IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i1p862-d1024043.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Smallholders’ Mariculture Device for Rearing Seafood: Environmentally Friendly and Providing Improved Quality

Author

Listed:
  • Tsang-Yuh Lin

    (Institute of Ocean Technology and Marine Affair, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan 70101, Taiwan)

  • Chung-Ling Chen

    (Institute of Ocean Technology and Marine Affair, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan 70101, Taiwan)

  • Yung-Yen Shih

    (Department of Applied Science, ROC Naval Academy, Kaohsiung 81345, Taiwan)

  • Hsueh-Han Hsieh

    (Department of Oceanography, National Sun Yat-sen University, Kaohsiung 80424, Taiwan)

  • Wei-Ji Huang

    (Department of Applied Science, ROC Naval Academy, Kaohsiung 81345, Taiwan)

  • Peter H. Santschi

    (Department of Marine and Coastal Environmental Sciences, Texas A & M University at Galveston, Galveston, TX 77554, USA)

  • Chin-Chang Hung

    (Department of Oceanography, National Sun Yat-sen University, Kaohsiung 80424, Taiwan)

Abstract

The aquaculture industry in Taiwan grosses more than USD 1.1 billion annually; however, it also generates considerable waste discharge (causing eutrophication in estuarine and coastal waters) and heavy groundwater withdrawals (causing land subsidence in coastal areas). Many aquaculture facilities using earth ponds are affected by benthic algae, resulting in an earthy odor, and fixed-cage farms are difficult to relocate during cold weather events. In this study, we tested small-scale (~15 ton) mobile cage tanks for the nearshore rearing of white shrimp and grouper in the Yung-An district of Kaohsiung, Taiwan. At the conclusion of the mariculture experiment, the content of free amino acids in shrimp and groupers reared in our mobile tanks surpassed that in animals reared locally in traditional earthy ponds. In a blind taste test involving 42 volunteers, groupers reared in mobile cage tanks were deemed more palatable than those raised in ponds. Our results demonstrate that small-scale mobile cage tanks are a feasible approach to the sustainable rearing of high-quality shrimp or fish. Note that wastewater from the mobile tanks is easily diluted by seawater, thereby reducing the likelihood of eutrophication in coastal regions. The proposed system could also be used for recreational fishing activities to increase income for smallholders of fishermen and/or aquaculture farmers.

Suggested Citation

  • Tsang-Yuh Lin & Chung-Ling Chen & Yung-Yen Shih & Hsueh-Han Hsieh & Wei-Ji Huang & Peter H. Santschi & Chin-Chang Hung, 2023. "A Smallholders’ Mariculture Device for Rearing Seafood: Environmentally Friendly and Providing Improved Quality," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:1:p:862-:d:1024043
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/1/862/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/1/862/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Beddington, Sir John, 2011. "The future of food and farming," International Journal of Agricultural Management, Institute of Agricultural Management, vol. 1(2), pages 1-5.
    2. Farber, Stephen C. & Costanza, Robert & Wilson, Matthew A., 2002. "Economic and ecological concepts for valuing ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 375-392, June.
    3. Chen, Chung-Ling, 2010. "Factors influencing participation of 'top-down but voluntary' fishery management--Empirical evidence from Taiwan," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 150-155, 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. Arts, Bas, 2014. "Assessing forest governance from a ‘Triple G’ perspective: Government, governance, governmentality⁎⁎This article belongs to the Special Issue: Assessing Forest Governance," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 17-22.
    2. Rocío del Pilar Moreno-Sánchez & Jorge H. Maldonado & Camilo Andrés Gutiérrez & Melissa Rubio, 2013. "Valoración de Áreas Marinas Protegidas desde la perspectiva de los usuarios de recursos: conciliando enfoques cuantitativos individuales con enfoques cualitativos colectivos," Documentos CEDE 11936, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    3. Hackbart, Vivian C.S. & de Lima, Guilherme T.N.P. & dos Santos, Rozely F., 2017. "Theory and practice of water ecosystem services valuation: Where are we going?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 218-227.
    4. Kenter, Jasper O. & Bryce, Rosalind & Christie, Michael & Cooper, Nigel & Hockley, Neal & Irvine, Katherine N. & Fazey, Ioan & O’Brien, Liz & Orchard-Webb, Johanne & Ravenscroft, Neil & Raymond, Chr, 2016. "Shared values and deliberative valuation: Future directions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 358-371.
    5. Chen, B. & Chen, G.Q., 2007. "Modified ecological footprint accounting and analysis based on embodied exergy--a case study of the Chinese society 1981-2001," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 355-376, March.
    6. Yoann Verger, 2015. "Sraffa and ecological economics: review of the literature," Working Papers hal-01182894, HAL.
    7. Nikodinoska, Natasha & Paletto, Alessandro & Pastorella, Fabio & Granvik, Madeleine & Franzese, Pier Paolo, 2018. "Assessing, valuing and mapping ecosystem services at city level: The case of Uppsala (Sweden)," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 368(C), pages 411-424.
    8. Nils Droste & Bartosz Bartkowski, 2018. "Ecosystem Service Valuation for National Accounting: A Reply to Obst, Hein and Edens (2016)," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(1), pages 205-215, September.
    9. Admiraal, Jeroen F. & Wossink, Ada & de Groot, Wouter T. & de Snoo, Geert R., 2013. "More than total economic value: How to combine economic valuation of biodiversity with ecological resilience," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 115-122.
    10. Olivier Petit & Franck-Dominique Vivien, 2015. "When economists and ecologists meet on Ecological Economics: two science paths around two interdisciplinary concepts," Post-Print halshs-01249774, HAL.
    11. Beça, Pedro & Santos, Rui, 2010. "Measuring sustainable welfare: A new approach to the ISEW," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 810-819, February.
    12. McVittie, Alistair & Norton, Lisa & Martin-Ortega, Julia & Siameti, Ioanna & Glenk, Klaus & Aalders, Inge, 2015. "Operationalizing an ecosystem services-based approach using Bayesian Belief Networks: An application to riparian buffer strips," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 15-27.
    13. Daniel Muller, 2018. "Economics of Human-AI Ecosystem: Value Bias and Lost Utility in Multi-Dimensional Gaps," Papers 1811.06606, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2018.
    14. Angelos Alamanos & Phoebe Koundouri, 2022. "Economics of Incorporating Ecosystem Services into Water Resource Planning and Management," DEOS Working Papers 2211, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    15. Chen, G.Q. & Chen, B., 2007. "Resource analysis of the Chinese society 1980-2002 based on energy--Part 5: Resource structure and intensity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 2087-2095, April.
    16. Bachev, Hrabrin, 2009. "Governing of agro-ecosystem services - modes, efficiency, perspectives," MPRA Paper 99870, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Azqueta, Diego & Sotelsek, Daniel, 2007. "Valuing nature: From environmental impacts to natural capital," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 22-30, June.
    18. Schmidt, Katja & Walz, Ariane & Martín-López, Berta & Sachse, René, 2017. "Testing socio-cultural valuation methods of ecosystem services to explain land use preferences," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 270-288.
    19. Baral, Nabin & Stern, Marc J. & Bhattarai, Ranju, 2008. "Contingent valuation of ecotourism in Annapurna conservation area, Nepal: Implications for sustainable park finance and local development," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 218-227, June.
    20. Sinden, John Alfred & Griffith, Garry, 2007. "Combining economic and ecological arguments to value the environmental gains from control of 35 weeds in Australia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 396-408, March.

    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:15:y:2023:i:1:p:862-:d:1024043. 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.