IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/inecol/v26y2022i6p2006-2019.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effects of feed formula and farming system on the environmental performance of shrimp production chain from a life cycle perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Ahmad Al Eissa
  • Peng Chen
  • Paul B. Brown
  • Jen‐Yi Huang

Abstract

Shrimp is the most popular seafood in the United States; its production plays an important role in the aquaculture industry. However, shrimp farming causes various environment impacts that must be mitigated to ensure the sustainability of shrimp production. This study performed a life cycle assessment (LCA) on two US‐based and one Vietnam‐based shrimp production chains from cradle to US market covering three farming systems and eight shrimp feed formulae. Midpoint environmental impacts including terrestrial acidification, freshwater eutrophication, and global warming were determined. For the intensive production chain (IPC), feed production was identified as the main contributor to the terrestrial acidification potential (TAP) and global warming potential (GWP), and its freshwater eutrophication potential (FEP) was dominated by shrimp farming. Poultry by‐product and fish meals were the feed ingredients contributing high TAP and GWP. However, soybean, wheat, and corn gluten meals produced higher FEP; hence, substituting plant‐based proteins for animal‐based ones in shrimp feeds did not all have positive environmental consequences. Shrimp farming was the hotspot of all the environmental impacts of the semi‐intensive production chain (SPC) and extensive production chain (EPC), except for the TAP of the EPC. Among the three production chains, the IPC had the highest FEP due to the on‐farm discharge of phosphorus‐containing wastewater, and the SPC caused the highest TAP because of the intensive uses of electricity and fertilizers for pond cultivation. Although the EPC was most sustainable in terms of TAP and FEP, open farming in mangrove areas produced the highest GWP owing to land transformation. This LCA study is expected to serve as US shrimp farmers’ decision‐making guidelines to adapt farming practices with lower environmental footprint.

Suggested Citation

  • Ahmad Al Eissa & Peng Chen & Paul B. Brown & Jen‐Yi Huang, 2022. "Effects of feed formula and farming system on the environmental performance of shrimp production chain from a life cycle perspective," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(6), pages 2006-2019, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:26:y:2022:i:6:p:2006-2019
    DOI: 10.1111/jiec.13370
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13370
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jiec.13370?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. Rosshairy Abd. Rahman & Graham Kendall & Razamin Ramli & Zainoddin Jamari & Ku Ruhana Ku-Mahamud, 2017. "Shrimp Feed Formulation via Evolutionary Algorithm with Power Heuristics for Handling Constraints," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2017, pages 1-12, November.
    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. Ian Vázquez‐Rowe & Robert Parker & Helen Hamilton & Huan Liu, 2022. "Industrial ecology for the oceans," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(6), pages 1842-1846, December.

    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. Weiqin Ying & Bin Wu & Yu Wu & Yali Deng & Hainan Huang & Zhenyu Wang, 2019. "Efficient Conical Area Differential Evolution with Biased Decomposition and Dual Populations for Constrained Optimization," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-18, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bla:inecol:v:26:y:2022:i:6:p:2006-2019. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1088-1980 .

    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.