Impactsofshrimpandprawnfarmingonlocalenvironmentsandlivelihoods insouthwestcoastalpartofBangladesh

Md.RashedulIslamStudent ID:47136804

Department ofEnvironmentSystemsGSFS,TheUniversityofTokyo

31st July,2015

1

Introduction

Shrimp farming has been started atearly of 1980s and prawn farming atearly of 1990s

Rapid expansion took place duesuitable agro-climatic condition andavailability resources

Occupied major economic activity inthe south-west coastal part ofBangladesh

Most of farms are constructed bytransforming prime agricultural land

Number of shrimp farmers: 538,000Number of prawn farmer: 295,000

Fig.1:Trendofincreasingfarmingareaandproductionofshrimp

(Source:DoF,2002,2014) 2Fig.2:TrendofincreasingfarmingareaandproductionofPrawn

0500010000150002000025000300003500040000

010000200003000040000500006000070000

1994-95 2000-01 2005-06 2012-13

Prod

uctio

ninM

T

Farm

areainha

Farmarea Prouduction

0100002000030000400005000060000700008000090000100000

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

1985-86 1995-96 2005-06 2012-13

Prod

uctio

ninM

T

Farm

areainha

Farmarea Production

CultureEnvironmentSalinewater Shrimp

PrawnFreshwater

Salinewater

Shrimpfarminwetseason Shrimpfarmindryseason

Freshwater

Prawn-ricefarminwetseason Prawn-ricefarmindryseason3

Yieldtype

Months

January-February

February-March

March-April

April-May

May-June

June-July

July-August

August-Septem

ber

September

-October

October-

Novem

ber

Novem

ber-Decem

ber

Decem

ber-January

Shrimp

Prawn-rice

Rice

Firstcycleofshrimpproduction

Secondcycleofshrimpproduction

Prawnproductioncycle

Boro riceproductioncycle

Amanriceproductioncycle

ProductionCycle:

ProductFlow: USA26%

Belgium21%

UK 13%

Germany8%

Netherlands 5%

Japan 4%Russia 3%

Others20%

Fig.4:MajorExportdestinationin2012-2013FY

(Source:BFFEA,2014)

ShrimpandPrawn

Domesticmarket

Exportmarket

3% 97%

Localmarket

Supermarkets

15% 85%

Fig.3:Productioncycleofdifferentcrops(Source:Fieldsurvey,2014)

4

1. Assess the impact of shrimp farming and prawn-rice farming on local environments andlivelihoods

2. A comparative study between Rampal sub-districtand Dumuria sub-district to Justify the impact ofshrimp and prawn rice farming

3. Cost-benefit study of three major crops i.e., shrimpfarming, prawn-rice farming and rice farming tofind their economic suitability as well as to find aconclusion of the study

Studyareaobjectivesofthepresentstudy

Studyarea:Rampal andDumuria Sub-district insouthwestcoastalpartofBangladesh

Objectives:

Fig.5:Shrimpandprawnfarmingzoneinsouthwestcoastalpart

*whitemarksindicatepresentstudyareas

Dumuria

Rampal

5

Datacollection anddatasourceBothprimaryandSecondarydatawerecollected

6

Datatypes SpecificfieldsDatasource

PrimaryData SecondaryData

Environmental Soilsalinity Laboratoryanalysis(240)

SoilResourceandDevelopmentInstitute

Economic

Cropproduction DepartmentofAgricultureExtension

Livestock DepartmentofLivestockShrimpandprawnfarms DepartmentofFisheriesCost-benefit(differentfarmingtypes)

Questionnairesurvey(90)

Social

Livelihoodsand Income Questionnairesurvey(50)

Homesteadforest Statistics DepartmentSocialfacilities(education,sanitation,recreationetc.)

Questionnairesurvey(50)

*Parenthesesindicatesthesamplenumbers

Fig.7:ChangesoflandusepatterninRampaloverlastthreedecades

TotalUpazilaarea:27,644haTotalcultivableland: 20,718ha

Presentshrimpfarmarea:14,877ha

(Source:DAE&DoF,Rampal,2014)Fig.6:MapofRampalSub-districtwithunionboundaries

Studyarea1:RampalSub-district (Shrimpfarmingzone)Majorfindings

7

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Year1981 Year1991 Year2001 Year2014%oflandusetype

AgriculturonlyAgriculture+ShrimpfarmShrimpfarmonly

Fig.8:Trendofincreasingsub-districtaveragesoilsalinityovertime

§ From1980, Shrimp farminggradually increasing soil salinity

§Recent laboratory analysisconfirmed that, Soil salinity is stillincreasing

§Land are becoming unsuitable forcrop production at all

SalinityintrusioninRampalSub-district

Fig.9:Unionlevelaveragesoilsalinityatdifferenttimeperiods(Source:SRDIandFieldSurvey2014)

0.005.00

10.0015.0020.0025.00

Year2014 Year2001 Year1991 Year1984

Salin

ityds/m

Timeperiod

Sub-districtaveragesoilsalinity(ds/m)

8

05

1015202530

Unionlevelaveragesoilsalinty(ds/m)

2014200119911984

(Source:DAE&DoF,Dumuria,2014)

TotalUpazilaarea:44,797ha

Totalcultivableland: 34,873ha

Prawnfarmingarea: 8,226ha

Shrimpfarmingarea:5,855ha

Studyarea2:DumuriaSub-district (Agricultureandfreshwaterprawnfarmingzone)

Fig.11:ChangesoflandusepatterninDumuriaoverlastthreedecadesFig.10:MapofDumuriaSub-districtwithunion

boundaries9

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Year1981 Year1991 Year2001 Year2014%oflandusetype

AgriculturonlyAgriculture+PrawnfarmAgriculture+ShrimpfarmShrimpfarmonly

Fig.12:UnionlevelaveragesoilsalinityinDumuriasub-district(Source:Fieldsurvey2014)

10unions(Soilsalinity<4ds/m)- atacceptablelimitforalltypesofcropsproduction

4unions(Soilsalinity<8ds/m)-salinitytolerantvarietiesgrowwell

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

Salin

ityds/m

Unionlevelaveragesoilsalinityin2014

SoilSalinityinDumuriasub-district

(Source:DAE,Dumuria,2014) 10

In1981:34,360haIn2014:32,016ha

Singlecropland:5,140haDoublecropland:22,785haTriplecropland:4,092ha

Comparative study between two sub-district

00.51

1.52

2.53

Year1981 Year1991 Year2001 Year2014

RiceproductioninMTha-1

RampalDumuria

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

Year1981 Year1991 Year2001 Year2014

VegetableproductioninMTha-1

Rampal Dumuria

A. Cropsproduction

▪Inputmaterialused:Seed,Fertilizer,Pesticide

werefoundsimilarinbothsub-districts

(Source:DAE,RampalandDumuria,2014,Fieldsurvey,2014)

Fig.13:Riceproductiontrendoverlastthreedecades

11

Fig.14:Vegetablesproductiontrendoverlastthreedecades

12

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00

Perh

aprod

uctio

ninM

T

SoilSalinity(ds/m)

Unionlevelaveragesoilsalinityandriceproduction

Dumuriasub-district

Rampalsub-district

Soilsalinity>8ds/msignificantlyreducericeproduction(DAE,Rampal,2014)

Fig.15:Correlationbetweensoilsalinityandperhariceproduction

Relationshipbetweensoilsalinityandriceproductionin2013-14

(Source:DAE,RampalandDumuria,2014,Fieldsurvey,2014)

B.Livestockandpoultry

-120 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0

2040

Cattle Bufallo Goat Duck Chicken

RampalsubdistrictDumuriasub-district

Fig.16:PercentagesofchangesoflivestockandpoultryoverlastthreedecadesinRampalandDumuria

Twomajorcausesare:

-Reductionofgrazingfields-Scarcityoffodder(duetoloss

ofagriculturalcropproduction)

(Source:DepartmentofLivestock,RampalandDumuria,2014)

13

23.28

18.2815.94

13.40 14.07 14.72

0

5

10

15

20

25

Year1991 Year2001 Year2011

%oftotalarea

Rampal Dumuria

Fig.17:Changesinhomesteadforestareaoverlasttwodecadesintwosub-districts

Twomajorcausesare:

-Dyingduetosalinitystress-Conversionintoshrimpfarms

C.Homestead forestwithsettlementarea

(Source:Departmentofstatistics,RampalandDumuria,2014;DAE,2014)

(Source:Fieldsurvey2014)

D.Impactsonlivelihoods:marginalandlandlessfarmers

InRampal,shrimpfarmingceasedthelivelihoodoptionsare:

Sharecropping

Cottage industry

Agriculture labor

Lossoflivelihoodopportunities

Cattlefattening

Milk productionAgriculture

Livestock

Newlivelihoodoptions:

Shrimpfarming

CollectionofshrimpandprawnPL

Seasonallaborforce

Others

Rickshawvanpulling

16%

20%

12%

24%

20%

InDumuria,besidestraditionallivelihoods,prawn-ricefarming-- involvedlargenumberofmarginalfarmersinthissector:

Prawn-ricefarming

Laborinprawnfarms

Sharecropping

Agriculturelabor

Cottagebusiness

Livestockrearing

20%

16%

28%

12%

16%

8%

Sub-districts

%of marginalhousehold

Morethan3 Triple Double Single

Rampal 0 12 32 56

Dumuria 28 60 12 0

Lowergradeandlowpaid

14

Diversityofincomegenerationsources

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

Householdhead'sincome

Familymember'sincmoe

Totalincome

Curren

cyinBDT

Averagemonthlyincome

Rampal

Dumuria

0

20

40

60

80

100

Accesstosafedrinkingwater

Useofsanitarylatrine

Accesstoelectricityconnection

Dropoutchildrenfrom

Primaryeducation

Percen

tageofFam

ily

Householdfacilities

Rampal

Dumuria

Householdincomeandaccesstosocialfacilities

Fig.18:Monthlyaverageincomeofmarginalandlandlesshouseholdsintwosub-districts

Fig.19:Differencesofavailingsocialfacilitiesbymarginalhouseholdintwosub-districts

Majorincomesourceoffamilymembers--InRampal:--Larvaefishing--Parttimeworkatshrimpdepot--laborforceatdifferentsector

InDumuria:--livestockrearing--cottagebusiness--agriculturelabor--laboratprawnfarmsanddepots

(Source:Fieldsurvey2014) 15

Cost-benefitanalysisofthreedifferentcrops

Farmsize:▪Prawnfarmsaresmall,because:

-Perunitproductioncostishigh-mostlyoperatedbysmallandmediumscalefarmers(84%)- convenienceofmanagement

(Source:Fieldsurvey2014)

Fig.20:Averagefarmsizeofdifferentfarmingtypes

2.83

0.75

2.16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Shrimpfarm Prawn-ricefarm Ricefarm

Averagefarmsizeinhectare(ha)

16

0

100000

200000

300000

400000

Shrimpfarming Prawn-ricefarming

Ricefarming

Curren

cyinBDT

Productioncostha-1

Fig.21:Productioncostofdifferentfarmingtypesforonehafarmsize

Productioncost:§Productioncostofprawnfarmishigh:

-veryhighpriceofprawnlarvae-requiresupplementaryfeed-laborintensive

17

Percentagesofbreakdowncost

Labor

14% Farmrepair

6%

ShrimpPLstocking18%

CarpFingerling

9%

Feed

4% Fertilizer12%

Harvesting6%

Leasevalue31%

Shrimpfarming

Labor

10%

Dikerepair3%

PrawnPLstocking25%

Carpfrystocking10%

Feed20%

Fertilizer3%

Fuel1%

Harvesting2%

Riceproduction

cost15%

Fixedcost11%

Pawn-ricefarming

Fig.22:Item-wisepercentagesofcostinvolvedinprawn-ricefarming

Fig.23:Item-wisepercentagesofcostinvolvedinshrimpfarming

Netprofit

Variables

Shrimp

farmingPrawn-ricefarming

Ricefarming

Farmarea -0.88 -0.56 0.22

Shrimp/prawnPLnumber 0.93 0.85

Materialcost Carpfingerlingnumber 0.71 0.63 0.83

Feed 0.82 0.86

Fertilizer 0.73 0.77

Laborcost 0.54 0.92 0.56

Totalproductioncost 0.94 0.87 0.80

CorrelationofdifferentvariableswithNetProfitbyfarmingtypes

Inshrimpfarming,minimumtomaximumratio

- forproductioncost,2.06andfornetprofit1.96

InPrawn-ricefarming,minimumtomaximumratio

- forproductioncost,1.82andfornetprofit1.65

Thenegativecorrelationbetweenfarmsizeandnetprofitmaybebecauseof-

-Higheramountofinputsupply-Intensivemanagement- operatedbyleaseholders

18

NetPresentValueandBenefit-CostRationofdifferentfarmingsystems

0

500000

1000000

1500000

NPVofShrimpfarm

NPVofPrawn-ricefarm

NPVofRicefarm

Curren

cyinBDT

NetPresentValue(NPV)

Initialestablishmentcost:

Ricefarmingsystem:BDT0.00Shrimpfarmingsystem:BDT101,400Prawn-ricefarmingsystem:BDT126,750

ForcalculationofNPVTimeperiodconsidered:10yearsRateofinterestconsidered:10%

Fig.24:NPVofdifferentfarmingtypes

Fig.25:DiscountedBCRofdifferentfarmingtypes

HigherBCRinshrimpfarming:moreprofitableintermsofquantityofcostinvolved

But,HigherNPVinPrawn-ricefarmingmoreprofitableintermsofcapacityofnetearningfromperunitarea

19

1.99

1.541.77

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

Shrimpfarming Prawnfarming Ricefarming

Benefit-CostRatio(BCR)

RiskavoidanceopportunityTwomajortypeofrisksareassociatedwithshrimp,prawnandriceproduction

1.Casualtyrisk(disease,mortality,flood,heavyrainfallanddrought,pestattack)

2.Pricerisk(production,stock,demandofproductinnationalorforeignmarket)

Shrim

pfaming Incomefrom

shrimp89%

Incomefromcarpfish11%

Praw

n-ric

efarm

ing

Incomefromcarpfish15.6%

Incomefromprawn61.6%

Incomefrompaddy16.2%

Incomefromvegetables6.6%

Ricefarm

ing

IncomefromBoro rice55.17%

IncomefromAmanrice44.83%

#InBangladesh,thereisnoinsurancepolicyincropproductionsector

#Soitisimportantforfarmerstohaveanopportunitytoavoidtherisk

20

Despitelotofpositiveapproaches,expansionofprawnfarmingmainlyhinderedby:

Highproductioncost

Shrimpfarming:

TotalproductioncostBDT94,811ha-1

PriceofPostlarvaeBDT500/thousand

Nouseofsupplementaryfeed

Averagelaborcount53mandays

Prawn-ricefarming:

TotalproductioncostBDT307,816ha-1

PriceofPostlarvaeBDT4000/thousand

Requiresupplementaryfeed,1750kgha-1

Averagelaborcount152mandays

Actionneededforpromotion ofprawnfarmingEstablishmentofadequatehatchery

Productionoflowcostfeed

Provisionofsoftloanforfarmers

Transferoftechnologybyextensionservices

DemarcationofsuitableshrimpfarmingareasbylandzoningprogramsAwarenessbuildingamongthelocals

Intensivemanagement

21

Conclusion:

§ The findings clearly indicates that, shrimp farming is significantly increasing soilsalinity and negatively impacting the local environments

▪ Shrimp farming is also resulting in loss of livelihoods of marginal famers, reducingtheir income level and capacity of availing fundamental social facilities.

§ Prawn-rice farming on the other simply voids salinity related controversies andalso creates larger livelihoods opportunities formarginal people.

§ Cost-benefit study alsoproves prawn-rice farming as more profitable venturethan other framings, but the prime draw back is high production cost

§ Proper institutional arrangement (credit support, productionof low cost feedand seed, extension services etc.) can inspired farmers to adopt prawn-ricefarming insteadof shrimp farming.

▪ More attention is needed in this sector not only to earn foreign exchange butalso to create a healthy environment with elevated income level of the locals.

22

ThankYou

23