IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i10p3479-d172657.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Synergy between Aquaculture and Hydroponics Technologies: The Case of Lettuce and Tilapia

Author

Listed:
  • Gal Hochman

    (Department of Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 08816, USA)

  • Eithan Hochman

    (Department of Environmental Economics and Management, Hebrew University, Rehovot 76100, Israel)

  • Nadav Naveh

    (Department of Environmental Economics and Management, Hebrew University, Rehovot 76100, Israel)

  • David Zilberman

    (Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720-3310, USA)

Abstract

This study investigates the economic and environmental value of the use of technologies that convert pollution and waste in one production process to an input in another production process. The study focuses on an aquaponics case study to show that the negative externalities borne from intensive fish farming can be internalized without regulatory intervention through a combination of fish farming and hydroponics. The introduction of aquaponics diversified the farmers’ sources of income, yielded savings in the cost of water purification and the cost of fertilizer for the plants’ growth, and resulted in more fish and plant output compared to the unregulated scenario. While deriving these results, we also derive a separation rule for managing live aquatic inventory, which separates expenses (which are affected by the biology of fish) and income.

Suggested Citation

  • Gal Hochman & Eithan Hochman & Nadav Naveh & David Zilberman, 2018. "The Synergy between Aquaculture and Hydroponics Technologies: The Case of Lettuce and Tilapia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-19, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:10:p:3479-:d:172657
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/10/3479/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/10/3479/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert Innes, 2000. "The Economics of Livestock Waste and Its Regulation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(1), pages 97-117.
    2. repec:cdl:agrebk:qt42f3h08z is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Perloff, Jeffrey M. & Berck, Peter, 1982. "The Commons as a Natural Barrier to Entry," CUDARE Working Papers 42863, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    4. David Zilberman & Eunice Kim & Sam Kirschner & Scott Kaplan & Jeanne Reeves, 2013. "Technology and the future bioeconomy," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 44(s1), pages 95-102, November.
    5. Eithan Hochman & PingSun Leung & Lawrence W. Rowland & James A. Wyban, 1990. "Optimal Scheduling in Shrimp Mariculture: A Stochastic Growing Inventory Problem," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 72(2), pages 382-393.
    6. Ben Belton & David C. Little, 2011. "Immanent and Interventionist Inland Asian Aquaculture Development and its Outcomes," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 29(4), pages 459-484, July.
    7. dela Cruz, C.R. & Lightfoot, C. & Costa-Pierce, B.A. & Carangal, V.R. & Bimbao, M.P. (eds.), 1992. "Rice-fish research and development in Asia," Monographs, The WorldFish Center, number 7468, April.
    8. Justus Wesseler & Joachim von Braun, 2017. "Measuring the Bioeconomy: Economics and Policies," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 9(1), pages 275-298, October.
    9. Justus Wesseler & Joachim von Braun, 2017. "Measuring the Bioeconomy: Economics and Policies," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 9(1), pages 275-298, October.
    10. Schultz, Theodore W, 1975. "The Value of the Ability to Deal with Disequilibria," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 13(3), pages 827-846, September.
    11. Gupta, M.V. & Sollows, J.D. & Mazid, M.A. & Rahman, A. & Hussain, M.G. & Dey, M.M., 1998. "Integrating aquaculture with rice farming in Bangladesh: feasibility and economic viability, its adoption and impact," Monographs, The WorldFish Center, number 13197, April.
    12. Toufique, Kazi Ali & Belton, Ben, 2014. "Is Aquaculture Pro-Poor? Empirical Evidence of Impacts on Fish Consumption in Bangladesh," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 609-620.
    13. Madan M. Dey & Ferdinand J. Paraguas & Patrick Kambewa & Diemuth E. Pemsl, 2010. "The impact of integrated aquaculture–agriculture on small‐scale farms in Southern Malawi," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 41(1), pages 67-79, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Wen, Lanjiao & Chatalova, Lioudmila, 2021. "Will transaction costs and economies of scale tip the balance in farm size in industrial agriculture? An illustration for non-food biomass production in Germany," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 13(2).
    2. Davide Viaggi & Matteo Zavalloni, 2021. "Bioeconomy and Circular Economy: Implications for Economic Evaluation in the Post-COVID Era," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 1(4), pages 1257-1269, December.
    3. Leonard Prochaska & Daniel Schiller, 2021. "An evolutionary perspective on the emergence and implementation of mission-oriented innovation policy: the example of the change of the leitmotif from biotechnology to bioeconomy," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 141-249, April.
    4. Lanjiao Wen & Lioudmila Chatalova, 2021. "Will Transaction Costs and Economies of Scale Tip the Balance in Farm Size in Industrial Agriculture? An Illustration for Non-Food Biomass Production in Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-18, January.
    5. Béné, Christophe & Arthur, Robert & Norbury, Hannah & Allison, Edward H. & Beveridge, Malcolm & Bush, Simon & Campling, Liam & Leschen, Will & Little, David & Squires, Dale & Thilsted, Shakuntala H. &, 2016. "Contribution of Fisheries and Aquaculture to Food Security and Poverty Reduction: Assessing the Current Evidence," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 177-196.
    6. Vincent Smith & Justus H. H. Wesseler & David Zilberman, 2021. "New Plant Breeding Technologies: An Assessment of the Political Economy of the Regulatory Environment and Implications for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-18, March.
    7. Maximilian Kardung & Kutay Cingiz & Ortwin Costenoble & Roel Delahaye & Wim Heijman & Marko Lovrić & Myrna van Leeuwen & Robert M’Barek & Hans van Meijl & Stephan Piotrowski & Tévécia Ronzon & Johanne, 2021. "Development of the Circular Bioeconomy: Drivers and Indicators," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-24, January.
    8. Walther Zeug & Alberto Bezama & Urs Moesenfechtel & Anne Jähkel & Daniela Thrän, 2019. "Stakeholders’ Interests and Perceptions of Bioeconomy Monitoring Using a Sustainable Development Goal Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-24, March.
    9. Avinash Manjula-Basavanna & Anna M. Duraj-Thatte & Neel S. Joshi, 2024. "Mechanically Tunable, Compostable, Healable and Scalable Engineered Living Materials," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-11, December.
    10. Kumeh, Eric Mensah & Kyereh, Boateng & Birkenberg, Athena & Birner, Regina, 2021. "Customary power, farmer strategies and the dynamics of access to protected forestlands for farming: Implications for Ghana's forest bioeconomy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    11. Steven Gronau & Etti Winter & Ulrike Grote, 2020. "Aquaculture, fish resources and rural livelihoods: a village CGE analysis from Namibia’s Zambezi Region," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 615-642, February.
    12. Andrew M. Neill & Cathal O’Donoghue & Jane C. Stout, 2020. "A Natural Capital Lens for a Sustainable Bioeconomy: Determining the Unrealised and Unrecognised Services from Nature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-24, September.
    13. Maciejczak, Mariusz, 2023. "Nature Based Innovations in the Development of Bioeconomy," Roczniki (Annals), Polish Association of Agricultural Economists and Agribusiness - Stowarzyszenie Ekonomistow Rolnictwa e Agrobiznesu (SERiA), vol. 2023(2).
    14. Tévécia Ronzon & Susanne Iost & George Philippidis, 2022. "Has the European Union entered a bioeconomy transition? Combining an output-based approach with a shift-share analysis," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(6), pages 8195-8217, June.
    15. D'Amato, D. & Korhonen, J., 2021. "Integrating the green economy, circular economy and bioeconomy in a strategic sustainability framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    16. Durwin H.J. Lynch & Pim Klaassen & Lan van Wassenaer & Jacqueline E.W. Broerse, 2020. "Constructing the Public in Roadmapping the Transition to a Bioeconomy: A Case Study from the Netherlands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-18, April.
    17. David Zilberman & Justus Wesseler, 2023. "Building the Bioeconomy through Innovation, Monitoring and Science‐based Policies," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 22(3), pages 21-25, December.
    18. Dušan Drabik & Justus Wesseler, 2023. "The EU Bioeconomy: Monitoring and Measurement," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 22(3), pages 3-4, December.
    19. Marta Miranda‐García & María‐Jesús Segovia‐Vargas, 2024. "Financial constraints and sustainability in bioeconomy firms," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 15(S7), pages 65-82, November.
    20. Mauricio Alviar & Andrés García-Suaza & Laura Ramírez-Gómez & Simón Villegas-Velásquez, 2021. "Measuring the Contribution of the Bioeconomy: The Case of Colombia and Antioquia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-26, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:10:p:3479-:d:172657. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.