LINK TẢI LUẬN VĂN MIỄN PHÍ CHO AE KET-NOI
Ngành Thủy sản tại Việt Nam: Phân tích kinh tế chiến lược
Table of Contents
List of Tables..................................................................................................................................................................................3 List of Figures.................................................................................................................................................................................3 Acronyms and Abbreviations ......................................................................................................................................................... 4 Preface .............................................................................................................................................................................................................5 Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................................................... 6
1
2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4
3 3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
4 4.1
4.2
5 5.1 5.2 5.3
6 6.1 6.2
7
8 8.1 8.2 8.3
Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................................... 12
The Fisheries Sector in Vietnam: An Overview ................................................................................................................... 14 Fisheries in Context ...................................................................................................................................................... 15 Production Trends ........................................................................................................................................................ 18 International Trade....................................................................................................................................................... 21 Food Security................................................................................................................................................................ 22
Aquaculture....................................................................................................................................................................... 25 The Growth of Aquaculture in Vietnam......................................................................................................................... 25
3.1.1 3.1.2 3.1.3
3.2.1 3.2.2
3.3.1 3.3.2
An Overview............................................................................................................................................................. 25 Aquaculture Environment......................................................................................................................................... 27 Diversification of Species .......................................................................................................................................... 28
Exports and International Trade ................................................................................................................................... 31
Role of International Trade in Vietnamese Aquaculture............................................................................................. 31
Pangasius Exports..................................................................................................................................................... 33
Aquaculture Governance .............................................................................................................................................. 37
The Role of the State ................................................................................................................................................ 39
The Role of Standards in Importing Countries............................................................................................................ 42
Aquaculture Farm Budgets: A Scenario Analysis............................................................................................................ 45
4.1.1 4.1.2 4.1.3 4.1.4 4.1.5
4.2.1 4.2.2 4.2.3
Production ............................................................................................................................................................... 54 Fishing Effort ............................................................................................................................................................ 55 Near to Shore Fisheries: A Case Study of Anchovy...................................................................................................... 57 Offshore Fisheries: A Case Study of Skipjack Tuna...................................................................................................... 59 Fishing costs and Productivity: Modelling Fuel Price Fluctuations ............................................................................... 62
Overfishing ................................................................................................................................................................... 64
Measuring Overcapacity ........................................................................................................................................... 64 Overfishing in Near-to-Shore Waters ........................................................................................................................ 67 Policy ....................................................................................................................................................................... 71
Marine Capture Fisheries ................................................................................................................................................... 53 Profile of Sector ............................................................................................................................................................ 53
Small-Scale Fisheries Activities: Aquaculture and Inland Capture....................................................................................... 79 Importance of Small-Scale Fisheries to Rural Livelihoods .............................................................................................. 80 Inputs and Returns of Fisheries..................................................................................................................................... 84 A Modelling of Household Participation in Fisheries ..................................................................................................... 86
Dynamic Scenario Analysis................................................................................................................................................. 88 Description of the Economywide Model ....................................................................................................................... 88 Model Results............................................................................................................................................................... 89
Concluding Remarks .......................................................................................................................................................... 98
Appendix ......................................................................................................................................................................... 102 Evaluation of Voluntary Aquaculture Standards in Vietnam........................................................................................ 102 Fisheries Data ............................................................................................................................................................. 123 DCGE Model Specification (used in Chapter 6) ............................................................................................................ 126
2
List of Tables
Table 2.1: National Structure of the Vietnam Economy, 2007 .....................................................................................15 Table 2.2: Factor contributions to sectoral value-added (rows sum to 100%) ..............................................................17 Table 2.3: Selected Indicators of Food Insecurity 2007................................................................................................23 Table 2.4: Food and Calorie Intake, Vietnam 2006 (percent) .......................................................................................24 Table 3.1: Aquaculture Production of Giant Tiger Prawn and Pangasius (volume and value) 2000-2008.......................26 Table 3.2: The Contribution of the Three Environments to the Volume of Vietnamese Aquaculture ............................27 Table 3.3: Total Aquaculture Volume by Species (tonnes) ..........................................................................................27 Table 3.4: The Contribution of the Three Environments to the Value of Vietnamese Aquaculture ...............................28 Table 3.5: Profitability of Marine Aquaculture in Indonesian Silvo-Fish Culture (Rupees 1000) ....................................29 Table 3.6: Elasticity Estimates: Regression Results of Model .......................................................................................36 Table 3.7: Estimated Price Elasticities .........................................................................................................................37 Table 3.8: Pangasius and Shrimp Production Parameters ............................................................................................46 Table 3.9: Impact on Pangasius Costs and Profits of Reduced Input Costs....................................................................48 Table 3.10: Impact on Shrimp Costs and Profits of Reduced Input Costs ......................................................................49 Table 3.11: Flooding due to Climate Change in the Mekong Delta in 2050...................................................................49 Table 3.12: Possible Impacts of Climate Change on Pangasius Production Costs..........................................................50 Table 3.13: Impact of Climate Change on Costs and Profits of Pangasius .....................................................................50 Table 3.14: Possible Impacts of Climate Change on Shrimp Production Costs ..............................................................51 Table 3.15: Impact of Climate Change on Costs and Profits of Shrimp .........................................................................51 Table 4.1: Anchovy Value Chain- Costs and Profits ......................................................................................................59 Table 4.2: Tuna Value Chain- Costs and Profits............................................................................................................60 Table 4.3: Initial Refined Fuel Shares of Total Cost (percent) .......................................................................................62 Table 4.4: Simulation of Environmental Fuel Tax Impact on Real Output (percent) ......................................................63 Table 4.5: Real Output Effects with a Simulated Production Subsidy (percent) ............................................................63 Table 5.1: Participation in, and Production of, Fisheries Activities ...............................................................................81 Table 5.2: Consumption and Sales of Selected Fisheries Products (VND 000)...............................................................84 Table 5.3: Production Inputs for Aquaculture..............................................................................................................85 Table 6.1: Baseline Scenario Assumptions...................................................................................................................89 Table 6.2: Change in GDP, 2007-2017 under Different Scenarios.................................................................................92 Table 6.3: Changes in Household per capita Consumption, 2007-2017 under Different Scenarios................................93 Table 6.4: Change in Trading Patterns of Fish Products (relative to baseline)...............................................................94 Table 6.5: Changes in agricultural land allocation and fisheries production, 2007-2017 ...............................................95
List of Figures
Figure 2.1: Fisheries as a Share of National GDP (percent) ..........................................................................................16 Figure 2.2: Total Fishery Sector Production (tonnes) ...................................................................................................18 Figure 2.3: Total Production Growth for Selected Time Periods (percent)....................................................................19 Figure 2.4: Shares of Total Fishery Sector Production (percent)...................................................................................19 Figure 2.5: Fisheries Sector Structure (000 tonnes, 2007)............................................................................................20 Figure 2.6: Vietnamese Fishery Exports (tonnes and percent) .....................................................................................21 Figure 2.7: Vietnamese Fishery Exports by Species and Destination (US$ value, percent) ............................................22 Figure 3.1: Aquaculture Production, regional split (percent) .......................................................................................26 Figure 3.2: Exports of Pangasius from Vietnam by Destination, 2007-2009 (tonnes)....................................................34 Figure 3.3: Baseline Model for Pangasius Farm (VND/kg). ...........................................................................................47 Figure 3.4: Baseline Model of Shrimp Farm (VND/Kg). ................................................................................................48 Figure 4.1: Marine Capture Fisheries Production (tonnes and percent) .......................................................................54 Figure 4.2: Marine Capture Fisheries Capacity (number vessels and HP), 1990-2008 ...................................................55 Figure 4.3: Marine Capture Fisheries Capacity 2008 (number of vessels).....................................................................56 Figure 4.4: Marine Capture Fisheries Catch per Unit of Effort (CPUE) ..........................................................................57 Figure 5.1: Share of Income from Different Sources for Fisheries Households in 2008 .................................................83 Figure 6.1: Conceptual Framework for the Economywide Model.................................................................................88 Figure 6.2: Simulation Schematic................................................................................................................................90 Figure 6.3: Change in final year per capita consumption for all fishers the Mekong Delta by expenditure quintile, 2007- 2017 ..........................................................................................................................................................................97 Figure 8.1: Conceptual Framework for the Economywide Model...............................................................................126
3
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Bn Billion
CGE Computable General Equilibrium
CIEM Central Institute for Economic Management
CPI Consumer Price Index
CPUE Catch per Unit of Effort
DERG Development Economics Research Group (University of Copenhagen) EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone
FAO Food and Agriculture Organisation, United Nations
FSPS Fisheries Sector Program Support
HCMC Ho Chi Minh City
ILSSA Institute for Labour Science and Social Affairs
ISIC International Standard Industrial Classification
LURC Land Use Right Certificate
GSO General Statistics Office of Vietnam
Ha Hectare
HH Household
HP Horse Power
Km Kilometre
LURC Land Use Right Certificate
MEY Maximum Economic Yield
MSY Maximum Sustainable Yield
Mn Million
MoFI Ministry of Fisheries
MONRE Ministry of Natural Resources and the Environment
MPI Ministry of Planning and Investment
N Number of Observations
Nm Nautical Mile
OLS Ordinary Least Squares
SAM Social Accounting Matrix
SD Standard Deviation
SME Small and Medium sized Enterprise
TAC Total Allowable Catch
US$ United States Dollar
VARHS Vietnam Access to Resources Household Survey
VHLSS Vietnam Household Living Standards Survey
VIFEP Vietnam Institute for Fisheries Economics and Planning
VND Vietnamese Dong
4
Preface
This report was commissioned by the Royal Embassy of Denmark (Danida) in Vietnam under Phase II of the Fisheries Sector Programme Support (FSPS), in early 2010. The report was commissioned following an appraisal of the need for an economic study of the fisheries sector conducted by Van Arkadie & Hung (June, 2009).
Following this appraisal, Danida made the decision to support a project which would produce a strategic economic evaluation of the fisheries sector in Vietnam, and which would provide the basis for effective government policies and interventions to implement its fishery sector strategy. Specifically, an overall objective was defined as to improve the effectiveness of government economic policies and interventions in the fishery sector by improving the quality of economic analysis of the sector and to contribute to the development of the capability to undertake economic analysis in the sector. It is hoped that this study, to be presented to Vietnamese government policy makers, will provide a basis for informed choices in selecting and designing government interventions in the fisheries sector of Vietnam.
Acknowledgements
The core research team consisted of the Development Economics Research Group (DERG) of the University of Copenhagen, and the Central Institute for Economic Management (CIEM) in the Ministry of Planning and Investment (MPI) of Vietnam. Mr Simon McCoy led the research, with Dr James Thurlow (World Institute for Development Economics Research, WIDER), Professor Neil Ridler (University of New Brunswick), and Professor Andy McKay (University of Sussex) joining the DERG team. Dr Nguyen Manh Hai, Mr Tran Trung Hieu, and Ms Le Xuan Quynh formed the CIEM research team. Professor Finn Tarp on the side of DERG, and Ms Vu Nguyet Xuan Hong, Vice President of CIEM, supervised the research effort through all its stages.
In addition to the core research team of DERG and CIEM, contributions to the research were made by Dr Nguyen Thi Kim Anh and her team (Nguyen Thi Tram Anh, Hao Van Tran, Pham Thi Thanh Thuy, and Nguyen Ngoc Duy), at the Faculty of Economics of Nha Trang University in Vietnam, and Dr Le Xuan Sinh and his team (Nguyen Thanh Toan, Huynh Van Hien, Do Minh Chung, and Nguyen Thi Kim Quyen) at Can Tho University, who contributed to large parts of the aquaculture research findings. In the area of aquacultures certification and standards, the DERG team was complemented by Dr Flavio Corsin and his team at the newly established ICAFIS.
Finally, thanks to the Vietnam Institute for Fisheries Economics and Planning (VIFEP) within the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD), in particular Ms Pham Thi Thuy Linh, who interacted with the research team throughout the year and who made contributions in terms of data provision and advice.
Our work would not have been possible without professional interaction, advice and encouragement from a large number of individuals and institutions. We would in particular like to highlight our thanks for the productive and stimulating collaboration with Mr Eric Keus and Mr Paul Nichols, both formerly advisors under the FSPS II Programme, and in particular, Mr Michael Akester, FSPS II Danida advisor. Thanks also to Mr Keith Symington, independent fisheries expert, and Ms Nguyen Thi Thu Hang, FSPS Project Officer at the Royal Embassy of Denmark in Vietnam. The Danida (FSPS II program) financial support is acknowledged with gratitude.
The study team would also like to express appreciation for the time that the surveyed fishermen and women made available during the year for the interviews carried out as part of this study. It is hoped that the present report will prove useful in the search for policies geared towards improving their livelihoods.
Finally, while advice has been received from many colleagues and friends, the research team takes full responsibility for any remaining errors or shortcomings in interpretation. All the usual caveats apply.
5
Executive Summary
Fishing in Vietnam is an ancient tradition and vocation, dating back many hundreds of years. Today, the sector represents an important source of economic growth, employment, nutrition, and foreign exchange. In recent years the sector has undergone a dramatic transformation, evolving basically in-line with a number of trends seen globally. Farmed fish, primarily in the Mekong Delta, now represents over half of total production, and Vietnam has become a major exporter of aquatic products. At the same time, marine catch is plateauing, with all indicators pointing strongly to a situation of overfishing caused by overcapacity.
The fisheries sector in Vietnam is diverse and segmented: large marine vessels with powerful engines fish offshore waters while small (often non-motorised) boats catch small fish near to the shore; tropical fish species are farmed in intensive and commercially competitive ways targeting the export market, as well as in small ponds owned by poor farmers using aquaculture as a means to supplement their crop income; and sophisticated and profitable fish processing companies share the market with household enterprises manufacturing basic fish products for the domestic market. These distinctions are important for policy design.
The sector represents an increasing part of agricultural GDP, and indeed is targeted by the government to continue to do so. However, in the context of Vietnam’s industrialisation and associated structural change, fisheries as a percentage of national GDP has been quite stable at around four percent for some time, and its contribution to the Vietnamese economy as a whole is thus comparable to the textiles and garments sector. As with some other agricultural products, while fisheries contributes relatively little to national GDP, it generates a disproportionate amount of the country’s export earnings (10.7 percent). And as with the rice sector in Vietnam, most product is passed downstream to the processing sector prior to consumption or export.
Total fisheries production has been growing steadily over the past two decades, climbing to 4.5mn tonnes in 2008, representing an increase of 350 percent from 1990 levels. Much of this rise has been derived from the aquaculture subsector which has grown from almost nothing just twenty years ago. If the aims of the sector 2020 Strategy are realised, such trends will continue, with a compound annual average growth rate of 3.6 percent targeted for the coming decade. Compared to growth of recent years, this actually represents a slight deceleration, though within this, aquaculture is targeted to account for 65-70 percent, implying an aquaculture output double that of today in ten years time.
Aquaculture Production and Export
Vietnamese aquaculture output and value have soared at an annual average growth rate of approximately 20 percent from 2000, exceeding the already high rates of the 1990s. By 2008 Vietnam accounted for almost five percent of world aquaculture output and value, triple that of 1990. Together, two products, Pangasius and the Giant Tiger Shrimp dominate, accounting for about two-thirds of total production and value. Moreover, this species dependence has increased over time. Production is concentrated geographically in the Mekong Delta, and in particular the provinces of Dong Thap, An Giang, and Ca Mau. The narrow dependence on two species has enabled the aquaculture sector to specialize, but it has negative implications for economic risk and regional equity.
Disease is perhaps the most likely and detrimental negative production shock, and there are recent examples from South America of rapidly growing, but short-term focused, aquaculture sectors that have suffered severely from this. In addition, poor quality feed and water quality concerns should be taken into serious consideration. Exogenous shocks such as climate change could also adversely affect production. A further shock could come from media information about the use of antibiotics. This occurred in the US and farmed salmon from Chile. A reason to diversify may also to spread the benefits of aquaculture to all regions of Vietnam. There are a number of other species, besides Pangasius and Tiger Shrimp that could be cultivated successfully outside of the Mekong Delta, some with a comparative advantage that could provide export opportunities; others would be more a means of providing livelihoods and of protein.
6
Aquaculture targeting in Vietnam is largely expressed in tonnage with little apparent interest in value except where it can be expressed as exports and foreign exchange. Profitability and efficiency are more appropriate benchmarks, and are likely maximised at production levels lower than the sector targets. This is reflected in an (over-)emphasis on Pangasius and Tiger Shrimp due to their beneficial impact on the balance of trade. To this extent, the model is similar to Chilean and earlier Thai experience. However, it appears to be to the detriment to species diversification, particularly species such as seaweed that may be viable only for the domestic market.
A significant factor in Vietnam’s successful aquaculture expansion has been the cultivation of products destined for export. Vietnamese policymakers, as in some other countries, whether Chile (farmed salmon) or Thailand (farmed shrimp), have viewed aquaculture not only as source of rural livelihoods but also as an international tradable product, and a source of foreign exchange. The primary export product, Pangasius, is essentially a low value-added generic product, with demand based almost entirely on price. Calculations made in this report find an inelastic own price elasticity of demand and an income elasticity of less than one. Although a normal and not inferior good, Pangasius must compete with low cost white fish substitutes such as Tilapia. If the plans for a continued rapid expansion in production and export are realised, Pangasius is thus vulnerable to oversupply, and appears to be in a poor bargaining position in importing countries. One of the ironies of food products that have inelastic demand is that higher supply actually results in lower revenues, because the increase in output is swamped by the decline in price. Given inelastic price elasticity of demand, the recent proposal to introduce a price floor on Pangasius exports has potential to Giúp the industry, especially in markets where there are currently few substitutes such as the EU. But the possible resulting emergence of a product surplus should be carefully monitored. Limiting output with a species that has inelastic own-elasticity would actually raise revenues- and processors may have an incentive to pass-on some of the higher price to farmers to ensure raw material. This pass-through is more likely if the process of vertical integration continues such that processors own farms themselves.
Processors of Pangasius must therefore develop more sophisticated (value-added) forms such as breaded fillets if the projected output expansion is not to produce a sharp decline in revenues. In short, focus in the sector must switch from targeting production to quality and value. Shifting the demand curve by generic marketing, as was successfully done by salmon farmers some years ago, is one way to do this. In this sense, product branding is key. Despite healthy growth, Vietnamese export produce is still not sufficiently ‘visible’ on the international market. Furthermore, Vietnamese exporters often target the lower end of the market and compete more on price than quality. This appears to have led to an image problem in that buyers in main import markets associate Vietnamese produce with lower price rather than high quality. The development of a brand name (quality mark) should form a core part of the wider aquatic export promotion strategy of the country.
The potentially disastrous impact of climate change to continued production of both Pangasius and shrimp in the Mekong Delta is well documented. Margins per kg are already very low for Pangasius, such that higher costs will threaten the survival of many farms. Shrimp farms may cope by consolidation given that some economies of scale exist, but in general, options facing farmers are limited. Feed is such a critical cost for farmers that any action that reduces feed costs could offset some of the damaging effects of climate change. As with feed, the cost of medicine is also important. Compared with other countries, medicine is over-used in Vietnam which may be due to poor husbandry practices, perverse incentives by pharmaceutical agents and retailers, or declining quality of fingerlings. There are policies that governments can implement to encourage better management practices, reduce the over-prescription of drugs, and improve the quality of fingerlings.
Aquaculture Certification and Vertical Integration
Increasingly, regulations concerning food health and safety are becoming more stringent and enforced in importing countries. Consumers are not only requiring greater assurances about food safety but also about the environmental and social impacts of production. Market access is thus becoming difficult except for the very largest producers, and small-scale farms may lack the technical knowledge and financial depth to
7
adapt their production. Despite these difficulties, meeting such standards is becoming a prerequisite for access to most importing countries. Such standards may be perceived as non-tariff barriers, but countries wishing to access those markets must abide by them. There is no price premium for meeting standards; instead the cost must be borne by exporters.
While Vietnamese exports are largely concentrated in a small number of major (developed country) markets, there is a growing tail of ‘other’ destinations. Such a diversification of export markets is a sensible risk-reducing strategy, but many of the ‘other’ countries impose less stringent standards on their fish imports. In the short-term, it will be tempting to exploit this given the lower compliance costs involved, but the medium to long-term rationale of this are doubtful. Investments should be made now to fulfil the relevant (mandatory and voluntary) certification requirements. A detailed analysis and set of recommendations of voluntary aquaculture certification standards is included in the report appendix.
In Vietnam these (traceability) requirements in importing countries have forced the domestic value chain to start to adjust. Domestic processing companies have driven the process, acquiring grow-out farms (particularly Pangasius) and establishing feed mills. Production is, in other words, being integrated down the value chain in a process initiated and managed by, and therefore happening on the terms of, the processing companies. The motivation of this vertical integration may be partly to control costs but the primary concern appears to be the need to meet standards. It may just be an emerging trend at this point, but to the extent that it is profitable and viewed as worthwhile by the processors, large integrated companies including feed manufacture, grow-out fish farms, and processing activities producing aquatic products ready for export are likely to increasingly dominate the aquaculture sector especially in the Mekong Delta. Given the potential efficiencies this could bring, integration is probably the right thing to happen for the industry. But it is important for this trend to be carefully managed by policy-makers in an efficient and equitable manner. This is particularly important vis-à-vis the producers (grow-out farms) who are in general smaller and more vulnerable than the other actors.
Marine Capture Fisheries
Despite year on year rises in ocean catch, productivity has been declining for many years. Due to a classic ‘tragedy of the commons’ situation, the Vietnamese ocean appears to be overcapitalised- simply put, there are too many fishers chasing too few fish. Moreover, the situation is worsening; with a sevenfold increase in the aggregate horsepower of Vietnam’s fishing fleet accompanied by just a threefold rise in production since 1990. The problem is particularly acute in near-to-shore waters- Approximately 60 percent of total catch is caught, and 86 percent of vessels operate, in an area representing just 25 percent of the total exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of Vietnam.
A significant proportion of ocean catch is comprised of so-called ‘trash fish’: low-value small or juvenile fish, spoiled fish due to poor post-harvest facilities on boats and onshore, and by-product of fishing with non- selective gears. This part of the catch is used primarily in the manufacture of fish sauce and fish/livestock feed. Such a high ‘trash fish’ component is indicative of the underlying problems plaguing the subsector, such as poor post-harvest techniques and adoption, lack of environmental consideration, and poor control of gears. Policy actions in this area should be a priority.
Results from surveys conducted as part of the report show the marine fisheries supply chain to be highly unbalanced. The processors set the price with the middlemen, and the middlemen set the price with the fishers. Fishers are price takers with slim operating margins, implying a high vulnerability to adverse cost or price changes. A small rise in operating costs can lead to losses, as was clearly illustrated with the fuel price rises of 2008. The response of authorities in this instance of a fuel price subsidy is in many ways understandable. But while subsidising the sector may ease the short term pain on such occasions, and indeed has undoubtedly played an important role in fishers’ livelihoods, the economic rationale of longer term subsidisation of the sector is not obvious. Policies can be implemented to attempt to redress the skewed distribution of value-added in the supply chain. In particular, specific attention should be paid to supporting the fishers. Helping fishers to organise themselves into groups such that they interact with the supply chain in a collective way would be one solution. Providing alternative credit sources and initiatives
8
to teach and finance preservation systems on board vessels would also Giúp to reduce fishers’ dependence on middlemen. Related to this, report findings illustrate clearly the quality versus quantity trade-off, such that ‘low quantity higher quality’ catch is not only more sustainable, but also more profitable.
All indications are thus of a marine fisheries subsector that would be more profitable at lower levels of production (catch). As things currently stand, fishers are facing a triple-whammy: They are having to fish longer and harder to catch the same volume of catch; the fish they do catch tends to be of lower commercial value; and the operating costs of fishing (such as fuel) are, in general, rising. In many cases, economic losses are thus being incurred, causing hardship on a fishing community already facing challenges. Indeed, for those small-scale fisheries activities that are seemingly economically viable in Vietnam, it is most likely due to strong market demand (which may come and go), government subsidies to the sector, a low opportunity cost to attracting labour to the ocean, and insufficient attention paid to sustainability.
Addressing Overfishing
There is thus a pressing need to start the process of reducing fishing effort. Labour and capital (fishermen and their boats) are ‘sticky’, such that any removal of them from the industry can be expected to be a difficult and lengthy process, and should necessarily be accompanied by supporting policies. Regulation (of fishing effort or production) is unlikely to bind unless there are concomitant initiatives put in place to (i) incentivise fishers to behave in a sustainable manner, and/or (ii) provide alternative and/or supplementary livelihood possibilities for fishers such that they are able to seek (part of t
ASEANGAP was developed under the ASEAN-Australia Development Cooperation Program and was launched in 2006 with the objective of harmonising GAP programs for fresh fruits and vegetables in ASEAN countries. ASEANGAP is a voluntary scheme covering not only food safety and quality, but also environmental management and workers’ safety and welfare. Certification for ASEANGAP compliance is conducted by the national authorities in each ASEAN country. ASEANGAP also offers an opportunity for national programs to be benchmarked.
In 2009 the Ad-Hoc Task Force on ASEANGAP met to develop a regional strategy to facilitate the implementation of ASEANGAP. At the meeting ASEANGAP was presented as a “flagship initiative” to enhance competitiveness of ASEAN agriculture products. However, the need to create awareness, promote implementation and raising recognition for ASEANGAP in the marketplace were also recognised.
At present, there is no evidence that the implementation of ASEANGAP by farmers leads to any actual benefits such as premium prices, improved market access or financial incentives such as improved access to credit or insurance. It is however possible that national schemes benchmarked or inspired to the ASEANGAP (e.g. VietGAP, ThaiGAP) do offer such benefits. This was beyond the scope of this assessment, although this report was expanded to include at least Vietnamese experiences.
Experiences from Government Aquaculture Certification Schemes in the Region
Two rather different examples of national aquaculture certification schemes promoted by the government are reviewed here.
Thai Quality Shrimp: Good Aquaculture Practices and Code of Conduct
The first and most developed government-promoted scheme for aquaculture certification is arguably the Thai Quality Shrimp scheme, through which better practices were developed to cover safety, health and
Do Drive thay đổi chính sách, nên một số link cũ yêu cầu duyệt download. các bạn chỉ cần làm theo hướng dẫn.
Password giải nén nếu cần: ket-noi.com | Bấm trực tiếp vào Link để tải:
Ngành Thủy sản tại Việt Nam: Phân tích kinh tế chiến lược
Table of Contents
List of Tables..................................................................................................................................................................................3 List of Figures.................................................................................................................................................................................3 Acronyms and Abbreviations ......................................................................................................................................................... 4 Preface .............................................................................................................................................................................................................5 Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................................................... 6
1
2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4
3 3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
4 4.1
4.2
5 5.1 5.2 5.3
6 6.1 6.2
7
8 8.1 8.2 8.3
Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................................... 12
The Fisheries Sector in Vietnam: An Overview ................................................................................................................... 14 Fisheries in Context ...................................................................................................................................................... 15 Production Trends ........................................................................................................................................................ 18 International Trade....................................................................................................................................................... 21 Food Security................................................................................................................................................................ 22
Aquaculture....................................................................................................................................................................... 25 The Growth of Aquaculture in Vietnam......................................................................................................................... 25
3.1.1 3.1.2 3.1.3
3.2.1 3.2.2
3.3.1 3.3.2
An Overview............................................................................................................................................................. 25 Aquaculture Environment......................................................................................................................................... 27 Diversification of Species .......................................................................................................................................... 28
Exports and International Trade ................................................................................................................................... 31
Role of International Trade in Vietnamese Aquaculture............................................................................................. 31
Pangasius Exports..................................................................................................................................................... 33
Aquaculture Governance .............................................................................................................................................. 37
The Role of the State ................................................................................................................................................ 39
The Role of Standards in Importing Countries............................................................................................................ 42
Aquaculture Farm Budgets: A Scenario Analysis............................................................................................................ 45
4.1.1 4.1.2 4.1.3 4.1.4 4.1.5
4.2.1 4.2.2 4.2.3
Production ............................................................................................................................................................... 54 Fishing Effort ............................................................................................................................................................ 55 Near to Shore Fisheries: A Case Study of Anchovy...................................................................................................... 57 Offshore Fisheries: A Case Study of Skipjack Tuna...................................................................................................... 59 Fishing costs and Productivity: Modelling Fuel Price Fluctuations ............................................................................... 62
Overfishing ................................................................................................................................................................... 64
Measuring Overcapacity ........................................................................................................................................... 64 Overfishing in Near-to-Shore Waters ........................................................................................................................ 67 Policy ....................................................................................................................................................................... 71
Marine Capture Fisheries ................................................................................................................................................... 53 Profile of Sector ............................................................................................................................................................ 53
Small-Scale Fisheries Activities: Aquaculture and Inland Capture....................................................................................... 79 Importance of Small-Scale Fisheries to Rural Livelihoods .............................................................................................. 80 Inputs and Returns of Fisheries..................................................................................................................................... 84 A Modelling of Household Participation in Fisheries ..................................................................................................... 86
Dynamic Scenario Analysis................................................................................................................................................. 88 Description of the Economywide Model ....................................................................................................................... 88 Model Results............................................................................................................................................................... 89
Concluding Remarks .......................................................................................................................................................... 98
Appendix ......................................................................................................................................................................... 102 Evaluation of Voluntary Aquaculture Standards in Vietnam........................................................................................ 102 Fisheries Data ............................................................................................................................................................. 123 DCGE Model Specification (used in Chapter 6) ............................................................................................................ 126
2
List of Tables
Table 2.1: National Structure of the Vietnam Economy, 2007 .....................................................................................15 Table 2.2: Factor contributions to sectoral value-added (rows sum to 100%) ..............................................................17 Table 2.3: Selected Indicators of Food Insecurity 2007................................................................................................23 Table 2.4: Food and Calorie Intake, Vietnam 2006 (percent) .......................................................................................24 Table 3.1: Aquaculture Production of Giant Tiger Prawn and Pangasius (volume and value) 2000-2008.......................26 Table 3.2: The Contribution of the Three Environments to the Volume of Vietnamese Aquaculture ............................27 Table 3.3: Total Aquaculture Volume by Species (tonnes) ..........................................................................................27 Table 3.4: The Contribution of the Three Environments to the Value of Vietnamese Aquaculture ...............................28 Table 3.5: Profitability of Marine Aquaculture in Indonesian Silvo-Fish Culture (Rupees 1000) ....................................29 Table 3.6: Elasticity Estimates: Regression Results of Model .......................................................................................36 Table 3.7: Estimated Price Elasticities .........................................................................................................................37 Table 3.8: Pangasius and Shrimp Production Parameters ............................................................................................46 Table 3.9: Impact on Pangasius Costs and Profits of Reduced Input Costs....................................................................48 Table 3.10: Impact on Shrimp Costs and Profits of Reduced Input Costs ......................................................................49 Table 3.11: Flooding due to Climate Change in the Mekong Delta in 2050...................................................................49 Table 3.12: Possible Impacts of Climate Change on Pangasius Production Costs..........................................................50 Table 3.13: Impact of Climate Change on Costs and Profits of Pangasius .....................................................................50 Table 3.14: Possible Impacts of Climate Change on Shrimp Production Costs ..............................................................51 Table 3.15: Impact of Climate Change on Costs and Profits of Shrimp .........................................................................51 Table 4.1: Anchovy Value Chain- Costs and Profits ......................................................................................................59 Table 4.2: Tuna Value Chain- Costs and Profits............................................................................................................60 Table 4.3: Initial Refined Fuel Shares of Total Cost (percent) .......................................................................................62 Table 4.4: Simulation of Environmental Fuel Tax Impact on Real Output (percent) ......................................................63 Table 4.5: Real Output Effects with a Simulated Production Subsidy (percent) ............................................................63 Table 5.1: Participation in, and Production of, Fisheries Activities ...............................................................................81 Table 5.2: Consumption and Sales of Selected Fisheries Products (VND 000)...............................................................84 Table 5.3: Production Inputs for Aquaculture..............................................................................................................85 Table 6.1: Baseline Scenario Assumptions...................................................................................................................89 Table 6.2: Change in GDP, 2007-2017 under Different Scenarios.................................................................................92 Table 6.3: Changes in Household per capita Consumption, 2007-2017 under Different Scenarios................................93 Table 6.4: Change in Trading Patterns of Fish Products (relative to baseline)...............................................................94 Table 6.5: Changes in agricultural land allocation and fisheries production, 2007-2017 ...............................................95
List of Figures
Figure 2.1: Fisheries as a Share of National GDP (percent) ..........................................................................................16 Figure 2.2: Total Fishery Sector Production (tonnes) ...................................................................................................18 Figure 2.3: Total Production Growth for Selected Time Periods (percent)....................................................................19 Figure 2.4: Shares of Total Fishery Sector Production (percent)...................................................................................19 Figure 2.5: Fisheries Sector Structure (000 tonnes, 2007)............................................................................................20 Figure 2.6: Vietnamese Fishery Exports (tonnes and percent) .....................................................................................21 Figure 2.7: Vietnamese Fishery Exports by Species and Destination (US$ value, percent) ............................................22 Figure 3.1: Aquaculture Production, regional split (percent) .......................................................................................26 Figure 3.2: Exports of Pangasius from Vietnam by Destination, 2007-2009 (tonnes)....................................................34 Figure 3.3: Baseline Model for Pangasius Farm (VND/kg). ...........................................................................................47 Figure 3.4: Baseline Model of Shrimp Farm (VND/Kg). ................................................................................................48 Figure 4.1: Marine Capture Fisheries Production (tonnes and percent) .......................................................................54 Figure 4.2: Marine Capture Fisheries Capacity (number vessels and HP), 1990-2008 ...................................................55 Figure 4.3: Marine Capture Fisheries Capacity 2008 (number of vessels).....................................................................56 Figure 4.4: Marine Capture Fisheries Catch per Unit of Effort (CPUE) ..........................................................................57 Figure 5.1: Share of Income from Different Sources for Fisheries Households in 2008 .................................................83 Figure 6.1: Conceptual Framework for the Economywide Model.................................................................................88 Figure 6.2: Simulation Schematic................................................................................................................................90 Figure 6.3: Change in final year per capita consumption for all fishers the Mekong Delta by expenditure quintile, 2007- 2017 ..........................................................................................................................................................................97 Figure 8.1: Conceptual Framework for the Economywide Model...............................................................................126
3
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Bn Billion
CGE Computable General Equilibrium
CIEM Central Institute for Economic Management
CPI Consumer Price Index
CPUE Catch per Unit of Effort
DERG Development Economics Research Group (University of Copenhagen) EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone
FAO Food and Agriculture Organisation, United Nations
FSPS Fisheries Sector Program Support
HCMC Ho Chi Minh City
ILSSA Institute for Labour Science and Social Affairs
ISIC International Standard Industrial Classification
LURC Land Use Right Certificate
GSO General Statistics Office of Vietnam
Ha Hectare
HH Household
HP Horse Power
Km Kilometre
LURC Land Use Right Certificate
MEY Maximum Economic Yield
MSY Maximum Sustainable Yield
Mn Million
MoFI Ministry of Fisheries
MONRE Ministry of Natural Resources and the Environment
MPI Ministry of Planning and Investment
N Number of Observations
Nm Nautical Mile
OLS Ordinary Least Squares
SAM Social Accounting Matrix
SD Standard Deviation
SME Small and Medium sized Enterprise
TAC Total Allowable Catch
US$ United States Dollar
VARHS Vietnam Access to Resources Household Survey
VHLSS Vietnam Household Living Standards Survey
VIFEP Vietnam Institute for Fisheries Economics and Planning
VND Vietnamese Dong
4
Preface
This report was commissioned by the Royal Embassy of Denmark (Danida) in Vietnam under Phase II of the Fisheries Sector Programme Support (FSPS), in early 2010. The report was commissioned following an appraisal of the need for an economic study of the fisheries sector conducted by Van Arkadie & Hung (June, 2009).
Following this appraisal, Danida made the decision to support a project which would produce a strategic economic evaluation of the fisheries sector in Vietnam, and which would provide the basis for effective government policies and interventions to implement its fishery sector strategy. Specifically, an overall objective was defined as to improve the effectiveness of government economic policies and interventions in the fishery sector by improving the quality of economic analysis of the sector and to contribute to the development of the capability to undertake economic analysis in the sector. It is hoped that this study, to be presented to Vietnamese government policy makers, will provide a basis for informed choices in selecting and designing government interventions in the fisheries sector of Vietnam.
Acknowledgements
The core research team consisted of the Development Economics Research Group (DERG) of the University of Copenhagen, and the Central Institute for Economic Management (CIEM) in the Ministry of Planning and Investment (MPI) of Vietnam. Mr Simon McCoy led the research, with Dr James Thurlow (World Institute for Development Economics Research, WIDER), Professor Neil Ridler (University of New Brunswick), and Professor Andy McKay (University of Sussex) joining the DERG team. Dr Nguyen Manh Hai, Mr Tran Trung Hieu, and Ms Le Xuan Quynh formed the CIEM research team. Professor Finn Tarp on the side of DERG, and Ms Vu Nguyet Xuan Hong, Vice President of CIEM, supervised the research effort through all its stages.
In addition to the core research team of DERG and CIEM, contributions to the research were made by Dr Nguyen Thi Kim Anh and her team (Nguyen Thi Tram Anh, Hao Van Tran, Pham Thi Thanh Thuy, and Nguyen Ngoc Duy), at the Faculty of Economics of Nha Trang University in Vietnam, and Dr Le Xuan Sinh and his team (Nguyen Thanh Toan, Huynh Van Hien, Do Minh Chung, and Nguyen Thi Kim Quyen) at Can Tho University, who contributed to large parts of the aquaculture research findings. In the area of aquacultures certification and standards, the DERG team was complemented by Dr Flavio Corsin and his team at the newly established ICAFIS.
Finally, thanks to the Vietnam Institute for Fisheries Economics and Planning (VIFEP) within the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD), in particular Ms Pham Thi Thuy Linh, who interacted with the research team throughout the year and who made contributions in terms of data provision and advice.
Our work would not have been possible without professional interaction, advice and encouragement from a large number of individuals and institutions. We would in particular like to highlight our thanks for the productive and stimulating collaboration with Mr Eric Keus and Mr Paul Nichols, both formerly advisors under the FSPS II Programme, and in particular, Mr Michael Akester, FSPS II Danida advisor. Thanks also to Mr Keith Symington, independent fisheries expert, and Ms Nguyen Thi Thu Hang, FSPS Project Officer at the Royal Embassy of Denmark in Vietnam. The Danida (FSPS II program) financial support is acknowledged with gratitude.
The study team would also like to express appreciation for the time that the surveyed fishermen and women made available during the year for the interviews carried out as part of this study. It is hoped that the present report will prove useful in the search for policies geared towards improving their livelihoods.
Finally, while advice has been received from many colleagues and friends, the research team takes full responsibility for any remaining errors or shortcomings in interpretation. All the usual caveats apply.
5
Executive Summary
Fishing in Vietnam is an ancient tradition and vocation, dating back many hundreds of years. Today, the sector represents an important source of economic growth, employment, nutrition, and foreign exchange. In recent years the sector has undergone a dramatic transformation, evolving basically in-line with a number of trends seen globally. Farmed fish, primarily in the Mekong Delta, now represents over half of total production, and Vietnam has become a major exporter of aquatic products. At the same time, marine catch is plateauing, with all indicators pointing strongly to a situation of overfishing caused by overcapacity.
The fisheries sector in Vietnam is diverse and segmented: large marine vessels with powerful engines fish offshore waters while small (often non-motorised) boats catch small fish near to the shore; tropical fish species are farmed in intensive and commercially competitive ways targeting the export market, as well as in small ponds owned by poor farmers using aquaculture as a means to supplement their crop income; and sophisticated and profitable fish processing companies share the market with household enterprises manufacturing basic fish products for the domestic market. These distinctions are important for policy design.
The sector represents an increasing part of agricultural GDP, and indeed is targeted by the government to continue to do so. However, in the context of Vietnam’s industrialisation and associated structural change, fisheries as a percentage of national GDP has been quite stable at around four percent for some time, and its contribution to the Vietnamese economy as a whole is thus comparable to the textiles and garments sector. As with some other agricultural products, while fisheries contributes relatively little to national GDP, it generates a disproportionate amount of the country’s export earnings (10.7 percent). And as with the rice sector in Vietnam, most product is passed downstream to the processing sector prior to consumption or export.
Total fisheries production has been growing steadily over the past two decades, climbing to 4.5mn tonnes in 2008, representing an increase of 350 percent from 1990 levels. Much of this rise has been derived from the aquaculture subsector which has grown from almost nothing just twenty years ago. If the aims of the sector 2020 Strategy are realised, such trends will continue, with a compound annual average growth rate of 3.6 percent targeted for the coming decade. Compared to growth of recent years, this actually represents a slight deceleration, though within this, aquaculture is targeted to account for 65-70 percent, implying an aquaculture output double that of today in ten years time.
Aquaculture Production and Export
Vietnamese aquaculture output and value have soared at an annual average growth rate of approximately 20 percent from 2000, exceeding the already high rates of the 1990s. By 2008 Vietnam accounted for almost five percent of world aquaculture output and value, triple that of 1990. Together, two products, Pangasius and the Giant Tiger Shrimp dominate, accounting for about two-thirds of total production and value. Moreover, this species dependence has increased over time. Production is concentrated geographically in the Mekong Delta, and in particular the provinces of Dong Thap, An Giang, and Ca Mau. The narrow dependence on two species has enabled the aquaculture sector to specialize, but it has negative implications for economic risk and regional equity.
Disease is perhaps the most likely and detrimental negative production shock, and there are recent examples from South America of rapidly growing, but short-term focused, aquaculture sectors that have suffered severely from this. In addition, poor quality feed and water quality concerns should be taken into serious consideration. Exogenous shocks such as climate change could also adversely affect production. A further shock could come from media information about the use of antibiotics. This occurred in the US and farmed salmon from Chile. A reason to diversify may also to spread the benefits of aquaculture to all regions of Vietnam. There are a number of other species, besides Pangasius and Tiger Shrimp that could be cultivated successfully outside of the Mekong Delta, some with a comparative advantage that could provide export opportunities; others would be more a means of providing livelihoods and of protein.
6
Aquaculture targeting in Vietnam is largely expressed in tonnage with little apparent interest in value except where it can be expressed as exports and foreign exchange. Profitability and efficiency are more appropriate benchmarks, and are likely maximised at production levels lower than the sector targets. This is reflected in an (over-)emphasis on Pangasius and Tiger Shrimp due to their beneficial impact on the balance of trade. To this extent, the model is similar to Chilean and earlier Thai experience. However, it appears to be to the detriment to species diversification, particularly species such as seaweed that may be viable only for the domestic market.
A significant factor in Vietnam’s successful aquaculture expansion has been the cultivation of products destined for export. Vietnamese policymakers, as in some other countries, whether Chile (farmed salmon) or Thailand (farmed shrimp), have viewed aquaculture not only as source of rural livelihoods but also as an international tradable product, and a source of foreign exchange. The primary export product, Pangasius, is essentially a low value-added generic product, with demand based almost entirely on price. Calculations made in this report find an inelastic own price elasticity of demand and an income elasticity of less than one. Although a normal and not inferior good, Pangasius must compete with low cost white fish substitutes such as Tilapia. If the plans for a continued rapid expansion in production and export are realised, Pangasius is thus vulnerable to oversupply, and appears to be in a poor bargaining position in importing countries. One of the ironies of food products that have inelastic demand is that higher supply actually results in lower revenues, because the increase in output is swamped by the decline in price. Given inelastic price elasticity of demand, the recent proposal to introduce a price floor on Pangasius exports has potential to Giúp the industry, especially in markets where there are currently few substitutes such as the EU. But the possible resulting emergence of a product surplus should be carefully monitored. Limiting output with a species that has inelastic own-elasticity would actually raise revenues- and processors may have an incentive to pass-on some of the higher price to farmers to ensure raw material. This pass-through is more likely if the process of vertical integration continues such that processors own farms themselves.
Processors of Pangasius must therefore develop more sophisticated (value-added) forms such as breaded fillets if the projected output expansion is not to produce a sharp decline in revenues. In short, focus in the sector must switch from targeting production to quality and value. Shifting the demand curve by generic marketing, as was successfully done by salmon farmers some years ago, is one way to do this. In this sense, product branding is key. Despite healthy growth, Vietnamese export produce is still not sufficiently ‘visible’ on the international market. Furthermore, Vietnamese exporters often target the lower end of the market and compete more on price than quality. This appears to have led to an image problem in that buyers in main import markets associate Vietnamese produce with lower price rather than high quality. The development of a brand name (quality mark) should form a core part of the wider aquatic export promotion strategy of the country.
The potentially disastrous impact of climate change to continued production of both Pangasius and shrimp in the Mekong Delta is well documented. Margins per kg are already very low for Pangasius, such that higher costs will threaten the survival of many farms. Shrimp farms may cope by consolidation given that some economies of scale exist, but in general, options facing farmers are limited. Feed is such a critical cost for farmers that any action that reduces feed costs could offset some of the damaging effects of climate change. As with feed, the cost of medicine is also important. Compared with other countries, medicine is over-used in Vietnam which may be due to poor husbandry practices, perverse incentives by pharmaceutical agents and retailers, or declining quality of fingerlings. There are policies that governments can implement to encourage better management practices, reduce the over-prescription of drugs, and improve the quality of fingerlings.
Aquaculture Certification and Vertical Integration
Increasingly, regulations concerning food health and safety are becoming more stringent and enforced in importing countries. Consumers are not only requiring greater assurances about food safety but also about the environmental and social impacts of production. Market access is thus becoming difficult except for the very largest producers, and small-scale farms may lack the technical knowledge and financial depth to
7
adapt their production. Despite these difficulties, meeting such standards is becoming a prerequisite for access to most importing countries. Such standards may be perceived as non-tariff barriers, but countries wishing to access those markets must abide by them. There is no price premium for meeting standards; instead the cost must be borne by exporters.
While Vietnamese exports are largely concentrated in a small number of major (developed country) markets, there is a growing tail of ‘other’ destinations. Such a diversification of export markets is a sensible risk-reducing strategy, but many of the ‘other’ countries impose less stringent standards on their fish imports. In the short-term, it will be tempting to exploit this given the lower compliance costs involved, but the medium to long-term rationale of this are doubtful. Investments should be made now to fulfil the relevant (mandatory and voluntary) certification requirements. A detailed analysis and set of recommendations of voluntary aquaculture certification standards is included in the report appendix.
In Vietnam these (traceability) requirements in importing countries have forced the domestic value chain to start to adjust. Domestic processing companies have driven the process, acquiring grow-out farms (particularly Pangasius) and establishing feed mills. Production is, in other words, being integrated down the value chain in a process initiated and managed by, and therefore happening on the terms of, the processing companies. The motivation of this vertical integration may be partly to control costs but the primary concern appears to be the need to meet standards. It may just be an emerging trend at this point, but to the extent that it is profitable and viewed as worthwhile by the processors, large integrated companies including feed manufacture, grow-out fish farms, and processing activities producing aquatic products ready for export are likely to increasingly dominate the aquaculture sector especially in the Mekong Delta. Given the potential efficiencies this could bring, integration is probably the right thing to happen for the industry. But it is important for this trend to be carefully managed by policy-makers in an efficient and equitable manner. This is particularly important vis-à-vis the producers (grow-out farms) who are in general smaller and more vulnerable than the other actors.
Marine Capture Fisheries
Despite year on year rises in ocean catch, productivity has been declining for many years. Due to a classic ‘tragedy of the commons’ situation, the Vietnamese ocean appears to be overcapitalised- simply put, there are too many fishers chasing too few fish. Moreover, the situation is worsening; with a sevenfold increase in the aggregate horsepower of Vietnam’s fishing fleet accompanied by just a threefold rise in production since 1990. The problem is particularly acute in near-to-shore waters- Approximately 60 percent of total catch is caught, and 86 percent of vessels operate, in an area representing just 25 percent of the total exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of Vietnam.
A significant proportion of ocean catch is comprised of so-called ‘trash fish’: low-value small or juvenile fish, spoiled fish due to poor post-harvest facilities on boats and onshore, and by-product of fishing with non- selective gears. This part of the catch is used primarily in the manufacture of fish sauce and fish/livestock feed. Such a high ‘trash fish’ component is indicative of the underlying problems plaguing the subsector, such as poor post-harvest techniques and adoption, lack of environmental consideration, and poor control of gears. Policy actions in this area should be a priority.
Results from surveys conducted as part of the report show the marine fisheries supply chain to be highly unbalanced. The processors set the price with the middlemen, and the middlemen set the price with the fishers. Fishers are price takers with slim operating margins, implying a high vulnerability to adverse cost or price changes. A small rise in operating costs can lead to losses, as was clearly illustrated with the fuel price rises of 2008. The response of authorities in this instance of a fuel price subsidy is in many ways understandable. But while subsidising the sector may ease the short term pain on such occasions, and indeed has undoubtedly played an important role in fishers’ livelihoods, the economic rationale of longer term subsidisation of the sector is not obvious. Policies can be implemented to attempt to redress the skewed distribution of value-added in the supply chain. In particular, specific attention should be paid to supporting the fishers. Helping fishers to organise themselves into groups such that they interact with the supply chain in a collective way would be one solution. Providing alternative credit sources and initiatives
8
to teach and finance preservation systems on board vessels would also Giúp to reduce fishers’ dependence on middlemen. Related to this, report findings illustrate clearly the quality versus quantity trade-off, such that ‘low quantity higher quality’ catch is not only more sustainable, but also more profitable.
All indications are thus of a marine fisheries subsector that would be more profitable at lower levels of production (catch). As things currently stand, fishers are facing a triple-whammy: They are having to fish longer and harder to catch the same volume of catch; the fish they do catch tends to be of lower commercial value; and the operating costs of fishing (such as fuel) are, in general, rising. In many cases, economic losses are thus being incurred, causing hardship on a fishing community already facing challenges. Indeed, for those small-scale fisheries activities that are seemingly economically viable in Vietnam, it is most likely due to strong market demand (which may come and go), government subsidies to the sector, a low opportunity cost to attracting labour to the ocean, and insufficient attention paid to sustainability.
Addressing Overfishing
There is thus a pressing need to start the process of reducing fishing effort. Labour and capital (fishermen and their boats) are ‘sticky’, such that any removal of them from the industry can be expected to be a difficult and lengthy process, and should necessarily be accompanied by supporting policies. Regulation (of fishing effort or production) is unlikely to bind unless there are concomitant initiatives put in place to (i) incentivise fishers to behave in a sustainable manner, and/or (ii) provide alternative and/or supplementary livelihood possibilities for fishers such that they are able to seek (part of t
ASEANGAP was developed under the ASEAN-Australia Development Cooperation Program and was launched in 2006 with the objective of harmonising GAP programs for fresh fruits and vegetables in ASEAN countries. ASEANGAP is a voluntary scheme covering not only food safety and quality, but also environmental management and workers’ safety and welfare. Certification for ASEANGAP compliance is conducted by the national authorities in each ASEAN country. ASEANGAP also offers an opportunity for national programs to be benchmarked.
In 2009 the Ad-Hoc Task Force on ASEANGAP met to develop a regional strategy to facilitate the implementation of ASEANGAP. At the meeting ASEANGAP was presented as a “flagship initiative” to enhance competitiveness of ASEAN agriculture products. However, the need to create awareness, promote implementation and raising recognition for ASEANGAP in the marketplace were also recognised.
At present, there is no evidence that the implementation of ASEANGAP by farmers leads to any actual benefits such as premium prices, improved market access or financial incentives such as improved access to credit or insurance. It is however possible that national schemes benchmarked or inspired to the ASEANGAP (e.g. VietGAP, ThaiGAP) do offer such benefits. This was beyond the scope of this assessment, although this report was expanded to include at least Vietnamese experiences.
Experiences from Government Aquaculture Certification Schemes in the Region
Two rather different examples of national aquaculture certification schemes promoted by the government are reviewed here.
Thai Quality Shrimp: Good Aquaculture Practices and Code of Conduct
The first and most developed government-promoted scheme for aquaculture certification is arguably the Thai Quality Shrimp scheme, through which better practices were developed to cover safety, health and
Do Drive thay đổi chính sách, nên một số link cũ yêu cầu duyệt download. các bạn chỉ cần làm theo hướng dẫn.
Password giải nén nếu cần: ket-noi.com | Bấm trực tiếp vào Link để tải:
You must be registered for see links