IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aesc23/334548.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Modelling the economic performance of Recirculating Aquaculture Systems (RAS) at the farm level

Author

Listed:
  • Campos-González, Jorge
  • Gadanakis, Yiorgos
  • Mancini, Mattia
  • Bateman, Ian

Abstract

Agricultural production practices are one of the most significant drivers of biodiversity loss and make farming a major contributor to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and water pollution. Currently, agricultural policies and farm management interventions at a farm level are designed to contribute to a transformational reform of agricultural systems to improve environmental and economic sustainability. The new Agriculture Act for the UK commits to net zero carbon emissions and policies to enhance environmental stewardship and sustainability and support the production of public goods. Introducing recirculating aquaculture systems (RAS) with farm-based renewable energy (Anaerobic Digestors, AD) provides a novel diversified enterprise for farming systems with considerable but poorly understood economic and environmental benefits. This study conducts farm-based Net Margin analysis to show that an AD unit generating up to 500 kW combined with six to 12 RAS 157 m3 units for high-value shrimp ("king prawn") production is economically viable on medium and large arable farms in the East of England at 2022 prices. Besides, we explore further key issues such as impacts on other farm activities, land use due to AD feedstock choices, use of digestate and nutrients cycling, among others.

Suggested Citation

  • Campos-González, Jorge & Gadanakis, Yiorgos & Mancini, Mattia & Bateman, Ian, 2023. "Modelling the economic performance of Recirculating Aquaculture Systems (RAS) at the farm level," 97th Annual Conference, March 27-29, 2023, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 334548, Agricultural Economics Society - AES.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aesc23:334548
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.334548
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/334548/files/AES2023_RecirculatingAquacultureSystems.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.334548?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. Jones, Philip & Salter, Andrew, 2013. "Modelling the economics of farm-based anaerobic digestion in a UK whole-farm context," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 215-225.
    2. Jonathan A. Foley & Navin Ramankutty & Kate A. Brauman & Emily S. Cassidy & James S. Gerber & Matt Johnston & Nathaniel D. Mueller & Christine O’Connell & Deepak K. Ray & Paul C. West & Christian Balz, 2011. "Solutions for a cultivated planet," Nature, Nature, vol. 478(7369), pages 337-342, October.
    3. Cristina Salvioni & Roberto Henke & Francesco Vanni, 2020. "The Impact of Non-Agricultural Diversification on Financial Performance: Evidence from Family Farms in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-14, 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. Xiaocui Dong & Hongguang Liu, 2023. "Sustainable evaluation of agroecosystem in the Yangtze River Economic Belt, China based on the Emergy Theory," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(11), pages 13471-13494, November.
    2. Emily L. Pakhtigian & Subhrendu K. Pattanayak & Jie-Sheng Tan-Soo, 2024. "Forest Fires, Smoky Kitchens, and Human Health in Indonesia," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 87(8), pages 2115-2141, August.
    3. Dench, William E. & Morgan, Leanne K., 2021. "Unintended consequences to groundwater from improved irrigation efficiency: Lessons from the Hinds-Rangitata Plain, New Zealand," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 245(C).
    4. Anton Strokov & Ekatherine Yakubovich & Pavel Krasilnikov, 2017. "Economic and Ecological Evaluation of Land Use Change: Evidence from Karelia," Economy of region, Centre for Economic Security, Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 1(2), pages 422-433.
    5. Clay, Nathan & King, Brian, 2019. "Smallholders’ uneven capacities to adapt to climate change amid Africa’s ‘green revolution’: Case study of Rwanda’s crop intensification program," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 1-14.
    6. Krishna Bahadur KC & Iftekharul Haque & Alexander F. Legwegoh & Evan D. G. Fraser, 2016. "Strategies to Reduce Food Loss in the Global South," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-13, June.
    7. Nathan Pelletier & Maurice Doyon & Bruce Muirhead & Tina Widowski & Jodey Nurse-Gupta & Michelle Hunniford, 2018. "Sustainability in the Canadian Egg Industry—Learning from the Past, Navigating the Present, Planning for the Future," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-24, September.
    8. Wilhelm, Jennifer A. & Smith, Richard G. & Jolejole-Foreman, Maria Christina & Hurley, Stephanie, 2020. "Resident and stakeholder perceptions of ecosystem services associated with agricultural landscapes in New Hampshire," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    9. Tothmihaly, Andras & Ingram, Verina & von Cramon-Taubadel, Stephan, 2019. "How Can the Environmental Efficiency of Indonesian Cocoa Farms Be Increased?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 134-145.
    10. Kuisma, Miia & Kahiluoto, Helena, 2017. "Biotic resource loss beyond food waste: Agriculture leaks worst," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 129-140.
    11. Marco Letta & Pierluigi Montalbano & Richard S.J. Tol, 2017. "Temperature shocks, growth and poverty thresholds: evidence from rural Tanzania," Working Papers 13/17, Sapienza University of Rome, DISS.
    12. Luca Romagnoli & Vincenzo Giaccio & Luigi Mastronardi & Maria Bonaventura Forleo, 2021. "Highlighting the Drivers of Italian Diversified Farms Efficiency: A Two-Stage DEA-Panel Tobit Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-16, November.
    13. Rommel, Jens & Anggraini, Eva, 2018. "Spatially explicit framed field experiments on ecosystem services governance," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 201-205.
    14. Ascui, Francisco & Ball, Alex & Kahn, Lewis & Rowe, James, 2021. "Is operationalising natural capital risk assessment practicable?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    15. repec:zib:zbesmy:v:6:y:2023:i:1:p:29-40 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. John M. Wallace & Alwyn Williams & Jeffrey A. Liebert & Victoria J. Ackroyd & Rachel A. Vann & William S. Curran & Clair L. Keene & Mark J. VanGessel & Matthew R. Ryan & Steven B. Mirsky, 2017. "Cover Crop-Based, Organic Rotational No-Till Corn and Soybean Production Systems in the Mid-Atlantic United States," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-21, April.
    17. Mathy Sane & Miroslav Hajek & Chukwudi Nwaogu & Ratna Chrismiari Purwestri, 2021. "Subsidy as An Economic Instrument for Environmental Protection: A Case of Global Fertilizer Use," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-20, August.
    18. Erbaugh, James & Bierbaum, Rosina & Castilleja, Guillermo & da Fonseca, Gustavo A.B. & Hansen, Steffen Cole Brandstrup, 2019. "Toward sustainable agriculture in the tropics," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 158-162.
    19. Xu, Zhan & Liang, Zhengyuan & Cheng, Jiali & Groot, Jeroen C.J. & Zhang, Chaochun & Cong, Wen-Feng & Zhang, Fusuo & van der Werf, Wopke, 2024. "Comparing the sustainability of smallholder and business farms in the North China Plain; a case study in Quzhou," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    20. Weltin, Meike & Hüttel, Silke, 2019. "Farm eco-efficiency: Can sustainable intensification make the difference?," FORLand Working Papers 10 (2019), Humboldt University Berlin, DFG Research Unit 2569 FORLand "Agricultural Land Markets – Efficiency and Regulation".
    21. Röös, Elin & Patel, Mikaela & Spångberg, Johanna, 2016. "Producing oat drink or cow's milk on a Swedish farm — Environmental impacts considering the service of grazing, the opportunity cost of land and the demand for beef and protein," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 23-32.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy; Production Economics;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:aesc23:334548. 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/aesukea.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.