prawn–fish–rice culture by

farmers, combined with high prices for prawns in inter-

national markets, and the demand for rice and fish for

household consumption and from local markets led to

increasing numbers of farmers adopting this strategy.

Assessment of prawn farming using the sustainable liveli-

hoods framework demonstrated that income, food secu-

rity and fulfillment of basic needs had been enhanced in

the majority of cases (82% of respondents) with most

farming households reporting higher levels of food and

fish consumption and cash income (Ahmed et al. 2008b).

More broadly within communities, integrated prawn–fish–rice culture can contribute to maintaining local food secu-

rity, despite the transition to cash crop production, and

generate employment opportunities both within farming

and associated input supply chains and post-harvest

processing and marketing networks. Approximately

600 000 people are involved in prawn–fish–rice farming

and associated activities, including marketing, processing

and exporting (Ahmed & Garnett 2010). Integrated prawn

–fish–rice farming appears to have broad potential in

terms of food supply, income and environmental benefits

(Ahmed et al. 2010a).

Figure 1 Integrated prawn–fish–rice farming areas in southwest Bangladesh; ( ) coastal limit boundary; ( ) risk zone boundary and ( )

high risk zone boundary.

Reviews in Aquaculture (2014) 6, 20–35

© 2013 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd 21

Ecosystem-based prawn–fish–rice farming

Integrated prawn–fish–rice farming in coastal Bangla-

desh is threatened, however, owing to recent and antici-

pated climate change effects. Bangladesh is highly

vulnerable to expected climate change impacts because of

its geophysical position and poor socioeconomic condi-

tions. Bangladesh is ranked first among countries vulnera-

ble to climate change (Harmeling 2010). Considering the

extreme vulnerability to climate change effects, integrated

governance and management approaches are needed to

cope with the challenges foreseen. The Government of Ban-

gladesh formulated the ‘Bangladesh Climate Change Strat-

egy and Action Plan’ to address the impacts of climate

change on ecosystems, economy and society (MOEF 2010).

The government is keen to promote climate change adapta-

tion to safeguard the continued growth of the prawn farm-

ing industry. Adapting prawn–fish–rice farming to climate

change and promoting resilience will, however, require a

combination of strategies and policies.

Integrated prawn–fish–rice farming in coastal Bangla-

desh is reviewed here as a potential ecosystem-based man-

agement approach suited to climate change adaptation to

understand better the ecological relationships among rice

field components that provide social, economic and envi-

ronmental benefits. Ecosystem-based aquaculture manage-

ment is considered one of the most important principles of

sustainable environmental management. It is a strategy for

the integrated management of land, water and living

resources that promotes conservation and sustainable use

in an equitable way. It recognizes that humans, with their

cultural diversity, are an integral component of ecosystems

(Soto et al. 2008). Subsequently we analyse the potential

impacts of climate change on prawn–fish–rice farming in

coastal Bangladesh. The central aim of this paper is to iden-

tify adaptation strategies to climate change for sustainable

prawn–fish–rice farming.

This paper is divided into seven sections. The first two

describe the origins of integrated prawn–fish–rice farming

and its geographical location and examine relationships

among different components of prawn–fish–rice ecosys-

tems. The third considers whether prawn–fish–rice farming

is consistent with the principles of an ecosystem-based

approach to aquaculture. The fourth section describes the

benefits and opportunities of integrated prawn–fish–ricefarming. The fifth and sixth sections review the potential

impacts of climate change on integrated farming systems

and discuss adaptation strategies to climate change, respec-

tively. The final section concludes with a summary of policy

related challenges and potential solutions.

Prawn–fish–rice ecosystems

Prawn and fish farming in rice fields is practised throughout

a range of biophysical and social-political settings in south-

west Bangladesh. Integrated prawn–fish–rice farming adds to

the biodiversity of the ecosystem. Rain-fed and deep-water

rice fields can harbour a rich biodiversity of flora and fauna

(Halwart 2008). The rice field flora consists of rice plants,

other vascular macrophytes and algae, while the fauna con-

sists of bivalve molluscs, crabs, fish, frogs, insects, snails, wild

prawns and aquatic birds. According to Halwart and Bartley

(2005), 145 species of fish, 11 species of crustaceans, 15 spe-

cies of molluscs, 13 species of reptiles, 11 species of amphibi-

ans, 11 species of insects and 37 species of plants were

recorded from rice fields in Cambodia, China, Laos and Viet-

nam. The rice field ecosystem is rich in plankton, periphyton,

benthos, detritus and microorganisms. Among the organ-

isms, benthic oligochaetes (earthworms) have received par-

ticular attention because they increase soil porosity and

promote phosphorus transfer to the soil (Halwart & Gupta

2004) and consequently have become known locally as the

‘farmer’s friend’ (Sinha et al. 2009).

One of the most important factors for raising prawns

and fish in rice fields is the availability of water. In south-

west Bangladesh, principal water sources in rice fields are

rainfall, groundwater (i.e. through tube-wells) and river

water transferred through canals (Ahmed et al. 2008c).

Other important factors in the rice field ecosystem are soil,

light, temperature, air, dissolved oxygen (DO), carbon

dioxide (CO2), pH, unionized ammonia (NH3) and nutri-

ents, i.e. nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium and other miner-

als (Halwart & Gupta 2004).

The production of dissolved oxygen in a rice field

depends on the photosynthetic activity of rice plants, aqua-

tic macrophytes and algae and diffusion through the air–water interface, promoted by wind action (Mustow 2002).

Respiration by prawns, fish and aquatic animals, plants and

algae consumes dissolved oxygen and results in the produc-

tion of CO2, while other important sources of CO2 are the

atmosphere through natural diffusion and agitation at

the water surface and decomposition of organic matter.

The removal of CO2 from the water column due to photo-

synthetic activity increases pH levels and dissolved oxygen

concentrations (Halwart & Gupta 2004). Suitable ranges of

these parameters for prawn and fish farming in rice fields

are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1 Suitable ranges of different parameters for integrated prawn

–fish–rice farming

Parameter Range Reference

Water level (cm) 30–90 Pillay (1990)

Water temperature (°C) 25–35 Halwart and Gupta (2004)

Water transparency (cm) 25–30 Wahab et al. (2008)

Dissolved oxygen (ppm) 5.0–7.5 Halwart and Gupta (2004)

Carbon dioxide (ppm) <10 Boyd and Tucker (1998)

Water pH 6.5–9.0 Mishra and Mohanty (2004)

Reviews in Aquaculture (2014) 6, 20–35

© 2013 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd22

N. Ahmed et al.

Incident light levels govern photosynthesis in rice

fields. The rice plant absorbs sunlight and produces

organic matter and energy through photosynthesis (Hal-

wart & Gupta 2004). Light levels in rice fields depend

on weather conditions, season, latitude and density of

rice plants. Usually integrated prawn–fish–rice farming

necessitates wide spacing (25 9 25 cm) between rice

plants that allows more light to penetrate underwater

(Frei & Becker 2005), which in turn increases photosyn-

thesis as well as aquatic primary production (i.e. phyto-

plankton) and thus the availability of natural feed for

prawns and fish (Mustow 2002). Water turbidity, density

of plankton and floating macrophytes can, however,

limit light penetration and thus photosynthetic activities.

Nevertheless, fish play a significant role in controlling

aquatic weeds and plankton. Rice plants act as a nitro-

gen sink and reduce ammonia concentrations and help

to make the water clear (Halwart & Gupta 2004; Oehme

et al. 2007).

Decaying rice leaves support the growth of microorgan-

isms which in turn promote nutrient cycling and facilitate

greater nutrient uptake by the rice plants (Lu & Li 2006).

Aquatic animals also play an important role in nutrient

recycling within rice field ecosystems. The movement of

stocked prawns and fish foraging for food in rice fields

results in aeration of the water and the release of nutri-

ents; grazing on photosynthetic biomass contributes to

enhanced nutrient cycling. Prawns and fish excrete organic

and inorganic nitrogen and phosphorus and promote the

exchange of nutrients between water and soil (Halwart &

Gupta 2004), thus increasing nutrient concentrations.

Phosphorus is often the limiting factor for primary

production.

Rice plants provide shelter for both prawns and fish.

Shading by rice plants also keeps the water temperature

close to optimum levels during the hot summer months

(Kunda et al. 2008). Temperatures would be higher in the

absence of rice plants, which can cause stress to prawns and

fish; elevated temperatures can also inhibit photosynthesis.

Favourable temperatures combined with other environ-

mental factors (i.e. sunlight, photosynthesis, water purifica-

tion, nutrients, aeration) in rice fields provide an ecosystem

supporting positive interactions among prawns, fish and

rice (Fig. 2).

Prawn–fish–rice agroecosystem management demands an

understanding of both ecological processes and functioning

and associated social–ecological systems. Social and ecologi-

cal systems are linked intrinsically and are collectively

referred to as social–ecological systems and this underpins

the integrated concept of humans-in-nature (Berkes & Folke

1998; Olsson et al. 2004). Considering prawn–fish–ricefarming in terms of social-ecological theory, subsystems

encompassing the resource system (rice fields), resource

units (prawns and fish), users (farmers) and governance sys-

tems (government and non-government organizations) can

interact to produce positive outcomes (Ostrom 2009). Social

and ecological systems are deeply interconnected across

temporal and spatial scales, and thus, social–ecological sys-tems can avoid vulnerability at one timescale through the

adoption of farming technology (Folke 2007). Robust

social-ecological systems can buffer against negative shocks

and trends, and consequently reduce vulnerability experi-

enced by farming communities (Folke et al. 2005). Social–ecological thinking constitutes an integrated concept that

emphasizes human–environment interactions for resource

management (Berkes et al. 2003).

Prawn-fish-rice ecosystems

Water purification, sunlight penetration

Photosynthesis,primary production

Favourable water temperature by shade

Increased soil fertility and nutrients

Control pest, insect and weed

Aeration of water and respirationEc

olog

ical

func

tion

of ri

ce p

lant

Ecol

ogic

al fu

nctio

n of

pra

wn-

fish

Figure 2 Interactions among different

components of prawn–fish–rice ecosystems

(adapted from Lu & Li 2006).

Reviews in Aquaculture (2014) 6, 20–35

© 2013 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd 23

Ecosystem-based prawn–fish–rice farming

Ecosystem based prawn–fish–rice farming

Ecosystem approach to aquaculture

An ecosystem approach to aquaculture (EAA) ‘is a strategy

for the integration of the aquaculture within the wider eco-

system in such a way that it promotes sustainable develop-

ment, equity and resilience of interlinked social and

ecological systems’ (Soto et al. 2008). An EAA can be con-

ceived as having three main objectives within a hierarchical

tree framework: (i) human well-being; (ii) ecological well-

being; and (iii) the ability to achieve both through effective

governance. An EAA should maximize not only economic

but also social and environmental benefits. Inadequate par-

ticipatory processes, poor understanding of social sustain-

ability requirements and weak governance inhibits the

widespread adoption of EAA strategies. An EEA should be

technically sophisticated, ecologically accountable and

socially responsible (Costa-Pierce 2008). An EAA should be

structured to deal effectively with issues of a social, economic,

environmental, technical, physical and political nature (Soto

et al. 2008). Implementation of an EAA requires an under-

standing of ecosystem functioning and changes in human

behaviour. According to Bailey (2008), seven issues that are

directly related to resilience of social systems include (i)

entrepreneurial opportunity and employment generation; (ii)

gender relations; (iii) economic diversification; (iv) infra-

structural development; (v) food supply; (vi) user conflicts;

and (vii) balances in wealth, income and power.

Approaches enshrining an EAA have also been termed

‘ecological aquaculture’ that encompasses integrated man-

agement of land, water and aquatic living resources for sus-

tainability (Soto et al. 2008). Future development of

aquaculture must reorient the ‘blue revolution’ to attain

ecologically integrated sustainable aquaculture systems that

have positive impacts on natural and social ecosystems

(Costa-Pierce 2002). An EAA includes management to

increase ecosystem productivity through integrated aqua-

culture and the development of linkages between aquacul-

ture, environment and society to promote economic

benefits (Hambrey et al. 2008). Three spheres of EAA

application are important: (i) farm; (ii) water body and

associated aquaculture zone; and (iii) market-trade (Soto

et al. 2008). An EAA acknowledges the need to achieve

profitability and the potential of aquaculture development

to deliver economic gains from a social and environmental

perspective (Knowler 2008).

Prawn–fish–rice farming

Integrated prawn–fish–rice farming in southwest Bangla-

desh as an EAA is characterized by relatively low inputs

(Table 2) of supplies that can be sourced locally (Fig. 3).

The peak season of prawn farming with monsoon season

aman rice is from May to December, a culture period of

around 6–8 months. However, farmers grow a variety of

dike crops year round on a small-scale. Prawn culture still

remains dependent on wild fry as hatchery production has

been limited. Nevertheless, a range of hatchery-produced

fish species, mainly Indian major carp and exotic carp, are

stocked with prawns in rice fields. A variety of feeds are

used for prawn culture including chopped snail meat,

farm-made aquafeed (i.e. mixture of rice bran, oilcake and

fishmeal) and commercially manufactured pelleted feed

(Ahmed et al. 2010a). Most farmers mainly use cow dung

as fertilizer for prawn farming. Chemical fertilizer use is

not widespread, only a few better-off farmers use a combi-

nation of chemical fertilizer such as urea and triple super

phosphate (TSP). The productivity of prawns, fish and rice

is variable because of low input and multiple crop farming

systems (Table 2).

It seems that there has been much progress towards an

ecosystem approach to integrated prawn–fish–rice farming

in southwest Bangladesh. An ecological approach to prawn

and fish farming in rice fields demands synergy between

appropriation and the use of resources and farm manage-

ment practices (Ahmed & Garnett 2010). Ecosystem based

prawn–fish–rice farming demands knowledge of social,

economic, environmental, technical, physical and political

systems (Table 3).

Benefits and advantages of integrated prawn–fish–rice farming

The practice of prawn and fish farming in rice fields is a

form of integrated aquaculture–agriculture (IAA) that can

be defined as integrated farming to achieve diversification

Table 2 Inputs and outputs of integrated prawn–fish–rice farming in

southwest Bangladesh

Item Average Range Reference

Farm size (ha) 0.23 0.06–1.01 Ahmed et al.

(2008c) and

Ahmed et al.

(2010a)

Stocking (quantity ha�1 yr�1)

Prawn postlarvae 20 671 10 000–30 000

Fish fingerlings 2450 2000–5000

Feeding (kg ha�1 yr�1)

Snail meat 9913 7932–12 383

Farm-made feed 3507 2818–4239

Fertilization (kg ha�1 yr�1)

Cow dung 1467 562–1907

Urea 435 138–741

TSP 211 89–356

Productivity (kg ha�1 yr�1)

Prawn 432 239–754

Fish 395 269–672

Rice 2352 1572–3119

Reviews in Aquaculture (2014) 6, 20–35

© 2013 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd24

N. Ahmed et al.

of aquaculture–agriculture practices and to promote link-

ages between subsystems (Edwards et al. 1988). According

to Prein (2002), IAA is defined as concurrent or sequential

linkages between two or more human activity systems.

Linkages between aquaculture and human activities involve

not only agriculture, but encompass processes of nutrient

and energy recovery (Edwards 1998). Taking a wider per-

spective, integration has been viewed as part of an ‘inte-

Figure 3 Sources of key inputs for inte-

grated prawn–fish–rice farming in southwest

Bangladesh (based on description from

Ahmed et al. 2008c, 2010a).

Table 3 Components of ecosystem based

integrated prawn–fish–rice farming Component Example

Social Socially acceptable with receptive and supportive farming conditions

Wider community involvement

Social resilience including livelihood opportunity and food supply

Social linkages and knowledge transfer

Economic Income of farmers and associated groups

National export earnings from prawn

Local marketing of fish and rice

Diversified economies at household and community level

Environmental Favourable environment for integrated farming

Great biodiversity of rice field flora and fauna

Ecological relationship among biotic and abiotic components

Positive effects on rice field ecosystems

Technical Simple production technology

Diversified cropping through integration

Maintaining water quality and soil fertility

Sustainability of integrated farming

Physical Low-lying rice fields with available water sources

Availability of wild prawn postlarvae and hatchery-produced fish fry

Locally available prawn feed (snail, rice bran, oilcake), and fertilizer (cow dung)

Prawn processing and export facilities

Political Regulations and legal frameworks

Cooperation among key stakeholders

Institutional and organizational support

Government support

Sources: Based on description from Ahmed et al. (2008c, 2010a).

Reviews in Aquaculture (2014) 6, 20–35

© 2013 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd 25

Ecosystem-based prawn–fish–rice farming

grated resources management’ approach (Lightfoot et al.

1993). Ideally, IAA results in increased diversification,

intensification, improved natural resource use efficiency,

increased productivity and sustainability (Lightfoot et al.

1992; Prein 2002; Pant et al. 2005). Integrated aquaculture

–agriculture is particularly appropriate for resource-poor

farmers, maximizing benefit from their labour (Ali 1990;

Nhan et al. 2007). In a country such as Bangladesh, where

land is scarce and the population is growing rapidly, inte-

grated aquaculture–agriculture makes the most of scarce

resources, particularly since there are often synergistic ben-

efits between the different enterprises (Frei & Becker 2005).

The practice of integrated aquaculture–agriculture in

southwest Bangladesh provides a wide range of benefits,

including aquaculture, agriculture, environmental attri-

butes and broader ecosystem services (Fig. 4).

Aquaculture

Many fish species migrate to rice field environments

because they provide a natural habitat during the rainy

season (Fernando 1993; Little et al. 1996; Halwart 1998).

Such natural aggregation might have inspired prawn–fish–rice farming to increase production (Gurung & Wagle

2005). Mutualism between prawns and fish in rice fields

has been reported by many scientists (Nguyen 1993;

Halwart & Gupta 2004; Giap et al. 2005; Lu & Li 2006).

Growth and yields of prawns in integrated farming do

not appear to be influenced by fish because they do not

compete for feed (Hossain & Islam 2006). Thus,

integrated prawn–fish culture in rice fields is technically

viable. A further advantage of prawn culture in rice fields

is the reduction of aggressive behaviour between prawns

that are known to be highly territorial (Tidwell &

Bratvold 2005).

Raising prawns and fish in rice fields is very effective in

enhancing the efficiency and productivity of farms. Inte-

grated prawn–fish–rice farming is considered to be the most

efficient in terms of resource utilization through the

complementary use of land and water. The culture of fish

with prawns in rice fields appears to stimulate increased

yields due to the complementary utilization of trophic

niches (Frei & Becker 2005), because the rice field offers

planktonic, periphytic and benthic food (Mustow 2002;

Wahab et al. 2008). Thus, the requirement for additional

feed and fertilizer is less compared with pond aquaculture

which in turn reduces production costs. Lower production

costs are possibly the most beneficial aspect of prawn and

fish farming in rice fields. As a result of using organic fertili-

zer (cow dung) and farm-made aquafeed, integrated prawn

–fish–rice farming has minimal environmental impacts.

A range of associated groups have benefited through

integrated prawn–fish–rice farming as it offers diverse live-

lihood opportunities for the rural poor, including farmers,

fry traders, commercial harvesters, market actors, interme-

diaries, transporters and processors. Owing to the produc-

tion of prawns destined for export markets this has resulted

in significant cash flows into the local economy, with

benefits being realized beyond the farming community, as

revenues have stimulated local trade. Although it should be

acknowledged that benefits have not necessarily been

shared equally and a rising demand for inputs and

resources may have disadvantaged certain groups. Most

farmers have improved their income through increased

profitability in prawn farming and diversified cropping sys-

tems and discernible qualitative and quantitative changes

in the level of economic activity have been witnessed

(Ahmed et al. 2010a). Although farmers never eat prawns,

the consumption of fish has increased notably over recent

years. Households of farmers tend to eat small indigenous

Increased rice yieldProduction of dike crops Controlled weed, pestDecreased fertilizer useReduced production costHigher food supply

Agriculture

Increased prawn, fish yieldEco-friendly farmingEfficient resource useDiversification, cost-effectiveNutritional benefitLivelihoods and income

Aquaculture Environment

Increased soil fertility Integrated pest managementReduced pesticide useControlled diseaseConserved biodiversityMaintained sustainability

Prawn-fish-rice farming: Integrated aquaculture-agriculture

Figure 4 Potential benefits of integrated

prawn–fish–rice farming.

Reviews in Aquaculture (2014) 6, 20–35

© 2013 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd26

N. Ahmed et al.

fish rather than sell them. These are a valuable source of

micronutrients, vitamins and minerals.

Agriculture

Rice production is increased by the presence of prawns and

fish. Studies have found that the cultivation of fish in rice

fields increased rice yields by 8–15% (dela Cruz et al. 1992;

Mohanty et al. 2004). Because of the fertilizing effect of

prawn and fish faeces and excreta, nutrient availability is

greatly increased to the rice crop. Interactions among

prawns, fish and rice also help resource-poor farmers lower

production costs because insects and pests are consumed

by the prawns and fish (Fernando 1993; WorldFish Center

2007). Fish also play a significant role in controlling aquatic

weeds. A reduction of weeds can help to reduce competi-

tion for nutrients and light, and thereby increase the

growth of rice plants (Lightfoot et al. 1992).

Production of dike crops also increases due to the oppor-

tunity to use pond water and fertile sediments to improve

soils. Dike crops including short-cycle fruits (banana, guava

and papaya) and vegetables (tomato, onion, bean and

gourd) are now more abundant, and farmers have benefited

from selling these. Integrated prawn–fish–rice farming has

substantially improved farmers’ food consumption. House-

holds of farmers are able to eat rice three times a day and

also eat better quality food (Ahmed et al. 2010a). Increased

rice production has also meant increased availability of

paddy straw, used for housing materials, cooking fuel and

cattle fodder. As a result of such fodder supplies, milk and

cow dung are readily available and inexpensive in prawn

farming communities. Cow dung is used for cooking fuel

and fertilizer, while milk is particularly beneficial for chil-

dren and lactating mothers.

Integrated prawn–fish–rice farming has significantly

increased farmer incomes. Because the various crops are

harvested at different times of the year, household cash flow

has improved and the risk of crop damage has been

reduced. Overall, the supply of rice, vegetables and fruits

has generated a number of employment opportunities, par-

ticularly in transport and marketing (Ahmed et al. 2010a).

The positive social impact is quite profound in prawn

farming communities due to increased income and liveli-

hood opportunities.

Environment

Integrated prawn–fish–rice farming is environmentally

sound as prawns and fish promote recycling of nitrogen

and phosphorus through bioturbation, thus improving soil

fertility (Lightfoot et al. 1992; Giap et al. 2005; Dugan et al.

2006). Prawn and fish waste increases the amount of

organic fertilizer in rice fields, leading to an improved cul-

ture environment. Integrated farming is also conducive to

the prevention of soil degradation. Prawn and fish farming

in rice fields is also recognized as a viable approach to inte-

grated pest management (IPM) (Haroon & Pittman 1997;

Horstkotte-Wesseler 1999; Berg 2001; Halwart & Gupta

2004). Moreover, fish are predators of snails and insects

and can help to control malaria mosquitoes and water-

borne diseases (Fernando & Halwart 2000; Matteson 2000).

This farming system is capable of lowering the emission of

the greenhouse gas methane (Lu & Li 2006).

The environment of the prawn–fish–rice ecosystem

facilitates the maintenance of biodiversity. As a result of

reduced pesticide and insecticide use, the rice field con-

serves a great variety of aquatic flora and fauna (Halwart

2008). Rice fields play an important role in the conserva-

tion of a number of small indigenous fish species, and

although these species may not be classified as endan-

gered on a global basis, native populations are under

immense pressure owing to environmental modification

and man-made interventions. Most of these small indige-

nous fish species breed naturally in rice fields during the

monsoon. Rice fields also contribute to conserving Indian

bullfrog (Rana tigrina) populations and in turn these ani-

mals play an important role in controlling rice pests and

hence increase rice production (Nuruzzaman 1993). Inte-

grated prawn–fish–rice farming is considered broadly sus-

tainable as it can be supported by relatively low-inputs

from local sources (Ahmed & Garnett 2010). Systems in

developed countries, however, are likely to include larger

inputs of chemical fertilizer and fossil-fuel driven tech-

nology (Gliessman 2006; Hazell & Pachauri 2006). Such

systems are likely to be less sustainable due to their larger

footprint beyond the farm boundaries (Khan & Hanjra

2009).

Vulnerability of prawn–fish–rice ecosystems toclimate change

In spite of a wide range of benefits, integrated prawn–fish–rice farming has been threatened by recent climate change.

The growing risks to prawn–fish–rice ecosystems result

from a combination of climatic events, including flood,

drought, sea-level rise and sea surface temperature changes

(Fig. 5).

Flood

Bangladesh is a flood-prone country and one-fifth of the

land is routinely flooded annually. By virtue of its geograph-

ical location close to the Great Himalayan Ranges in the

north and Bay of Bengal in the south, Bangladesh is

endowed with many rivers. Bangladesh is often called a ‘land

of rivers’ as a network of around 700 rivers and tributaries

Reviews in Aquaculture (2014) 6, 20–35

© 2013 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd 27

Ecosystem-based prawn–fish–rice farming

criss-cross the country. The main causes of coastal flooding

are rainfall, river flow and sea level rise. Increased rainfall

causes a greater frequency of floods and river bank erosion.

As Bangladesh is a very low-lying country any rise in sea level

and siltation in the major river systems can exacerbate the

effects of floods. Cyclones from the Bay of Bengal also con-

tribute to coastal flooding. Flood events appear to become

more extreme due to El Ni~no (Conway &Waage 2010).

Integrated prawn–fish–rice farming in southwest Ban-

gladesh is extremely vulnerable to coastal flooding. Floods

normally occur during the monsoon from June to Sep-

tember coinciding with the peak season of prawn–fish–rice farming. This unique farming system is at high risk

from flooding because it is practised in predominantly

low-lying areas and the monsoon floodwaters routinely

threaten to inundate the main areas of production. Sud-

den or prolonged floods often damage prawn–fish–riceecosystems. Preventing the escape of prawns and fish is

very difficult during the floods, especially for small farm-

ers who are reluctant to raise their low and narrow dikes

because of associated construction costs. Without appro-

priate adaptation and planning, coastal flooding in the

future will have a devastating effect on integrated prawn–fish–rice farming.

Drought

Climatic conditions in Bangladesh are characterized by

monsoon floods and drought in the dry season (November

–March) and owing to rainfall variability drought is a nota-

ble feature of coastal Bangladesh in both pre-monsoon and

post-monsoon seasons. An El Ni~no event resulting in

strong global warming can cause the monsoon to switch

into a dry mode, resulting in significant reductions in

rainfall leading to severe droughts (Conway & Waage

2010). The number of drought events in coastal Bangladesh

has increased in recent years due to climate change. Because

of a lack of water for agriculture in coastal Bangladesh, soil

moisture content can be severely decreased in rice fields

and the coastal poor often face high levels of food insecu-

rity owing to direct and indirect drought effects (Ahmed

et al. 2010b). Agricultural drought causes famine which

occurs when there is a sudden collapse in the level of food

production and consumption, but this has also been associ-

ated with poor governance (Sen 1982).

Drought is one of the foremost environmental limits to

integrated prawn–fish–rice farming in southwest Bangladesh

(Ahmed & Garnett 2010). Severe or prolonged droughts

often result in curtailed culture periods and constitute a

common threat to rice culture. Drought is a major con-

straint affecting prawn, fish and rice yields, whilst climate

change is likely to exacerbate drought problems, thereby

further threatening prawn–fish–rice agroecosystems.

Sea-level rise

Sea-level rise resulting from global warming and the melt-

ing of glaciers in the Himalayas would inundate large parts

of coastal Bangladesh and the country is particularly vul-

nerable as the 710 km long coastline on the Bay of Bengal

is difficult to protect (Pouliotte et al. 2009). About 70% of

Bangladesh is <10 m above sea level (Conway & Waage

2010) and a predicted 62 cm sea-level rise would inundate

16% of the country, affecting 43 million people by 2080,

whilst a 1 m sea-level rise would affect the vast majority of

coastal areas in Bangladesh, signalling the eradication of

the Sundarbans, the world’s largest remaining mangrove

forest (World Bank 2000).

+Flood Drought

+

– ––

+++++

++

+

Prawn-fish-rice ecosystems

Climate change

Frequency of cyclones

Salt water intrusion

Evaporation and rain

Sea level rise

Tidal surge and damage

Sea surface temperature

Heating of coastal land

Water temperature

Figure 5 Impacts of climate change on

prawn–fish–rice ecosystems in southwest Ban-

gladesh (+, indicates increase level, frequency

or intensity of climatic events; �, indicates

negative impacts on prawn–fish–rice ecosys-

tems).

Reviews in Aquaculture (2014) 6, 20–35

© 2013 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd28

N. Ahmed et al.

The sea-level rise observed to date has increased the

frequency of cyclones and associated tidal surges and salt

water intrusion to the coastal region. The entire coastal

zone in Bangladesh is prone to violent storms and tropi-

cal cyclones that originate in the Indian Ocean and track

through the Bay of Bengal (Ali 1996). The development

of cyclones is strongly influenced by rising sea surface

temperatures (Lal 2001; Agrawala et al. 2003). Cyclones

constitute a major source of vulnerability in coastal

Bangladesh, with cyclones in 1970 killing around 300 000

people and in 1991 the recorded death toll was 138 000

individuals (World Bank 2000). In November 2007,

coastal Bangladesh was affected by tropical cyclone Sidr,

the worst in 10 years. Six months later in May 2008,

cyclone Nargis again devastated coastal life in Bangladesh.

In April 2009, cyclone Bijli veered away from the south-

ern coast of the country. A month later (May 2009),

cyclone Aila slammed into southwest Bangladesh (Ahmed

et al. 2010b). In October 2010, Bangladesh escaped the

main brunt of cyclone Giri as it headed towards Myan-

mar. It is accepted that the frequency of cyclones in

coastal Bangladesh has increased due to climate change

(Ali 1999; Pouliotte et al. 2009).

Cyclones and associated storm surges often cause sudden

damage to prawn–fish–rice ecosystems. Sea-level rise and

tropical cyclones with tidal surges have been linked to sal-

ine water intrusion in the coastal area. Large areas of rice

fields in southwest Bangladesh have already been inundated

with salt water and thus soil and water salinity have

increased which in turn has reduced soil fertility. Rice pro-

ductivity has decreased as a result of soil and water salinity

(Ali 2006). According to the World Bank (2000), about

200 000 t of rice production would be lost if climate

change were to accelerate the saline water intrusion in

coastal Bangladesh. By 2050 soil and groundwater salinity

is predicted to affect two million hectares of land in coastal

Bangladesh (Conway & Waage 2010). Soil and water salini-

zation severely affect the flora and fauna of rice field ecosys-

tems (Pouliotte et al. 2009). Salt water intrusion into rice

fields would change the water quality and affect freshwater

prawn and fish production in the future. Soil in rice fields

heats up faster because of saline water intrusion (Conway &

Waage 2010) and increased farm water and soil tempera-

ture due to salinity may cause higher mortality of prawns

and fish.

Sea surface temperature

Sea surface temperature is likely to have severe effects on

prawn–fish–rice ecosystems in coastal Bangladesh. It was

noted by Conway and Waage (2010, p. 285) that ‘with

surface temperature increases, the land will heat up faster

and there will be a greater contrast between the land and

the ocean, and thus more intense monsoons’. Changes in

sea surface temperature may produce harmful algal

blooms and result in lower dissolved oxygen levels. Mod-

ified sea surface temperature regimes also threaten to

cause changes in marine ecosystems and may affect the

timing and success of prawn migration and spawning

(WorldFish Center 2006). The productivity and survival

of prawn postlarvae is largely dependent on the health of

coastal ecosystems (Ahmed & Troell 2010). The repro-

ductive biology of prawns is sensitive to variations in

water temperatures and seasonal increases in water tem-

perature often cause prawn broodstock mortalities. Thus,

changes in water temperature would disrupt prawn

reproductive patterns and migrations. Climate change

including sea surface temperature effects may also

increase prawn and fish diseases (Alborali 2006). The

productivity of prawn farming and consequently export

earning in Bangladesh have already been severely affected

by prawn disease outbreaks (Alam et al. 2007). Similarly,

the productivity of fish and rice may become increasingly

variable due to anticipated sea surface temperature

changes.

Adaptation to climate change

Climate change presents a severe and growing challenge to

the sustainability of integrated prawn–fish–rice farming.

Eradication of prawn–fish–rice agroecosystems by climate

change could have dramatic consequences for the economy

of Bangladesh. Mitigation of climate change is not an

option locally because the impacts and legacy of climate

change demand global responses and structural reform.

Thus, climate change adaptation strategies must be devel-

oped with limited resources.

Community-based adaptation strategies

Considering the extreme vulnerability of prawn–fish–riceecosystems to climate change effects, community-based

adaptation (CBA) strategies must be formulated to cope

with the challenges. CBA is colloquially termed a bottom-

up process in which the interactive participation and

engagement of community members themselves is central

to climate change adaptation (Huq & Reid 2007). The prin-

ciples of CBA include increasing the capacity of communi-

ties to adapt to adverse climate change effects and,

regarding Bangladesh, successful facilitation of the process

has been noted. CARE Bangladesh worked in flood-prone

areas and promoted livelihood diversification as a practical

response, including growing vegetables on floating gardens

in waterlogged areas and duck rearing (Mitchell & Tanner

2006). A key factor governing the adaptive capacity of com-

munities is their access to and control over natural (water

Reviews in Aquaculture (2014) 6, 20–35

© 2013 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd 29

Ecosystem-based prawn–fish–rice farming

and land), human (knowledge of climate risks, farming

skills and health), social (community-based organization

and social support institutions), physical (infrastructure

and facilities) and financial (income, savings and credit)

capitals or resources (CARE 2010). Considering integrated

prawn–fish–rice farming, however, most farmers are poor

and have limited access to livelihood resources (Ahmed

et al. 2008b).

Effective CBA depends on implementing a number of

complementary strategies, including the promotion of cli-

mate resilient livelihood strategies, disaster risk reduction

strategies, capacity development of local institutions, and

social mobilization and empowerment (CARE 2010). The

active involvement of local institutions with relevant stake-

holders, including community members, NGOs, govern-

ment agencies and community-based organizations may

aid capacity development to plan and implement CBA

strategies. Strong collaboration among stakeholders will

provide a platform for knowledge and information sharing

on CBA. A resilient community is well placed to cope with

climate risks and to recover quickly from any adverse

impacts (CARE 2010).

A number of CBA projects for resilient prawn–fish–ricefarming can be envisaged that will depend on involve-

ment and support from local institutions. Constructing

appropriately climate change proofed irrigation facilities

in preparation for the dry season and higher dikes for

the monsoon may help to protect prawn–fish–rice ecosys-

tems. Coastal embankment construction and afforestation

of a greenbelt would help to reduce the effect of cyclones

and sea-level rise in coastal Bangladesh (Pouliotte et al.

2009). A locally appropriate agroecosystem for the

culture of freshwater prawn, marine shrimp and brack-

ishwater fish could be devised to facilitate adaptation to

salt water intrusion in rice fields. Moreover, introduction

of salt-tolerant rice varieties may substantially increase

rice production (Alpuerto et al. 2009). The advantages of

integrated culture practices over monocultures with

regard to climate change adaptation include joint

production of cash and staple crops, promoting both

local food security and economic development, important

aspects for developing social-ecological resilience. Inte-

grated prawn–fish–rice culture also makes more efficient

use of resources than monocultures and results in diver-

sification economies (Rahman et al. 2011). According to

these authors, however, inefficiencies persist and action

to increase the education levels of farmers and encourage

female labour inputs could further enhance the produc-

tivity of such systems and reduce risks, thus contributing

to greater resilience to climate change. Complementary

and targeted research will be needed to develop CBA

strategies to ensure integrated prawn–fish–rice farming is

resilient and sustainable.

Translocation of prawn–fish–rice farming: coastal to

inland

Integrated prawn–fish–rice farming is more significant for

coastal Bangladesh than for inland areas because of favour-

able ecological conditions and suitable bio-physical

resources including access to wild prawn fry. Integrated

prawn–fish–rice farming could, however, be extended to

inland areas that are perhaps less vulnerable to climate

change. Temperature ranges further inland and at higher

elevations than the coastal zone are conducive to prawn

culture, as demonstrated by established prawn culture in

Mymensingh District in north-central Bangladesh (Ahmed

et al. 2008a). Nevertheless, adoption of prawn–fish–ricefarming is generally low elsewhere in the country due to

technical, financial and institutional constraints (Nabi

2008). Expansion of prawn–fish–rice farming across the

country is feasible due to similar ecological conditions in

rice fields but will require CBA approaches supplemented

with technical and financial support. Government policy

must encourage adoption of integrated prawn–fish culture

in rice field agroecosystems. Extension services, training

programmes, institutional and organizational support, gov-

ernment assistance and public-private partnerships are

needed to expand prawn–fish–rice farming throughout the

country (WorldFish Center 2010).

Expansion of prawn farming in rice fields depends on

the availability of prawn postlarvae. Whilst it is possible to

transport wild postlarvae quite easily over considerable dis-

tances, there are costs and associated financial and disease

risks associated with this. Establishment of hatchery pro-

duction of prawn postlarvae closer to on-growing areas

would be desirable, thus avoiding dependence on wild seed

and offering opportunities for health checks and environ-

mental conditioning prior to delivery. Construction of

prawn hatcheries with proper technical support and facili-

ties is thus needed to avoid dependence on wild prawn fry

(Ahmed et al. 2008a) and policies could be devised to

encourage the private sector to invest in developing such

infrastructure to promote more sustainable and resilient

integrated prawn–fish–rice culture. Providing credit consti-tutes one policy mechanism necessary to facilitate technol-

ogy transfer. Access to microcredit at reasonable interest

rates would be essential if integrated prawn–fish–rice farm-

ing is to become accessible to the rural poor (Ahmed et al.

2010a). National banks and NGOs with remits focused on

poverty alleviation through social and economic develop-

ment could play a pivotal role in promoting prawn–fish–rice culture across the country (Ahmed & Garnett 2010).

Rice monoculture remains the main farming system in

Bangladesh. Several reports have suggested that rice mono-

cultures cannot achieve sustainable food supply owing to

long-term environmental decline (Berg 2001; Halwart &

Reviews in Aquaculture (2014) 6, 20–35

© 2013 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd30

N. Ahmed et al.

Gupta 2004; Frei & Becker 2005; Lu & Li 2006). Reduced

fertilizer and pesticide use through the adoption of IPM is

one long-term option to improve farm productivity in an

environmentally friendly manner (Horstkotte-Wesseler

1999; Berg 2002; Gupta et al. 2002; Ahmed & Garnett

2011). Integrated prawn–fish–rice farming can provide a

sustainable alternative to rice monocultures in which farm-

ers can harness associated ecological benefits. Integration of

prawns and fish in rice fields is a practical means to sustain-

able intensification of agriculture, producing more food

from the same area of land without worsening environmen-

tal impacts (The Royal Society 2009; Godfray et al. 2010).

Integrated prawn–fish–rice farming holds the promise to

assist Bangladesh keep pace with a burgeoning demand for

food through fish and rice production, whilst maintaining

economic development through export oriented prawn

production (Fig. 6).

The total area of perennial rice fields in Bangladesh is

about 10.14 million ha and there are a further 2.83 mil-

lion ha of seasonal rice fields where water remains for

about 4–6 months (BRKB 2010). The carrying capacity of

seasonal rice fields is not fully utilized, but there exists tre-

mendous scope to increase prawn and fish production

through aquaculture integration. If prawn farming

extended to a quarter of the 2.83 million ha of seasonal rice

fields, the country would stand to earn an additional US

$2.35 billion annually from prawn exports. Similarly, the

country would potentially earn an additional US$9.41

billion annually, if prawn farming were extended to the entire

2.83 million ha of seasonal rice fields (Table 4). Eventually

the country would produce an additional 0.73 and 1.58

million t per annum of fish and rice, respectively, if inte-

grated prawn–fish farming was adopted across the total

area of seasonal rice fields (Ahmed & Garnett 2011). Never-

People and livelihoods

Income and export earnings

Food supply Ecosystems

Agriculture (rice, dike crops)

Aquaculture (prawn, fish)

Human component Farming component

Figure 6 Interrelationships among compo-

nents of prawn–fish–rice farming towards

food supply, income and livelihoods (adapted

from Bala & Hossain 2009).

Table 4 Potential for export earnings from prawn production in seasonal rice fields in Bangladesh

Seasonal rice field

area (million ha)

Convert to prawn–fish–

rice farming (%)

Prawn–fish–rice

farming area (ha)

Average prawn

production*

(kg ha�1 yr�1)

Total prawn

production (t yr�1)

Average export

price† (US$ kg�1)

Total export

earning (million US$)

2.83 25 707 500 432 305 640 7.7 2353

50 1 415 000 611 280 4706

75 2 122 500 916 920 7060

100 2 830 000 1 222 560 9413

*Average prawn production is from Table 2.

†An average export price of head-less prawn is US$14 kg�1. As the removal of heads, legs and shell during processing leads to an average 45% of

decrease in weight, the average export price of head-on prawn is calculated at US$7.7 kg�1.

Reviews in Aquaculture (2014) 6, 20–35

© 2013 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd 31

Ecosystem-based prawn–fish–rice farming

theless, social, economic and environmental challenges

must be overcome to enable successful expansion of prawn

–fish–rice farming throughout the country. Favourable

social, economic and environmental outcomes will be vital

in ensuring potential benefits are delivered effectively to the

millions of rural poor in Bangladesh who stand to benefit.

Conclusions and policy implications

Ecosystem-based prawn–fish–rice farming in southwest Ban-

gladesh plays an important role in the economy of the coun-

try, earning valuable foreign exchange, contributing to

increased food production, diversifying the economy and

increasing employment opportunities. It is an efficient and

diversified farming system for sustainably producing food

and cash crops. The combination of prawns, fish and rice

production gives particularly good potential returns. The evi-

dence presented in this study confirms that prawn–fish–ricefarming has brought about social, economic and

environmental benefits. Despite widespread benefits, the

practice of prawn and fish farming in rice field ecosystems is

vulnerable to climate change, including floods, drought, sea-

level rise and modified sea surface temperatures. Concerning

climate change, CBA strategies need to be developed with

stakeholders to cope with the challenges. Moreover, adaptive

research on coping mechanisms including the development

of integrated prawn-shrimp culture with salt tolerant rice

varieties should be given particular attention.

It is proposed that integrated prawn–fish–rice farming

could be transferred to inland areas that appear less vulner-

able to climate change impacts compared with coastal

regions. Expansion of prawn–fish–rice farming will require

dynamism to fully exploit potential opportunities. Consid-

ering the role of ecosystem-based integrated prawn–fish–rice farming, much greater benefits could be obtained if

future government policies encouraged the expansion of

this promising farming strategy and promoted a workable

approach to encourage interactive participation of the rural

poor in formulating appropriate development strategies.

Institutional and organizational support, training facilities,

extension services, technical support and public–privatepartnerships would greatly support expansion of integrated

prawn–fish–rice farming which constitutes a promising

ecosystem-based approach to aquaculture.

Acknowledgements

This review is derived from a British Council sponsored

INSPIRE (International Strategic Partnership in Research

and Education) Exploratory Research Grant. A previous

version of this paper was presented by the lead author at

the University of Plymouth, University of Reading and

University of Essex, UK to establish strategic partnerships.

We would like to express gratitude to Professor Conner

Bailey, Dr Malcolm Beveridge and Professor James Muir

for their helpful comments on an earlier version of the

manuscript. Views and opinions expressed herein are solely

those of the authors.

References

Agrawala S, Ota T, Ahmed AU, Smith J, Aalst MV (2003) Devel-

opment and Climate Change in Bangladesh: Focus on Coastal

Flooding and the Sundarbans. Organization for Economic

Cooperation and Development, Paris.

Ahmed N, Garnett ST (2010) Sustainability of freshwater prawn

farming in rice fields in southwest Bangladesh. Journal of

Sustainable Agriculture 34: 659–679.

Ahmed N, Garnett ST (2011) Integrated rice-fish farming in

Bangladesh: meeting the challenges of food security. Food

Security 3: 81–92.

Ahmed N, Troell M (2010) Fishing for prawn larvae in Bangla-

desh: an important coastal livelihood causing negative effects

on the environment. Ambio 39: 20–29.

Ahmed N, Demaine H, Muir JF (2008a) Freshwater prawn farm-

ing in Bangladesh: history, present status and future pros-

pects. Aquaculture Research 39: 806–819.

Ahmed N, Allison EH, Muir JF (2008b) Using the sustainable

livelihoods framework to identify constraints and opportuni-

ties to the development of freshwater prawn farming in south-

west Bangladesh. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 39:

598–611.

Ahmed N, Brown JH, Muir JF (2008c) Freshwater prawn farm-

ing in gher systems in southwest Bangladesh. Aquaculture Eco-

nomics and Management 12: 207–223.

Ahmed N, Allison EH, Muir JF (2010a) Rice-fields to prawn

farms: a blue revolution in southwest Bangladesh? Aquacul-

ture International 18: 555–574.

Ahmed N, Troell M, Allison EH, Muir JF (2010b) Prawn post-

larvae fishing in coastal Bangladesh: challenges for sustainable

livelihoods. Marine Policy 34: 218–227.

Alam SMN, Pokrant B, Yakupitiyage A, Phillips MJ (2007) Eco-

nomic returns of disease-affected extensive shrimp farming in

southwest Bangladesh. Aquaculture International 15: 363–370.

Alborali L (2006) Climatic variations related to fish diseases and

production. Veterinary Research Communications 30 (Suppl

1): 93–97.

Ali AB (1990) Rice-fish farming in Malaysia: a resource optimi-

sation. Ambio 19: 404–408.

Ali A (1996) Vulnerability of Bangladesh to climate change and

sea level rise through tropical cyclones and storm surges.

Water, Air and Soil Pollution 92: 171–179.

Ali A (1999) Climate change impacts and adaptation assessment

in Bangladesh. Climate Research 12: 109–112.

Ali AMS (2006) Rice to shrimp: land use/land cover changes and

soil degradation in Southwestern Bangladesh. Land Use Policy

23: 421–435.

Reviews in Aquaculture (2014) 6, 20–35

© 2013 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd32

N. Ahmed et al.

Alpuerto VEB, Norton GW, Alwang J, Ismail AM (2009) Eco-

nomic impact analysis of marker-assisted breeding for toler-

ance to salinity and phosphorus deficiency in rice. Applied

Economic Perspective and Policy 31: 779–792.

Bailey C (2008) Human dimensions of an ecosystem approach

to aquaculture. In: Soto D, Aguilar-Manjarrez J, Hishamunda

N (eds) Building an Ecosystem Approach to Aquaculture, pp.

37–46. FAO/ Universitat de les Illes Balears Expert Workshop,

7–11 May 2007, Palma de Mallorca, Spain. FAO Fisheries and

Aquaculture Proceedings No. 14, FAO, Rome.

Bala BK, Hossain MA (2009) Modeling of food security and eco-

logical footprint of coastal zone of Bangladesh. Environment,

Development and Sustainability 12: 511–529.

Berg H (2001) Pesticide use in rice and rice-fish farms in the

Mekong Delta, Vietnam. Crop Protection 20: 897–905.

Berg H (2002) Rice monoculture and integrated rice-fish farm-

ing in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam–economic and ecological

considerations. Ecological Economics 41: 95–107.

Berkes F, Folke C (eds) (1998) Linking Social and Ecological

Systems: Management Practices and Social Mechanisms for

Building Resilience. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Berkes F, Colding J, Folke C (eds) (2003) Navigating Social-eco-

logical Systems: Building Resilience for Complexity and Change.

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

Boyd CE, Tucker CS (1998) Pond Aquaculture Water Quality

Management. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA.

BRKB (Bangladesh Rice Knowledge Bank) (2010) Rice Statistics

in Bangladesh. Bangladesh Rice Knowledge Bank, Bangladesh

Rice Research Institute, Gazipur.

CARE (Cooperative for Assistance and Relief Everywhere)

(2010) Community-Based Adaptation Toolkit. CARE Interna-

tional, Merrifield, VA.

Conway G, Waage J (2010) Science and Innovation for Devel-

opment. UK Collaborative on Development Sciences, Lon-

don.

Costa-Pierce BA (2002) Farming systems research and extension

methods for the development of sustainable aquaculture eco-

systems. In: Costa-Pierce BA (ed.) Ecological Aquaculture: The

Evolution of the Blue Revolution, pp. 103–124. Blackwell Sci-

ence, Oxford.

Costa-Pierce BA (2008) An ecosystem approach to marine aquacul-

ture: a global review. In: Soto D, Aguilar-Manjarrez J, Hisham-

unda N (eds) Building an Ecosystem Approach to Aquaculture, pp.

81–115. FAO/ Universitat de les Illes Balears Expert Workshop, 7

–11 May 2007, Palma de Mallorca, Spain. FAO Fisheries and

Aquaculture Proceedings No. 14, FAO, Rome.

dela Cruz CR, Lightfoot C, Costa-Pierce BA, Carangal VR, Bim-

bao MAP (1992) Rice-fish research and development in Asia.

ICLARM Conference Proceedings 24. International Centre for

Living Aquatic Resources Management, Manila.

DoF (Department of Fisheries) (2012) Fishery Statistical Year-

book of Bangladesh 2010–2011. Fisheries Resources Survey Sys-

tem, Department of Fisheries, Dhaka, Bangladesh.

Dugan P, Dey MM, Sugunan VV (2006) Fisheries and water

productivity in tropical river basins: enhancing food security

and livelihoods by managing water for fish. Agricultural Water

Management 80: 262–275.

Edwards P (1998) A systems approach for the promotion of

integrated aquaculture. Aquaculture Economics and Manage-

ment 2: 1–12.

Edwards P, Pullin RSV, Gartner JA (1988) Research and Educa-

tion for the Development of Integrated Crop–Livestock–Fish

Farming Systems in the Tropics. ICLARM Studies and Reviews

16, ICLARM, Manila.

Fernando CH (1993) Rice field ecology and fish culture – an

overview. Hydrobiologia 259: 91–113.

Fernando CH, Halwart M (2000) Possibilities for the integration

of fish farming into irrigation systems. Fisheries Management

and Ecology 7: 45–54.

Folke C (2007) Social-ecological systems and adaptive gover-

nance of the commons. Ecological Research 22: 14–15.

Folke C, Hahn T, Olsson P, Norberg J (2005) Adaptive gover-

nance of social-ecological systems. Annual Review of Environ-

ment and Resources 30: 441–473.

Frei M, Becker K (2005) Integrated rice-fish culture: coupled

production saves resources. Natural Resources Forum 29: 135–

143.

Giap DH, Yi Y, Lin CK (2005) Effects of different fertilisation

and feeding regimes on the production of integrated farming

of rice and prawn Macrobrachium rosenbergii (De Man).

Aquaculture Research 36: 292–299.

Gliessman SR (2006) Agroecology: The Ecology of Sustainable

Food Systems. CRC Press, Taylor and Francis Group, New

York.

Godfray HCJ, Beddington JR, Crute IR, Haddad L, Lawrence D,

Muir JF et al. (2010) Food security: the challenge of feeding 9

billion people. Science 327: 812–818.

Gupta MV, Sollows JD, Mazid MA, Rahman A, Hussain MG,

Dey MM (2002) Economics and adoption patterns of inte-

grated rice-fish farming in Bangladesh. In: Edwards P, Little

DC, Demaine H (eds) Rural Aquaculture, pp. 41–53. CABI

Publishing, Oxford.

Gurung TB, Wagle SK (2005) Revisiting underlying ecological

principles of rice-fish integrated farming for environmental,

economical and social benefits. Our Nature 3: 1–12.

Halwart M (1998) Trends in rice-fish farming. FAO Aquaculture

Newsletter 18: 3–11.

Halwart M (2008) Biodiversity, nutrition and livelihoods in

aquatic rice-based ecosystems. Biodiversity: Journal of Life on

Earth 9: 36–40.

Halwart M, Bartley D (eds) (2005) Aquatic Biodiversity in Rice-

Based Ecosystems. Studies and Reports from Cambodia, China,

Lao PDR and Vietnam. FAO, Rome.

Halwart M, Gupta MV (2004) Culture of Fish in Rice Fields.

FAO, Rome and The WorldFish Center, Penang.

Hambrey J, Edwards P, Belton B (2008) An ecosystem approach

to freshwater aquaculture: a global review. In: Soto D, Agui-

lar-Manjarrez J, Hishamunda N (eds) Building an Ecosystem

Approach to Aquaculture, pp. 117–221. FAO/ Universitat de

les Illes Balears Expert Workshop, 7–11 May 2007, Palma de

Reviews in Aquaculture (2014) 6, 20–35

© 2013 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd 33

Ecosystem-based prawn–fish–rice farming

Mallorca, Spain. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Proceedings

No. 14. FAO, Rome.

Harmeling S (2010) Global Climate Risk Index 2010: Who is Most

Vulnerable? Weather-Related Loss Events since 1990 and How

Copenhagen Needs to Respond. Germanwatch, Bonn.

Haroon AKY, Pittman KA (1997) Rice-fish culture: feeding,

growth and yield of two size classes of Puntius gonionotus

Bleeker and Oreochromis spp. in Bangladesh. Aquaculture 154:

261–281.

Hazell P, Pachauri RK (2006) Bioenergy and Agriculture: Prom-

ises and Challenges. A 2020 Vision for Food, Agriculture and

the Environment, Focus 14, International Food Policy

Research Institute, Washington, DC.

Horstkotte-Wesseler G (1999) Socioeconomics of rice-aquacul-

ture and IPM in the Philippines: synergies, potentials and

problems. ICLARM Technical Report 57. ICLARM, Manila.

Hossain MA, Islam MS (2006) Optimisation of stocking density

of freshwater prawn Macrobrachium rosenbergii (de Man)

in carp polyculture in Bangladesh. Aquaculture Research 37:

994–1000.

Huq S, Reid H (2007) Community-Based Adaptation: a Vital

Approach to the Threat Climate Change Poses to the Poor. IIED

Briefing Paper, International Institute for Environment and

Development, London.

Islam KMZ, Sumelius J, Backman S (2012) Do differences in

technical efficiency explain the adoption rate of HYV rice?

Evidence from Bangladesh. Agricultural Economics Review 13:

93–110.

Khan S, Hanjra MA (2009) Footprints of water and energy

inputs in food production – global perspectives. Food Policy

34: 130–140.

Knowler D (2008) Economic implications of an ecosystem

approach to aquaculture. In: Soto D, Aguilar-Manjarrez J, Hi-

shamunda N (eds) Building an Ecosystem Approach to Aqua-

culture, pp. 47–65. FAO/ Universitat de les Illes Balears Expert

Workshop, 7–11 May 2007, Palma de Mallorca, Spain. FAO

Fisheries and Aquaculture Proceedings No. 14. FAO, Rome.

Kunda M, Azim ME, Wahab MA, Dewan S, Roos N, Thilsted SH

(2008) Potential of mixed culture of freshwater prawn (Macro-

brachium rosenbergii) and self recruiting small species mola

(Amblypharyngodon mola) in rotational rice-fish/prawn culture

systems in Bangladesh. Aquaculture Research 39: 506–517.

Lal M (2001) Tropical cyclones in a warmer world. Current Sci-

ence 80: 1103–1104.

Lightfoot C, Bimbao MP, Dalsgaard JPT, Pullin RSV (1993)

Aquaculture and sustainability through integrated resources

management. Outlook on Agriculture 22: 143–150.

Lightfoot C, van Dam A, Costa-Pierce B (1992) What’s happen-

ing to rice yields in rice-fish systems? In: dela Cruz CR, Light-

foot C, Costa-Pierce BA, Carangal VR, Bimbao MP (eds)

Rice-Fish Research and Development in Asia, pp. 77–184.

ICLARM Conference Proceedings. ICLARM, Manila.

Little DC, Surintaraseree P, Taylor NI (1996) Fish culture in

rain fed rice fields of northeast Thailand. Aquaculture 140:

295–321.

Lu J, Li X (2006) Review of rice-fish-farming systems in China –

one of the globally important ingenious agricultural heritage

systems (GIAHS). Aquaculture 260: 106–113.

Matteson PC (2000) Insect-pest management in tropical Asian

irrigated rice fields. Annual Review Entomology 5: 549–574.

Mishra A, Mohanty RK (2004) Productivity enhancement

through rice-fish farming using a two-stage rainwater conser-

vation technique. Agricultural Water Management 67: 119–

131.

Mitchell T, Tanner T (2006) Adapting to Climate Change: Chal-

lenges and Opportunities for the Development Community.

Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, Sus-

sex.

MOEF (Ministry of Environment and Forest) (2010) Bangladesh

Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan. Ministry of Envi-

ronment and Forest, Dhaka.

Mohanty RK, Verma HN, Brahmanand PS (2004) Performance

evaluation of rice-fish integration system in rainfed medium

land ecosystem. Aquaculture 230: 125–135.

Muir JF (2003) The Future for Fisheries: Institutional Frame-

works. Fisheries Sector Review and Future Development Study.

Commissioned with the association of the World Bank, DAN-

IDA, USAID, FAO, DFID with the cooperation of the Bangla-

desh Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock and the Department

of Fisheries, Dhaka.

Mustow SE (2002) The effects of shading on phytoplankton

photosynthesis in rice-fish fields in Bangladesh. Agriculture,

Ecosystems and Environment 90: 89–96.

Nabi R (2008) Constraints to the adoption of rice-fish farming

by smallholders in Bangladesh: a farming systems analysis.

Aquaculture Economics and Management 12: 145–153.

Nguyen QT (1993) Rice-freshwater prawn (Macrobrachium ro-

senbergii) farms in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam. Naga, the

ICLARM Quarterly 16 (4): 18–20.

Nhan DK, Phong LT, VerdegemMJC, Duong LT, Bosma RH, Lit-

tle DC (2007) Integrated freshwater aquaculture, crop and live-

stock production in the Mekong delta, Vietnam: determinants

and the role of the pond. Agricultural Systems 94: 445–458.

Nuruzzaman AKM (1993) Coastal Environment and Shrimp

Cultivation. Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council,

Dhaka.

Oehme M, Frei M, Razzak MA, Dewan S, Becker K (2007) Stud-

ies on nitrogen cycling under different nitrogen inputs in inte-

grated rice-fish culture in Bangladesh. Nutrient Cycling in

Agroecosystems 79: 181–191.

Olsson P, Folke C, Hahn T (2004) Social-ecological transforma-

tion for ecosystem management: the development of adaptive

co-management of a wetland landscape in Southern Sweden.

Ecology and Society 9 (4): 2.

Ostrom E (2009) A general framework for analysing sustainabil-

ity of social-ecological systems. Science 325: 419–422.

Pant J, Demaine H, Edwards P (2005) Bio-resource flow in inte-

grated agriculture-aquaculture systems in a tropical mon-

soonal climate: a case study in northeast Thailand.

Agricultural Systems 83: 203–219.

Reviews in Aquaculture (2014) 6, 20–35

© 2013 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd34

N. Ahmed et al.

Pillay TVR (1990) Aquaculture Principles and Practices. Fishing

News Books, Oxford.

Pouliotte J, Smit B, Westerhoff L (2009) Adaptation and devel-

opment: livelihoods and climate change in Subarnabad, Ban-

gladesh. Climate and Development 1: 31–46.

Prein M (2002) Integration of aquaculture into crop-animal sys-

tems in Asia. Agricultural Systems 71: 127–146.

Rahman S, Barmon BK, Ahmed N (2011) Diversification econo-

mies and efficiencies in a ‘blue-green revolution’ combina-

tion: a case study of prawn-carp-rice farming in the ‘gher’

system in Bangladesh. Aquaculture International 19: 665–682.

Sen A (1982) Poverty and Famines: An Essay on Entitlement and

Deprivation. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Sinha RK, Heart S, Valani D, Chauhan K (2009) Vermiculture

and sustainable agriculture. American-Eurasian Journal of Agri-

cultural and Environmental Sciences (Special Issue) 5: 1–55.

Soto D, Aguilar-Manjarrez J, Brug�ere C, Angel D, Bailey C, Black

K et al. (2008) Applying an ecosystem-based approach to

aquaculture: principles, scales and some management mea-

sures. In: Soto D, Aguilar-Manjarrez J, Hishamunda N (eds)

Building an Ecosystem Approach to Aquaculture, pp. 37–46.

FAO/ Universitat de les Illes Balears Expert Workshop, 15–35

May 2007, Palma de Mallorca, Spain. FAO Fisheries and

Aquaculture Proceedings No. 14. FAO, Rome.

The Royal Society (2009) Reaping the Benefits: Science and the

Sustainable Intensification of Global Agriculture. The Royal

Society, London.

Tidwell JH, Bratvold D (2005) Utility of added substrates in

shrimp culture. In: Azim ME, Verdegem MCJ, van Dam AA,

Breveridge MCM (eds) Periphyton: Ecology, Exploitation and

Management, pp. 247–268. CABI Publishing, Wallingford,

Oxford.

Wahab MA, Kunda M, Azim ME, Dewan S, Thilsted SH (2008)

Evaluation of freshwater prawn-small fish culture concur-

rently with rice in Bangladesh. Aquaculture Research 39: 1524–

1532.

World Bank (2000) Bangladesh: Climate Change and Sustain-

able Development. Report No. 21104-BD. Rural Development

Unit, South Asia Region, the World Bank, Dhaka, Bangla-

desh.

WorldFish Center (2006) The Threat to Fisheries and Aquacul-

ture from Climate Change. Policy Brief. The WorldFish Center,

Penang.

WorldFish Center (2007) Rice-Fish Culture: A Recipe for Higher

Production. The WorldFish Centre, Penang.

WorldFish Center (2010) Public Private Partnerships in Small-

Scale Aquaculture and Fisheries. Policy Brief No. 2135. The

WorldFish Centre, Penang.

Reviews in Aquaculture (2014) 6, 20–35

© 2013 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd 35

Ecosystem-based prawn–fish–rice farming