IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ifaamr/307212.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Value chain impact of the increased hilsa shad (Tenualosa ilisha) harvest in Bangladesh

Author

Listed:
  • Khan, Akhtaruzzaman
  • Wahab, Abdul
  • Haque, A.B.M. Mahfuzul
  • Nahiduzzaman, M.
  • Phillips, Michael J.

Abstract

Hilsa shad is the largest single fish species, contributing 12% of the total fish production in Bangladesh. Since the rapid decline of its harvest in early 2000, the government of Bangladesh took various initiatives to accelerate the hilsa production and introduced the hilsa fisheries management action plan in 2005. Under WorldFish led enhanced coastal fisheries project, implemented in partnership with the Department of Fisheries, the hilsa fishery reversed and experienced record harvest in 2016. Therefore, this study was undertaken to explore the contributions and benefits of this increased hilsa shad production among value chain actors. The results revealed that increased catches have significant impacts on the volumes of hilsa that were handled by the value chain actors, which depressed market price along the value chain. However, the increased amounts of hilsa harvested compensated for the reduced price and led to increased profits, increased household incomes of the value chain actors, and enhanced fish consumption at the household levels. The increased hilsa catch also had positive and significant impacts on credit repayment. Therefore, the incentive-based co-management system deserves continuation to improve the livelihood of the poor hilsa fishers, to increase the income of the value chain actors and to ensure a sustainable hilsa fishery for Bangladesh.

Suggested Citation

  • Khan, Akhtaruzzaman & Wahab, Abdul & Haque, A.B.M. Mahfuzul & Nahiduzzaman, M. & Phillips, Michael J., 2020. "Value chain impact of the increased hilsa shad (Tenualosa ilisha) harvest in Bangladesh," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 23(3), September.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ifaamr:307212
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.307212
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/307212/files/ifamr2019.0201.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.307212?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Agnes R. Quisumbing & John A. Maluccio, 2003. "Resources at Marriage and Intrahousehold Allocation: Evidence from Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Indonesia, and South Africa," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 65(3), pages 283-327, July.
    2. Toufique, K A, 2015. "Some Thoughts on Hilsa Exports and Management in Bangladesh," Bangladesh Development Studies, Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS), vol. 38(2), pages 115-127, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Anuradha Talukdar & Petra Schneider & Amany Begum & Md. Abu Kawsar & Mst. Armina Sultana & Tofael Ahmed Sumon & Md. Rashed-Un- Nabi & Mohammad Mojibul Hoque Mozumder & Md. Mostafa Shamsuzzaman, 2022. "The Premium of Hilsa Sanctuary: A Socio-Economic and Ecological Evaluation from the Meghna Estuary, Bangladesh," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-13, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. de Brauw, Alan & Gilligan, Daniel O. & Hoddinott, John & Roy, Shalini, 2014. "The Impact of Bolsa Família on Women’s Decision-Making Power," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 487-504.
    2. Sevias Guvuriro & Frederik Booysen, 2021. "Family‐type public goods and intra‐household decision‐making by co‐resident South African couples," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(3), pages 1629-1647, August.
    3. Agnes Quisumbing & Neha Kumar, 2011. "Does social capital build women's assets? The long-term impacts of group-based and individual dissemination of agricultural technology in Bangladesh," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 220-242.
    4. Kassie, Menale & Fisher, Monica & Muricho, Geoffrey & Diiro, Gracious, 2020. "Women’s empowerment boosts the gains in dietary diversity from agricultural technology adoption in rural Kenya," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    5. Lay, Jann, 2010. "MDG Achievements, Determinants, and Resource Needs: What Has Been Learnt?," GIGA Working Papers 137, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
    6. Alkire, Sabina & Meinzen-Dick, Ruth & Peterman, Amber & Quisumbing, Agnes & Seymour, Greg & Vaz, Ana, 2013. "The Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 71-91.
    7. Fafchamps, Marcel & Quisumbing, Agnes, 2005. "Assets at marriage in rural Ethiopia," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 1-25, June.
    8. van den Bold, Mara & Quisumbing, Agnes R. & Gillespie, Stuart, 2013. "Women’s empowerment and nutrition: An evidence review:," IFPRI discussion papers 1294, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    9. D'Souza, Anna & Tandon, Sharad, 2015. "Using Household and Intrahousehold Data To Assess Food Insecurity: Evidence from Bangladesh," Economic Research Report 262207, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    10. Dauphin, Anyck & Fortin, Bernard & Lacroix, Guy, 2015. "How Falsifiable is the Collective Model? A New Test with an Application to Monogamous and Bigamous Households in Burkina Faso," IZA Discussion Papers 9002, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Vos, R.P. & Cuesta, J.D. & León, M. & Lucio, R. & Rosero, J., 2005. "Reaching the millennium development goal for child mortality : Improving equity and efficiency in Ecuador's health budget," ISS Working Papers - General Series 19169, International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam (ISS), The Hague.
    12. Kumar, Neha & Quisumbing, Agnes R., 2010. "Access, adoption, and diffusion," IFPRI discussion papers 995, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    13. Rama Lionel Ngenzebuke, 2016. "Female say on income and child outcomes: Evidence from Nigeria," WIDER Working Paper Series 134, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    14. Ms Fozia & Durdana Qaiser Gillani & Asifa Iftikhar, 2022. "Do Employed Females Provide Better Care to Their Children? The Case of Education and Health Care in Pakistan," Journal of Economic Impact, Science Impact Publishers, vol. 4(2), pages 134-141.
    15. Sekabira, Haruna & Qaim, Matin, 2017. "Can mobile phones improve gender equality and nutrition? Panel data evidence from farm households in Uganda," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 95-103.
    16. Santos, Florence & Fletschner, Diana & Savath, Vivien & Peterman, Amber, 2014. "Can Government-Allocated Land Contribute to Food Security? Intrahousehold Analysis of West Bengal’s Microplot Allocation Program," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 860-872.
    17. Han, Wenjing & Zhang, Xiaoling & Zhang, Zhengfeng, 2019. "The role of land tenure security in promoting rural women’s empowerment: Empirical evidence from rural China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 280-289.
    18. Nayana Bose & Shreyasee Das, 2021. "Intergenerational effects of improving women’s property rights: evidence from India," Oxford Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(3), pages 277-290, July.
    19. Quisumbing, Agnes R., 2003. "Food Aid and Child Nutrition in Rural Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 31(7), pages 1309-1324, July.
    20. Cheryl R. Doss & Agnes R. Quisumbing, 2020. "Understanding rural household behavior: Beyond Boserup and Becker," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(1), pages 47-58, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:ifaamr:307212. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifamaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.