Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Mar 13;12(3):e0173131.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0173131. eCollection 2017.

Effect of production quotas on economic and environmental values of growth rate and feed efficiency in sea cage fish farming

M Besson  1   2 , I J M de Boer  3 , M Vandeputte  2   4 , J A M van Arendonk  1 , E Quillet  2 , H Komen  1 , J Aubin  5
Affiliations

Effect of production quotas on economic and environmental values of growth rate and feed efficiency in sea cage fish farming

M Besson et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

In sea cage fish farming, production quotas aim to constrain the impact of fish farming on the surrounding ecosystem. It is unknown how these quotas affect economic profitability and environmental impact of genetic improvement. We combined bioeconomic modelling with life cycle assessment (LCA) to calculate the economic (EV) and environmental (ENV) values of thermal growth coefficient (TGC) and feed conversion ratio (FCR) of sea bass reared in sea cages, given four types of quota commonly used in Europe: annual production (Qprod), annual feed distributed (Qannual_feed), standing stock (Qstock), and daily feed distributed (Qdaily_feed). ENV were calculated for LCA impact categories climate change, eutrophication and acidification. ENV were expressed per ton of fish produced per year (ENV(fish)) and per farm per year (ENV(farm)). Results show that irrespective of quota used, EV of FCR as well as ENV(fish) and ENV(farm) were always positive, meaning that improving FCR increased profit and decreased environmental impacts. However, the EV and the ENV(fish) of TGC were positive only when quota was Qstock or Qdaily_feed. Moreover, the ENV(farm) of TGC was negative in Qstock and Qdaily_feed quotas, meaning that improving TGC increased the environmental impact of the farm. We conclude that Qstock quota and Qdaily_feed quota are economically favorable to a genetic improvement of TGC, a major trait for farmers. However, improving TGC increases the environmental impact of the farm. Improving FCR represents a good opportunity to balance out this increase but more information on its genetic background is needed to develop breeding programs improving FCR.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

References

    1. Folke C, Kautsky N, Troell M (1994) The Costs of Eutrophication from Salmon Farming: Implications for Policy. J. Environ. Manage. 40: 173–82.
    1. Mente E, Pierce GJ, Santos MB, Neofitou C (2006) Effect of feed and feeding in the culture of salmonids on the marine aquatic environment: a synthesis for European aquaculture. Aquacult. Int. 14: 499–522.
    1. Read P, Fernandes T (2003) Management of environmental impacts of marine aquaculture in Europe. Aquaculture 226: 139–63.
    1. Holmer M, Hansen PK, Karakassis I, Borg JA, Schembri PJ. Monitoring of environmental impacts of marine aquaculture In: Holmer M, Black K, Duarte CM, Marbà N, Karakassis I, editors. Aquaculture in the Ecosystem. Springer; 2008. pp. 47–85.
    1. Ervik A, Hansen PK, Aure J, Stigebrandt A, Johannessen P, Jahnsen T (1997) Regulating the local environmental impact of intensive marine fish farming I. The concept of the MOM system (Modelling-Ongrowing fish farms-Monitoring). Aquaculture 158: 85–94.