the status of aquaculture in myanmar: a review of existing ...€¦ · the lit review finds only 15...

The Status of Aquaculture in Myanmar:

A review of existing data

1

Ben Belton (MSU), Aung Hein, Kyan Htoo, L. Seng Kham (CESD) Ulrike Nischan (IFPRI), Thomas Reardon & Duncan

Boughton (MSU)

This study is made possible by the generous support of the American people through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The study was also supported by financial assistance from the Livelihoods and Food Security Trust Fund (LIFT). The contents are the

responsibility of Michigan State University (MSU) and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID, the United States Government, or LIFT and its donors

Outline

• Why focus on aquaculture?• Conventional Wisdom (literature review)

• Fish Consumption and Price Data (IHLCA 2010 and CSO)

• Production and Trade (CSO, DOF, FAO)

• Spatial Analysis of Pond Area (Google Earth Pro)

2

Why focus on aquaculture?

• Fish is crucial to food and nutrition security in many of the world’s least developed countries – often the major source of micronutrients

• Demand for fish increasing in line with rising incomes and urbanization, shift from staples to higher value foods

• Global capture fisheries output growth stagnant• Aquaculture is fastest growing food sector globally, providing half the

world’s food fish, set to grow 35% by 2022 to 85 million t (OECD/FAO, 2013)

• Fish farming is a high value agricultural activity

3

Presenter

Presentation Notes

One out of three children in Myanmar stunted. One out of four underweight (UNICEF 2012) Fish not only provide micronutrients but also facilitate absorption of micronutrients of vegetable origins

61 146 314 460 473

1084

16982185 2147

2502

3310 3461

6011

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

Gro

ss m

argi

n pe

r hec

tare

(USD

)

Per hectare returns from paddy, horticulture and aquaculture in Bangladesh(Source: Derived from IFPRI, 2013; 2015; Jahan, 2016)

Productive, high value activity

The conventional wisdom on Myanmar’s aquaculture

• Large-scale farm dominated• No small-scale producers• Impossible to construct ponds on paddy land• Export oriented• Low productivity and technical efficiency• Limited employment generation

5

Presenter

Presentation Notes

The lit review finds only 15 English language publications; all of them grey literature, except 1 peer reviewed article No small-scale producers including multi-purpose homestead ponds In short, the usual characterization of the section is that there is severe policy and legal constraints on its growth, that the sector is marked by low technical efficiency, that there is a sluggish domestic demand, and finally that there is limited opportunities for small- and medium-sized farms. There are some elements of truth in these statements. However, over- simplification does not help clear analysis as will be discussed later by my colleagues.

Fish Consumption

6

Share of national food expenditure by food group (%) (Source: Authors’ calculations from IHLCA 2010 dataset)

Household Food Expenditure Budget Shares

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Average expenditures on fish and meat were almost equal. Rice and other staple accounted only 23% expenditure while the other types of food provided the rest. the type of profound transformation occurring in diets and food systems throughout the rest of Asia is already well underway in Myanmar too. This is based on 2010 data but even more than that now

Fish’s contribution to consumption of animal source foods

Myanmar estimated average annual consumption of animal source foods per capita, by location (Source: authors’ calculations from IHLCA 2010 dataset) 8

31%

40%

40%

50%

56%

57%

56%

52%

44%

45%

35%

34%

30%

29%

16%

14%

13%

13%

9%

11%

12%

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

0 10 20 30 40 50

East

Central

North

* National

West

South

Lower

Estimated average annual consumption per capita (kg)

Fish Meat Eggs Milk

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Fish accounted for 50 % of animal source food at national level. Thaninthayi – 65% , Rakhine 60% Every State and Region has limited consumption of fresh milk.

Rural and Urban Fish Consumption

Average consumption of fish by source and location (Source: Author’s calculations from IHLCA dataset 2010)

Average fish consumption (kg/capita/year)

AquacultureDried/

processedFresh-water

captureMarine capture All fish

National 3.9 6.4 5.1 3.5 18.9

Rural 3.5 6.5 5.5 3.3 18.7

Urban 5.0 6.3 4.0 4.1 19.4Urban – Rural Difference (%) 41 -2 -27 25 3

9

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Estimated average annual fish consumption per capita is almost the same in both rural and urban areas (IHLCA data set, 2010). This pattern is interesting because urbanization is usually found to result in overall increases in fish consumption. However, aggregate consumption figures mask important differences in the source of fish consumed. Average consumption per capita of freshwater capture fish is 27% higher in rural areas than urban. Consumption of fish from marine capture and aquaculture is higher in urban areas than in rural (by 25% and 41% respectively)

Fish consumption by economic statusAverage fish consumption (kg/capita/year)

AquacultureDried/

processed

Fresh-water

captureMarine capture All fish

Quintile 1 1.6 4.2 4.3 3.0 13.0

Quintile 2 3.2 5.8 4.6 3.0 16.6

Quintile 3 4.1 6.4 4.8 3.1 18.4Quintile 4 4.9 7.3 5.3 3.8 21.2Quintile 5 5.5 8.3 6.3 4.4 24.5Q5-Q1 Difference (%) 253 98 47 45 88Consumption increase per quintile (%) 34.4 17.3 9.5 10.1 16.2

Average consumption of fish by source and expenditure quintile (Source: Author’s calculations from IHLCA dataset 2010)

10

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Total annual fish consumption per capita among the wealthiest 20% of the population is close to double that among poorest 20% . Disaggregating further, a similar pattern holds for dried/processed fish. Consumption of fish from both marine and freshwater capture fisheries is more equitably distributed across income groups. Inequality in consumption between rich and poor is greatest for aquaculture fish, average consumption per capita of which is around 3.4 times higher among members of the wealthiest quintile than among those in the poorest 20% of the population (5.5 kg versus 1.6 kg)

310

21 22 24 2532

12

20

2731 23

42 296339

18 129

55

2231 34 35

4429 33

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

West South * National Lower Central East North

Aquaculture Freshwater captureMarine capture Dried/processed fish products

Fish Consumption Geography

Share of fish consumed by source and region (Authors’ Calculations from ILHCA- 2010)

Historical Price Trends

Real fish prices, May 2008-Jan 2015 (Source: CSO, various years)

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

5500

6000Ap

r-08

Jun-

08

Aug-

08

Oct

-08

Dec-

08

Feb-

09

Apr-

09

Jun-

09

Aug-

09

Oct

-09

Dec-

09

Feb-

10

Apr-

10

Jun-

10

Aug-

10

Oct

-10

Dec-

10

Feb-

11

Apr-

11

Jun-

11

Aug-

11

Oct

-11

Dec-

11

Feb-

12

Apr-

12

Jun-

12

Aug-

12

Oct

-12

Dec-

12

Feb-

13

Apr-

13

Jun-

13

Aug-

13

Oct

-13

Dec-

13

Feb-

14

Apr-

14

Jun-

14

Aug-

14

Oct

-14

Dec-

14

Pric

e (K

yat/

Viss

at c

onst

ant 2

008

pric

es)

Nga Yan (Freshwater capture) Nga Talauk (Marine capture) Nga Myit Chin (Aquaculture)

- 0.5%

+ 2.9%

+ 5.2%

12

Presenter

Presentation Notes

The real price of snakehead (freshwater capture) and hilsa (marine capture) increased by 2.9% and 5.2% per year on average over the period 2008-2014 respectively, whilst the real price of the main farmed fish, rohu, fell 0.5% per year. Among 10 common fisheries products analyzed, the real price of eight out of nine fishery products increased faster than the rate of inflation.

13

Fish Production and Trade

Reported aquaculture production

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Prod

uctio

n ('0

00 t)

Freshwater prawn Other freshwater fish Pangasius

Silver barb Common carp Mrigal

Chinese major carp Tilapia Catla

Rohu Marine fish

Myanmar aquaculture production by species, 1990-2013 (Source: FAO, 2015)14

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Aquaculture production stood at less than 100,000 t per annum before 2001 It was dominated almost entirely by a single species, rohu (nga myit chin; Labeo rohita) before 2001. A boom in inland aquaculture occurring from 2000 onwards, during which time growth in output averaged 18.3% per year. Some diversification began to occur during this period in terms of the variety and quantity of other species farmed, but rohu continued to dominate the sector, accounting for approximately ⅔ of reported production.

Freshwater Aquaculture Exports

Myanmar Inland Aquaculture Exports by Volume and Share of Total Production (Source: derived from DOF, 2014) 15

0.01

10.2

8.7

14.3 1412.9

1413.3

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2011 2012

Expo

rts (

% o

f tot

al p

rodu

ctio

n)

Expo

rts (

t)

Volume (t) % of total production

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Officially recorded exports of fish from inland aquaculture began in 2004, with a small quantity of rohu exported to Bangladesh. Nine years later, in 2012, total reported exports had reached 99,393 t, comprised predominantly of rohu. Exports of fish from freshwater aquaculture never exceeded 14% of total reported farm output during these 11 years.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Aqua

cultu

re fi

sh e

xpor

ts ('

000

t)

Middle East South Asia Southeast Asia Europe Others

Volume of freshwater aquaculture exports by importing region, 2004-2012 (Source: CSO, 2010; DOF, 2012)

Exports of farmed fish, by importing region

Estimation of 2010 fish supply based on consumption and trade data

Source

Apparent production

(t)

Officially reported

production (t)

Difference (%)

Marine capture 923,150 2,060,780123

Freshwater capture 524,341 1,002,430 91

Aquaculture 324,322 858,760 164

Total 1,771,813 3,921,970 121Estimate of Myanmar’s total fish supply in 2010, based on apparent consumption and exports (Source: Derived from DOF, 2012; 2014, IHLCA 2010

17

18

Spatial Analysis

Reported fish pond area

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0

50

100

150

200

250

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Pond

are

a ('0

00 h

a)

Pond

are

a ('0

00 a

cres

)

Others Bago Yangon Ayeyarwaddy

Myanmar inland fishpond area (Source: DOF, 2014) 19

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Ayeyarwady Region provided just over half of total pond area in 2014. The adjoining regions of Yangon and Bago accounted for 27% and 12% of reported pond area respectively in 2014. All other states and regions combined contributed just 10%.

Estimation of pond area and growth rates using satellite

imagery

Estimated spatial change in selected pond clusters(Source: Authors’ calculations from Google Earth Pro)

ItemPond area

(acres) Number of pondsHlegu Cluster (2004 678 1282009 1553 1732014 1721 266Change '04-‘14 (%) 154 108“Nyaungdon Island” Cluster 2003 9698 9942010 27663 15092014 34192 1736Change '03-‘14 (%) 253 75Latkyargyi Cluster 2003 2240 4412014 3111 509Change '03-‘14 (%) 39 15

Spatial distribution

of fish ponds in Lower

Myanmar

(Source: Authors’, derived from Google Earth satellite images) 21

Presenter

Presentation Notes

The greatest concentrations of ponds are found in an area of floodplain located approximately 25-50 km west of Myanmar’s largest city, Yangon. The whole area is intersected by many rivers, and canals constructed for water management and transport . Most transport in this area is by boat, but it is also bisected by the Yangon-Pathein highway and a few smaller roads.

Gap between reported and GIS estimated pond area

22

Region/StatePond area (Ha)

OfficialPond area (Ha)Google Earth

Difference (%)

Ayeyarwady 45,705 56,721 24

Yangon 24,236 37,503 55

Bago 10,532 9,468 -10

Sub-total 80,868 103,978 29

Comparison of officially reported and estimated pond area (Source: Authors' own calculations from DOF, 2014; Google Earth Pro)

Presenter

Presentation Notes

There is a significant gap between these figures in Ayeyarwady and Yangon regions, where estimates exceed officially reported numbers by 24% and 55% respectively. Total pond area for the four regions/states combined exceeds that officially reported by 29%.

Conclusions• Triangulation of multiple data sources paints a picture of

aquaculture that is much more complex than suggested by theconventional wisdom

• Fish is by far the most important animal source food consumed in Myanmar, and crucial source of micronutrients in the diet

• Aquaculture’s contribution to fish consumption growing fast, and is especially important in urban areas and Upper Myanmar

• The real price of aquaculture fish is falling over time• The growth of aquaculture has been driven mainly by the domestic

market, not by exports• Total fish production may be significantly lower than officially

reported, but pond area has expanded rapidly over the last decade

23

Presenter

Presentation Notes

The lit review finds only 15 English language publications; all of them grey literature, except 1 peer reviewed article No small-scale producers including multi-purpose homestead ponds In short, the usual characterization of the section is that there is severe policy and legal constraints on its growth, that the sector is marked by low technical efficiency, that there is a sluggish domestic demand, and finally that there is limited opportunities for small- and medium-sized farms. There are some elements of truth in these statements. However, over- simplification does not help clear analysis as will be discussed later by my colleagues.

the status of aquaculture in myanmar: a review of existing ...€¦ · the lit review finds only 15...

Documents