The social consequences of tropical shrimp mariculture development

Ocean & Shoreline Management 11 (1988) 31-44

The Social Consequences of Tropical Shrimp Mariculture Development

Conner Bailey College of Agriculture, Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama 36849-5406, USA

(Received 12 November 1987; accepted 20 December 1987)

ABSTRACT

Tropical shrimp mariculture has become a focal point of coastal resource development over the past decade. Strong international demand, combined with static supplies of shrimp from capture fisheries, have made shrimp mariculture attractive to national leaders, international development agencies, and private sector entrepreneurs. In this paper the rapid development of shrimp mariculture over the past decade is briefly reviewed and the impact of this development on coastal ecosystems is discussed. The social consequences of shrimp mariculture development are examined with particular reference to resource alloca- tion and property rights, the role of the state, and the marginalization of small-scale producers. The paper concludes with a discussion of alternative policies for promoting shrimp mariculture on a socially sound and sustainable basis.

1 INTRODUCTION

In the span of less than a single decade, shrimp mariculture has become established as a significant source of foreign exchange earnings for a small number of tropical developing countries. The financial success of these early adopters, most notably Ecuador, has encouraged many other countries to invest in shrimp mariculture development. Bilateral and multilateral development assistance agencies, and private investors from Europe, North America, Taiwan and Japan, are encouraging expansion of shrimp mariculture production in coastal areas.

31 Ocean & Shoreline Management 0951-8312/88/$3.50 ~) 1988 Elsevier Applied Science Publishers Ltd, England. Printed in Northern Ireland

32 Conner Bailey

The purpose of this paper is to draw attention to the social consequences of shrimp mariculture development. First the rapid expansion of shrimp mariculture is briefly reviewed, and then the impact of this development on complex coastal ecosystems is discussed. Next the role of the state in transforming multiple-use/multiple-user resources historically used by coastal residents to single-use private property owned by local and national elites serving export markets is examined. Finally, alternative policies for promoting socially beneficial development of tropical coastal resources is discussed.

2 RAPID GROWTH OF SHRIMP MARICULTURE

Approximately two-thirds of all shrimp exports are destined for consumers in Japan and the United States. 1'2 Strong international demand for shrimp led to a tremendous increase in fishing effort during the 1960s and 1970s. By the mid-1970s world shrimp landings had reached a plateau of between 1.72 and 1.82 million metric tonnes. 3 Shrimp resources are regarded as being fully exploited and unable to meet growing demand. 3 Any increase in supply to world markets will have to come from mariculture. The data in Table 1 provide regional and national comparisons of the area currently in production and

T A B L E 1 Tropical Shrimp Mariculture: Regional and Nat ional Comparisons

Region/country Hectares in production Yield (kg/ha/yr)

Current Potential

Culture system

Asia India Bangladesh Indonesia Thailand Philippines Malaysia Taiwan China Latin America Ecuador Panama Peru Brazil

30 0004 1 700 0005 50-1 2005'6 Extensive, rice fields 7 28 0008 na" 30-508 Extensive, rice fields 8

193 7009 1 000 0001° 1(10-3006 Extensive, polyculture 5'6 36 40011 100 00011 1 ( 1 0 - 3 0 0 6 Extensive, polyculture 5'6

176 00012 400 00012 100-3005,6 Extensive, polyculture 5'6 67513 50 00013 1 00013 Semi-intensive 13

3 2005 3 20014 15 0 0 0 5 Intensive s 8 200 TM na 9014 Extensive 15

60 00016 70 00016'17 240-1 200 TM Semi-intensive TM

2 50019 6 00019 300-2 00019 Semi-intensive 6 3 20019 6 00019 50019 Semi-intensive 19 3 00020 8 10014 n a Extensive 21

ana = not available.

Social consequences of tropical shrimp mariculture development 33

estimates of potential areas which could be developed for shrimp mariculture.

The phenomenal success of Ecuador's shrimp mariculture industry has attracted worldwide attention. Between 1979 and 1983 pond production of shrimp in Ecuador increased from 4700 to 35 600 metric tonnes. 16 During this same period the value of shrimp exports increased from US$31 million to US$184.7 million. 22 By 1980 pond grown shrimp surpassed total landings from Ecuador's long-established trawl fishery. 16 For Ecuador shrimp mariculture has been a major growth industry and source of foreign exchange earnings.

With the example of Ecuador firmly in mind, shrimp mariculture development has captured the imagination of national policymakers, international development assistance agencies, and private sector investors ranging from small-scale producers to multinational corporations. Most of this development is occurring in those Asian and Latin American nations listed in Table 1. Relatively little effort to date has been made in Africa to establish shrimp mariculture systems. 23

Private sector investment was most important in launching Ecuador's shrimp b o o m . 24 Foreign investors played a major role in both Ecuador, Panama and elsewhere in Latin America, as well as in south and southeast Asia. 1~'1~-27 In several Asian nations foreign and domestic investment in shrimp mariculture is being encouraged by tax credits, subsidized loans, and infrastructural development. 1~'23'27'28 The Asian Development Bank and the World Bank currently are supporting shrimp mariculture projects in Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Bangladesh and China. 29,3° Development programs include efforts to intensify production and expand mariculture operations into new areas. Scura notes that these two multilateral donors are planning to commit more than US $200 million to development of shrimp mariculture in these Asian nations. 31 Japan, Belgium, the United Kingdom, and the United States, among other nations, are providing bilateral support for shrimp mariculture development. 32-34

In Asia coastal mariculture has a long-established tradition, with well-established systems for intensive, semi-intensive, and extensive production of fish and shrimp? °'18'35 Extensive systems are those where all or nearly all nutritional requirements are derived from natural sources and where stocking takes place primarily through tidal action. Semi-intensive systems are those where carrying capacity is enhanced through intentional fertilization and/or supplemental feeding and the ponds are selectively stocked with fish fry or post-larval shrimp. Intensive systems are those where all nutritional requirements are met from external sources. Intensive systems predominate in Japan and

34 Conner Bailey

Taiwan, while extensive systems predominate throughout much of southeast Asia, especially in areas where mariculture is a long- established adaptation by small-scale producers.

Shrimp mariculture in Latin America differs markedly from that of Asia. In most parts of Asia there is a strong tradition of small-scale agriculture and aquaculture which extends into the coastal zone. Consequently, average farm size among mariculturists in Asia tends to be small. In Latin America, however, coastal mariculture is a new adaptation. In contrast to the typically small size of most Asian holdings, shrimp mariculture in Latin America is dominated by relatively large, well-capitalized producers, a pattern consistent with that region's latifundia tradition. 24'36-38

3 IMPACT OF MARICULTURE DEVELOPMENT ON COASTAL ECOSYSTEMS

In many parts of Asia traditional mariculture practices involved a polyculture of fish and shrimp intimately linked to the local ecosystem. Ponds were stocked by tidal action, which also brought in vital nutrients to enhance primary productivity within the ponds. The fact that these production systems have been in existence for hundreds of years testifies to their sustainability and their relatively benign impact on coastal ecosystems.

Contemporary shrimp mariculture development is qualitatively different, often involving selective stocking and supplemental feeding. Contemporary development of this production system also differs in that extensive new areas are rapidly being converted into shrimp ponds. In Ecuador shrimp mariculture development has resulted in destruction of roughly 20% of the mangrove forest in some parts of the coun t ry . 39

In the rush to development, mangroves and other coastal wetlands are being destroyed with little regard for the consequences. Often ponds are constructed in areas where acid sulfate soil conditions result in ponds being abandoned, the owners moving on to new areas to try again. Much of this destruction has taken place along the coastal fringe, where the impact on marine life is most severe. 39'4°

Shrimp mariculture development by definition involves some degree of manipulation of the natural environment. This does not always result in environmental destruction or degradation. Where salt fiats are converted to shrimp ponds, for example, one simple ecosystem of relatively low productivity is replaced by another simple system with far greater productivity. Shrimp mariculture in this setting is relatively


benign in environmental terms, and offers important practical advantages to developers (e.g. ease of construction, favorable soil characteristics). Consequently, salt flats generally are the first areas to be converted to use as shrimp ponds. However, most salt flats have long since been developed and in most cases future expansion of areas under cultivation will come at the expense of mangroves and other coastal habitats.

Unlike salt flats, mangroves and other coastal wetlands are highly complex and productive ecosystems which serve a wide variety of useful functions. 12'4~ These include: preventing coastal erosion and encouraging soil deposition; providing food, shelter, and sanctuary for birds and mammals; and providing spawning, nursery and forage areas for numerous finfish, crustaceans, and mollusc species. Mangroves provide structure and stability in an otherwise featureless and fluid zone.

Conversion of coastal wetlands to other uses (e.g. shrimp ponds) affects habitats of critical importance to valuable marine species. Convincing evidence exists that mangroves serve as critically important habitats for shrimp in the post-larval and juvenile stages for their life cycle. 42-45 Turner estimates that for every hectare of mangrove converted to other uses, annual harvests of fish and shrimp from the wild are decreased by 767kgs. 44 Burbridge argues that the long-term fisheries value of mangrove habitat is greater than its value for any other use, including coastal mariculture. 46 Because of the intimate relationship between mangrove and estuarine habitats, and the abun- dance of post-larval shrimp used for stocking ponds, 43 the viability of shrimp mariculture is closely linked to the status of mangrove in the local ecosystem. This is likely to remain true in the foreseeable future despite major investments in hatcheries to produce post-larval shrimp. Destruction of mangrove habitat is likely to exacerbate existing shortages of post-larval shrimp, which are the primary constraint to increased shrimp mariculture production in many countries. 6,22

Sustainable mariculture development is best achieved by minimizing unnecessary damage to local ecosystems. Increasingly, it is recognized that coastal wetlands and mangroves are valuable resources in their own right. Careful management of these resources provides numerous benefits to a variety of users. In many tropical developing countries mangrove forests are heavily utilized by local residents who exploit them to meet needs for cash and household sustenance. Among the products obtained from mangrove forests are lumber, thatching mate- rials, firewood, and a wide variety of foodstuffs. 41,47,48 In most cases this exploitation has continued on a sustainable basis over a considerable period of time. Although the need to carefully manage mangrove and

36 Conner Bailey

other coastal resources is widely acknowledged, there appear to be few cases where successful attempts have been made to restrain private entrepreneurs from converting mangrove into shrimp ponds. The result is that a complex ecosystem supporting multiple uses by a variety of users is being transformed into a greatly simplified system that becomes the private property of an individual entrepreneur.

4 IMPACT OF MARICULTURE DEVELOPMENT ON SOCIAL SYSTEMS

The above generalized discussion of the impact of shrimp mariculture on coastal ecology necessarily glosses over important location-specific variations in conditions. The precise nature of physical and biological changes brought about by construction of shrimp ponds will vary from place to place, but, in general, important commonalities exist which allow us to identify specific issues of concern (e.g. habitat destruction). Similarly, when attempting to identify common cross-national concerns regarding the social implications of mariculture development, it is necessary to keep in mind important differences in culture, history, social organization, and class relations. The study of coastal ecology is complex, but this complexity pales when compared to the diversity and variability exhibited between and within human societies.

This said, there remain a set of common concerns that are pertinent to the discussion of developmental change. Among the relevant questions that need to be asked are 'who benefits?' and 'how are the benefits of development distributed within a society's population?' It is generally true that whenever a significant form of socio-economic change occurs, some individuals are more likely to benefit than others. This has been amply demonstrated with reference to agricultural and marine fisheries development in much of the Third W o r l d . 47'49-51 The argument is advanced here that similarly skewed distributional patterns have emerged in the process of shrimp mariculture development. The issues are clearly put by Smith and Pestafio-Smith: 52

The vast majority of residents in coastal communities are desperately poor. They are poor because of their lack of access to alternative employment opportunities and because existing community and national structures and institutions often allow local elites to capture the bulk of any benefits that come from more productive technologies introduced to or adopted by such communities. Large-scale aquaculture enterprises frequently displace small- scale fishermen and aquaculturists through subsidized financing and institutional arrangements that favor the large-scale or corporate investor. (p. 7)


Shrimp mariculture development of the type most commonly pro- moted by national governments and supported by international development agencies is oriented to large-scale enterprises rather than to small-scale producers. Local elites have the advantages of education and wealth which provide access to the knowledge and capital necessary to successfully adopt new production technologies. 53 Of equal importance, these same elites are politically influential and have access to institutional resources (e.g. credit, government subsidies, permits, etc.) unavailable to non-elites. These political connections are particularly important to understanding the dynamics of shrimp mariculture development. 52,54

In most countries the state claims legal ownership over mangrove and other coastal zone resources. Despite the intensity with which local populations have exploited mangrove resources, they lack formal title to them or property rights. Moreover, communities of people who depend on such coastal resources tend to be politically and economi- cally marginal2 5 It is not surprising that what they regard as their traditional resource use rights are unknown or ignored by the larger society. This only becomes a problem when the resource in question becomes valuable, as, for example, is the case with coastal mangroves deemed suitable for shrimp pond construction.

Stripped to its essence the expansion of shrimp mariculture into mangrove habitat generally involves the transformation of a multi- use/multi-user coastal resource into a privately owned single-purpose resource. In many tropical developing countries policies which en- courage development of privately owned shrimp ponds involve expropriation of resources over which local residents have traditional rights based on long-standing patterns of usage. However, because these people do not have legally recognized property rights, the resources upon which their communities depend can be allocated to outside investors. Obtaining a government permit to built a pond generally requires political contacts if not outright bribery. 24,37 In some cases members of a local elite simply stake personal claim over resources that have been used by local residents without bothering to obtain a permit. Such uncontrolled conversion of mangrove appears to be widespread. 34'39'53 This expropriation of coastal resources has a direct effect on coastal residents' ability to earn a living. Not only do they lose access to mangrove products, they also are likely to suffer losses from declining catches from fisheries resources associated with the mangrove. 44,56

Contemporary shrimp mariculture development also affects small- scale operators of shrimp ponds. In Indonesia the Asian Development

38 Conner Bailey

Bank is funding a project which has bought out small-scale pond operators, turning over 200 ha of ponds to each of five private firms. 57 These firms grow shrimp on their own behalf and are given respon- sibility for providing inputs and extension services to small-scale producers in their area. These firms also provide local small-scale producers with a marketing outlet for their shrimp. Besides expropriat- ing several hundred producer households, this project has placed these private firms in a position of considerable economic power relative to surrounding small-scale producers.

Even without such direct action, the higher productivity and profita- bility of newly available shrimp mariculture technologies is increasing l and va lues . 37 Opportunities for supernormal profits have attracted well-financed entrepreneurs who have bid up the price of ponds, resulting in significant structural changes. Most notable of these have been a concentration of pond ownership and alterations in the social relations of production. On the basis of a detailed study of central Java, Hannig reports that the benefits of shrimp mariculture have been captured by local elites who have gradually altered tenancy relation- ships in their o w n f avo r . 36'37

Shrimp mariculture is capital rather than labor intensive. 53 During the construction phase a significant amount of unskilled (and generally minimally paid) labor is required, but once the ponds are in place the labor demand is limited. 58 McCoy estimates that operation of a 20 ha shrimp pond in Panama can be handled by one full-time unskilled laborer and one full-time pond manager; an additional 10 work-days are necessary during harvest. 59 Hannig shows that operation of a 2 ha shrimp pond in Indonesia requires 30 days of family labor and 60 days of hired labor each year (compared with 32 and 120 days, respectively, for rice cultivation in the s a m e a rea ) . 37

Shrimp mariculture development provides limited employment opportunities for coastal residents and most of those who find jobs are hired as unskilled laborers and guards. Wage rates for unskilled workers in coastal communities tend to be low, reflecting the opportunity cost of labor in these areas. 6° The irony is that the very process of shrimp mariculture development directly contributes to low wages by restricting access to local resources, thereby reducing local employment opportunities and increasing workers' dependence on seasonal jobs which require few skills.

REDIRECTING SHRIMP MARICULTURE DEVELOPMENT

In the previous sections a series of concerns regarding the direction of shrimp mariculture development were addressed. The negative conse-


quences of shrimp mariculture development are not the blind chances of a cruel economic fate, but rather are the direct result of structural inequalities of wealth and power. These factors combine to create significant structural change, the marginalization of most coastal residents as unskilled labor, and a seriously skewed distribution of development benefits. Profits and foreign exchange from shrimp mariculture often have been earned at the expense of broader social interests. These include the immediate interests of established coastal residents, who lose access to mangrove or other coastal resources to which they have traditional use rights. Fishermen and their customers also are affected as coastal ecosystems are disrupted to build shrimp ponds, resulting in declining catches of fish and shrimp. Because pond-grown shrimp are directed towards export markets, mariculture production does not serve to replace this decline in locally available food. More broadly, the costs of coastal ecosystem disruption for society may include coastal erosion, saltwater intrusion into ground- water and agricultural fields, and a reduction in supply of a wide range of valuable goods produced from the resources available in mangrove forests or other coastal wetlands.

The primary motivations for shrimp mariculture development are foreign exchange earnings and profits. If, however, development is perceived as a process through which improvements are made to the quality of life for society as a whole, rather than for certain classes or groups, current policies by national and international agencies need to be reconsidered. In particular, given evidence of serious disruptions to both social systems and coastal ecosystems, we must address issues of social soundness and the sustainability of development efforts.

Contemporary policies favoring the rapid expansion of shrimp mariculture capacity have transformed a multiple-use/multiple-user resource into single-use private property primarily for the benefit of relatively wealthy producers who have the necessary financial and political resources to invest in this enterprise. Shrimp mariculture development offers relatively limited new employment opportunities, and those which are made available typically are poorly paid seasonal and nonskilled jobs.

If shrimp mariculture is to play a positive role in development, policies need to be established which consider more than technical and financial feasibility of shrimp mariculture. 53,54 Shrimp mariculture development can be directed towards local small-scale producers rather than to local and national elites. Success in this approach would require substantial commitment to improving extension and credit services to scattered coastal communities. The problems involved in providing adequate services to numerous small-scale producers rather than to a

40 Conner Bailey

more limited set of typically well-educated and well-financed large-scale producers must be recognized. The combination of positive social gain and the high value of the product involved, however, justify the level of effort required.

Small-scale shrimp mariculture development should build on the diversity of resources found within the coastal zone. For much of the time there will be little work to be done. Research into farming systems clearly shows that during periods of underemployment, small-scale agriculturalists are engaged in a variety of secondary occupations. 48 Small-scale shrimp farmers should be encouraged to follow a similar pattern rather than specialize in a single enterprise. Their location in an ecosystem generally characterized by diversity provides for opportunity to exploit a wide range of locally available products. This will be the case particularly where complex coastal ecosystems are not totally disrupted in the process of pond construction or other development activities.

Coastal ecosystems are by nature highly productive. Properly managed, resources found in the coastal zone will support intensive human use. The key to this productivity is the complexity of coastal ecosystems. The conversion of mangrove into shrimp ponds, among other sources of disruption, threatens to degrade the biological diversity and productivity of this critically important ecosystem. Ponds can be constructed in mangrove in a nondestructive fashion by leaving sufficient buffer between the ponds and the coastal fringe, and by other well-established management practices. 4°,41 These practices have been incorporated into the law of several nations, but the lack of effective enforcement is a common problem, 12,38.41 This basic failure of resource management threatens the sustainability not only of shrimp mariculture development but also may foreclose other development options within the coastal zone. Properly managed, shrimp mariculture offers important opportunities for sustained and socially appropriate utilization of coastal resources.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Preparation of this paper was supported by the Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station at Auburn University and by a program support grant to Auburn University by the US Agency for International Development.


REFERENCES

1. Rackowe, R., The International Market for Shrimp. ADB/FAO INFOFISH Market Studies, Volume 3 (March 1983). INFOFISH, Kuala Lumpur, 1983.

2. Vondruska, J., Economic assessment of trends in shrimp fisheries, markets, mariculture and analog products. In Proceedings of the Work- shop on Shrimp and Prawn Markets, International Institute of Fisheries Economics and Trade, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, 1984.

3. Robinson, M. A., Prospects for world fisheries to 2000. FAO Fisheries Circular No. 722, revision 1 (June). FAO, Rome, 1982.

4. National Marine Fisheries Service, Shrimp aquaculture in Asia. F/M321:GH/MF, IFR-85/13B. National Marine Fisheries Service, Wash- ington, DC, 17 April 1985.

5. Shang, Y. C., Status, potential and constraints to development of coastal aquaculture in Asia. INFOFISH Marketing Digest, 5 (1986) 10-13.

6. Pedini, M., Penaeid shrimp culture in tropical developing countries. FAO Fisheries Circular No. 732. FAO, Rome, 1981.

7. Kurian, C. V. & Sebastian, V. O., Prawns and Prawn Fisheries of India. 2nd revised edition. Hindustan Publishing Corporation, New Delhi, 1982.

8. Kibria, G., Shrimp fisheries of Bangladesh. ICLARM Newsletter, 8 (1985) 11-12.

9. Directorate General of Fisheries, Fisheries Statistics of Indonesia, 1983. Directorate-General of Fisheries, Department of Agriculture, Jakarta, 1985.

10. Ling, Shao-wen, Status, potential and development of coastal aquaculture in the countries bordering the South China Sea. South China Sea Fisheries Development and Coordinating Program. SCS/DEV/73/5/Rome. FAO, Rome, 1973.

11. American Embassy, Bangkok, Unclassified cable, dated March 31 1986, to National Marine Fisheries Service, regarding shrimp mariculture in Thailand.

12. Schmittou, H. R., Grover, J. H., Peterson, S. B., Librero, A. R., Rabanal, H. B., Portugal, A. A. & Adriano, M., Development of aquaculture in the Philippines. International Center for Aquaculture, Research and Development Series No. 32. Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama, 1985.

13. American Embassy, Kuala Lumpur, Unclassified cable, dated February 3 1986, to National Marine Fisheries Service, regarding shrimp mariculture in Malaysia.

14. National Marine Fisheries Service, Shrimp situation and outlook. Fish- eries Development Analysis Branch, NMFS, St. Petersburg, Florida, June 1984.

15. United Nations Development Programme, Aquaculture development in China. Aquaculture Development and Coordination Programme. ADCP/REP/79/10. UNDP and FAO, Rome, 1979.

16. McPadden, C. A., A brief review of the Ecuadorian shrimp industry. Instituto National de Pesca, Guayaquil Buletin Cientifico y Tecnico, VII (1985) 42-68.

17. Parodi, E., Written statement before the United States International

42 Conner Bailey

Trade Commission of Emilio Parodi Cabrera, Langostinos Del Golfo, C. Ltda, Guayaquil. New Orleans, 21 March 1985.

18. Mock, C. R., Penaeid shrimp culture consultation, Taiwan. Trip report, December 1-11, 1983. National Marine Fisheries Service, Galveston, Texas, 1983.

19. Weidner, D. M., A view of the Latin American shrimp culture industry, Part II. Aquaculture Magazine, (May 1985) 19-31.

20. National Marine Fisheries Service, The latest developments in Latin American fisheries. F/321:dw, IFR-85/55. National Marine Fisheries Service, Washington, DC, August 1985.

21. Scott, P. C., Shrimp culture in Brazil. ICLARM Newsletter, 8 (1985) 14. 22. Sutinen, J. G., Broadus, J. & Spurrier, W., An economic analysis of

trends in the shrimp cultivation industry of Ecuador. Paper presented at the Symposium on Integrated Management for Shrimp Mariculture Development in Ecuador, Guayaquil, Ecuador, 4-8 August 1986.

23. Coche, A. (ed.), Coastal aquaculture: Development perspectives in Africa and case studies from other regions. Committee for Inland Fisheries of Africa (CIFA) Technical Paper No. 9. FAO, Rome, 1982.

24. Meltzoff, S. K. & LiPuma, E., The social and political economy of coastal zone management: shrimp mariculture in Ecuador. Coastal Zone Manage- ment Journal, 14 (1986) 349-80.

25. Mock, C. R., Report on penaeid shrimp culture consultation and visit, Guayaquil, Ecuador, South America, and Panama, Central America, August 12-September 20, 1981. Journal of the World Mariculture Society, 13 (1982) 165-84.

26. Mock, C. R., Penaeid shrimp culture consultation and visit, Brazil, South America, January 24-February 7, 1982. Unpublished trip report, 1982.

27. American Embassy, Colombo, Unclassified cable, dated February 7 1986, to National Marine Fisheries Service, regarding shrimp mariculture in Sri Lanka, 1986.

28. Sakthivel, M., Shrimp farming--a boon or bane to India? ICLARM Newsletter, 8 (1985) 9-10.

29. Asian Development Bank, Loan, technical assistance and private sector operations approvals. No. 87/6, June 1987.

30. World Bank, Fishery development donor consultation. 13-15 October 1986. Agenda Item No. 4(a), Summary, Annexes, Supplements.

31. Scura, E. D., The challenge and potential of aquaculture. Keynote address to the 1985 Meeting of the World Mariculture Society, Orlando, Florida, January 1985.

32. Asian Development Bank, Indonesian fisheries sector study. Prepared by the Asian Development Bank in association with the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development. December 1983.

33. Palomares, M. L. D., Developing countries dominate shrimp scene. ICLARM Newsletter, 8 (1985) 3-5.

34. Bailey, C., Angell, C., Frankenberg, D., Sullivan, G. & Willard, M., Aquatic Resources Development Feasibility Study. 2 Vols. Resources Development Associates, Inc., Diamond Springs, California, 1985.

35. Kutty, M. N., Aquaculture in South East Asia: some points of emphasis. Aquaculture, 211 (1980) 159-68.


36. Hannig, W., Ecological destruction and socio-economic transformation: conditions of brackishwater pond cultivation in Karanganyar, Subdistrict Tugu, Municipality of Semarang. Unpublished research report dated November 1985. Submitted to Kristen Satya Wacana University, Salatiga, Central Java, Indonesia.

37. Hannig, W., Towards a blue revolution; a study on socioeconomic aspects of brackishwater pond cultivation in Java. PhD dissertation, Faculty of Sociology, University of Bielfeld, FRG, 1986.

38. Siddall, S. E., Atchue, J. A. & Murray, R. L., Mariculture development in mangroves: a case study of the Philippines, Ecuador and Panama. In Coastal Resources Management: Development Case Studies, ed. J. R. Clark. Renewable Resources Information Series, Coastal Management Publication No. 3. Prepared for the National Park Service, US Depart- ment of the Interior, and US Agency for International Development. Research Planning Institute, Inc., Columbia, South Carolina, 1985.

39. Snedaker, S. C., Dickinson, J. C. III, Brown, M. S. & Lahmann, E. J., Shrimp pond siting and management alternatives in mangrove ecosystems in Ecuador. Final report to the Office of the Science Advisor, US Agency for International Development, 1986.

40. Burbridge, P. R. Problems and issues of coastal zone management. In Man, Land and Sea; Coastal Resource Use and Management in Asia and the Pacific, ed. C. H. Soysa, L. S. Chia & W. L. Collier. Agricultural Development Council, Bangkok, 1982, pp. 309-20.

41. Hamilton, L. S. & Snedaker, S. C. (eds), Handbook for Mangrove Area Management. Honolulu: East-West Center, Environment and Policy Institute; International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources; and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 1984.

42. Martosubroto, P. & Naamin, N., Relationship between tidal forests (mangroves) and commercial shrimp production in Indonesia. Marine Research in Indonesia, 18 (1977) 81-6.

43. Prahl, H. von, Importancia del manglar en la biologia de los camarones peneidos. In The Mangrove Ecosystem: Human Uses and Management Implications. Report of the Seminar organized by UNESCO at Cali, Colombia, 27 November-1 December 1978. UNESCO Reports in Marine Science 9. UNESCO Regional Office for Science and Technology for Latin America and the Caribbean, Montevideo, Uruguay.

44. Turner, R. E., Intertidal vegetation and commercial yields of penaeid shrimp. Trans. Amer. Fisheries Soc., 106 (1977) 411-16.

45. Turner, R. E., Coastal fisheries, agriculture and management in Indone- sia: case studies for the future. In Coastal Resources Management: Development Case Studies, ed. J. R. Clark. Renewable Resources Information Series, Coastal Management Publication No. 3. Prepared for the National Park Service, US Department of the Interior, and the US Agency for International Development. Research Planning Institute, Inc., Columbia, South Carolina, 1985.

46. Burbridge, P. R., Coastal Resource Management. Government of Indonesia-United Nations Development Program, Environmental Sector Review. United Nations Development Program, Jakarta, 1983.

44 Conner Bailey

47. Bailey, C., The Sociology of Production in Rural Malay Society. Oxford University Press, Kuala Lumpur, 1983.

48. Ruddle, K., Johnson, D., Townsend, P. & Rees, J. D., Palm Sago; A Tropical Starch from Marginal Lands. East-West Center, Honolulu, Hawaii, 1978.

49. Bailey, C., The blue revolution: impact of technological innovation on Third World fisheries. The Rural Sociologist, 5 (1985) 259-66.

50. Cohen, J., Rural change in Ethiopia: the Chilalo Agricultural Develop- ment Unit. Economic Development and Culture Change, 22 (1975) 580-614.

51. Scott, J. C., Weapons of the Weak; Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance. Yale University Press, New Haven, 1985.

52. Smith, I. R. & Pestafio-Smith, R. Social feasibility of coastal aquaculture. ICLARM Newsletter, 8 (1985) 6-8.

53. Rogers, E., Diffusion of Innovations. Free Press of Glencoe, New York, 1962.

54. Smith, I. R., Social feasibility of coastal aquaculture: packaged technology from above or participatory rural development? Keynote address prepared for a consultation on Social Feasibility of Coastal Aquaculture, November 26-December 1 1984, Madras, India.

55. Collier, W. L., Development problems and conflicts in the coastal zone of Sumatra: swamps are for people. Paper presented at the conference on Resource Use and Management in the Coastal Zones of the Asian Humid Tropics, 18-21 December 1978, Bangkok.

56. Macintosh, D. J., Fisheries and aquaculture significance of mangrove swamps. In Recent Advances in Aquaculture, ed. J. F. Muir & R. J. Roberts. Croom Helm, London and Canberra; and Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado, 1982, pp. 5-85.

57. Asian Development Bank, Project Paper, Indonesia Brackishwater Aquaculture Development. Asian Development Bank, Manila, 1982, 114 PP.

58. Yengoyan, A. A., Demographic and economic aspects of poverty in the rural Philippines. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 16 (1974) 58-72.

59. McCoy, E., Feasibility of pond culture of shrimp in Panama. Directorate of Aquaculture, Ministry of Agriculture, Republic of Panama, October 1979.

60. Smith, I. R., A Research Framework for Traditional Fisheries: ICLARM Studies and Reviews 2. International (;enter for Living Aquatic Resources Management, Manila.

Documents

The social consequences of tropical shrimp mariculture development