Báo cáo khoa học nông nghiệp " A PRELIMINARY EVALUATION OF ADOPTION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF BETTER MANAGEMENT PRACTICES IN THE CATFISH FARMING INDUSTRY IN THE MEKONG DELTA, VIETNAM " ppt

For example, one research assistant said, “ it is becoming increasingly difficult to culture catfish, investment costs keep increasing, which means the industry is out of the everyday fa

A PRELIMINARY EVALUATION OF ADOPTION AND

IMPLEMENTATION OF BETTER MANAGEMENT PRACTICES IN THE CATFISH FARMING INDUSTRY IN THE MEKONG DELTA, VIETNAM

CARD Project 001/07/VIE

August 2010

1 Background

Aquaculture is a rapidly expanding global industry, which has the potential to improve the livelihoods of many people in the developing world Aquaculture may provide a means of income to the rural poor and support the availability of

an affordable protein source, and contribute to food security To achieve this potential, significant improvements must be made in current production

systems, particularly from an environmental and resource usage view points Despite evidence of profitability in many sectors, some systems are still

performing sub-optimally and/or causing negative impacts on the social and environmental landscape There is a pressing need for the aquaculture industry

as a whole to become ecologically sustainable to realize its full potential and be viable well into the future

1.1. Sustainable Aquaculture and Better Management Practices

The concept of ecologically sustainable development (ESD) is complex The

multidisciplinary nature of ESD, including social, environmental and economic dimensions, must be acknowledged at the planning stage of new and emerging industries in order to facilitate enduring and optimal performance Such factors make creating ESD-based industry development a complex process that must consider the needs of all stakeholders

Better Management Practices (BMPs) have been proposed as one method to address sustainability issues in aquaculture BMPs are a set of management guidelines, which are relatively easy to achieve without substantial increases in costs They are designed to standardize and optimize ‘through chain’ industry management practices within the constraints of the existing system They

facilitate the means for continuous improvement in producers to meet market needs and expectations around product quantity and quality, and provide a framework for addressing ESD at an industry scale To do this, BMPs must be context specific, subject to the geo-political region, industry sector and species of interest, socio-economic circumstances of key stakeholders and the needs and expectations of the post-harvest sector, including processors and consumers

1.2. Catfish Farming in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam

BMPs are presently being developed within the catfish-farming sector located in the Mekong Delta of southern Vietnam This sector has seen rapid expansion over the last decade, with current production in excess of one million tones per annum, worth over US$1 billion in export value Such expansion has highlighted

a number of social and environmental issues, which challenge the long-term sustainability of the industry The widespread adoption of BMPs is seen as a key strategy to secure a sustainable future

A project funded by the AusAID Capacity for Rural Development (CARD)

program, designed to facilitate the development and implementation of BMPs in the catfish farming industry in the Mekong Delta, is presently in progress This project is lead by the Victorian Department of Primary industries (Fisheries Victoria) in collaboration with the Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-

Pacific (NACA), Research Institute for Aquaculture #2 (RIA2), Vietnam, and Can Tho University, Vietnam

The CARD project is based in four provinces of the Mekong Delta, South Vietnam, and is primarily targeting the role of smallholders at the production end of the market chain (i.e hatchery, nursery and grow out stages) It is expected that BMPs will provide more security for smallholder farmers, particularly where such farmers organize themselves into cooperative associations (also referred to

as ‘aqua clubs’)

The project has a requirement to evaluate the impact of BMPs under pilot, scale demonstration conditions, including the role of farmer associations in facilitating effective BMP adoption and implementation To date, draft BMPs have been developed and are being demonstrated as part of formal trials by a selection of farmers and farmer associations for a full (six month) production cycle commencing in early 2010 (see Appendix 1)

farm-1.3. Social and environmental impacts

Several studies have documented the social and environmental issues facing the industry (Phuong & Oanh, 2010; Bush et al., 2009) Some examples include

depleting wild fish stocks used for feed, a lack of effluent management and the unregulated use of chemicals While these broad issues have been discussed, few studies have assessed the effectiveness of particular management strategies in addressing these issues Further, Phan et al (2009) also found there was a lack of guidelines surrounding farm management, and little communication between neighboring farmers on environmental issues Consequently, there is a pressing need for research to explore whether specific management strategies such as BMPs address key social and environmental issues and improve farm

management performance

The draft BMPs developed by the CARD project cover a number of farming

activities and associated economic, social and environmental issues relevant to

the long term sustainability of the industry (AusAID (CARD) 2009) In summary these include:

• Addressing key market issues: ensuring small scale producers have a stronger standing in the industry as well as helping producers meet

increasingly stringent food safety and production standards

• Addressing environmental concerns at the farm level, such as minimizing the risk of disease, efficient water exchange rates and appropriate

stocking density

• The BMPs will also address social issues relating to community

expectations, including the likely role of farmer associations (also

referred to as ‘aqua clubs’)

2 The Present Study

The present study comprises a discrete component of the larger CARD Catfish BMP project, and contributes to the broader CARD project evaluation, with

specific emphasis on environmental and social impacts of the BMP

demonstration trials as determined primarily by participating farmers

The present study examines whether smallholder catfish farmers believe BMPs can address key social and environmental issues on their farms in the Mekong Delta, South Vietnam In this sense, the study contributes new knowledge at the local, farmer level, with specific emphasis on impacts of BMPs on the social and environmental issues facing the industry With this knowledge, the study will guide future BMP extension strategies and help in the planning of government policies and industry (including farmer and NGO-based) support programs For the purposes of this study, the focus was on smallholder rural farmers at the production end of the market chain (hatchery, nursery and grow out) They are the key drivers of the intensive, pond-based production system for which BMPs are expected to provide tangible benefits These farms are typically family

owned and operated (also referred to as ‘household scale’) Recently, some of these farms have been taken over by larger farmers and/or processors (as part

of expansion of ‘industrial scale’ farming) due to market pressures, such as

increasing cost of inputs and declining fish price, and other farms have simply closed down for economic reasons

2.1. Objectives

The overall aim of the present study is to undertakes a preliminary evaluation of the BMP demonstration trials as part of the CARD project The purpose is to contribute valuable new knowledge which will facilitate a viable future for the smallholder farmers in the catfish aquaculture industry, as they are integral to the future viability and sustainability of the industry as a whole Specifically, three key objectives are addressed:

2.2. Materials and Methods

The study undertakes a two-step approach:

• Firstly, the study analyses and reviews existing data on socio-economic and environmental issues, industry problems and farmer attitudes to BMPs generated by the CARD baseline survey (Phan et al., 2009) This survey involved structured interviews with representative farmers in all four catfish producing regions; An Giang, Dong Thap, Can Tho, and Vinh Long Farms were randomly selected from a list provided by respective administrations and involved farmers planning to be involved in the BMP project as well as farmers not involved in the project (Phan et al., 2009) Responses to the key questions from the structured interviews relevant

to objectives of the present evaluation study were summarized and

reviewed to generate preliminary understanding of social and

environmental issues at the stage prior to the implementation of the CARD Catfish BMP project This activity is particularly directed to

answering the first research objective of the present study

• A second, fieldwork component of the present study addresses objectives two and three, and focuses on the CARD Project implementation of the BMP demonstration trials This work was conducted from the 13TH June

to the 30th June 2010 It involved surveys of catfish farmers involved in the BMP demonstration trials primarily from two (Can Tho and An Giang)

of the four major catfish farming provinces in the Mekong Delta, but also included surveys of other BMP farmers and some non BMP farmers in the other major provinces of the Delta

The fieldwork component used a semi structured approach, involving use of standardized questionnaires (see Attachment 2) to conduct in-depth interviews with participants at their farms The semi-structured approach was chosen as it describes and measure impacts of BMPs and associated attitudes of farmers in a way that allows scope for farmers to express in their own words their concerns, ideas and aspirations surrounding BMPs and the industry’s longer term

sustainability The interview questions were therefore designed in a

consequential, conversational way to allow key themes to emerge Data was then subject to qualitative and semi-quantitative analysis as appropriate This approach complements the intricate and unique nature of each farmer’s reaction, and allows for further probing when required

Where possible, the present study also involved semi structured ‘focus group’ interviews at farmer association (aqua club) meetings using similar questions as

for the individual interviews The purpose was to give the fieldwork component

a more comprehensive picture of farmer reactions to BMPs by drawing on two levels of analysis Themes identified during individual farmer interviews were also discussed with the associations/aqua clubs as a validation and verification step

Interviews were carried out in Vietnamese with the assistance of a translator from the Vietnamese CARD project team Project team members know many of the farmers well and have been working with them for several years By being connected with this trustworthy team, farmers felt at ease during the interview process and gave greater insights into their experiences

The questions (Attachment 2) are based on the outcome of the survey

undertaken by Phan et al (2009) and Tam et al (2010), as well as additional questions required to answer the key objectives The survey data are expected to identify key elements of farmer knowledge, aspirations, skills and attitudes

(KASA) relevant to BMPs A summary of the theory of action for the present study based on the completed evaluation was prepared based on an established evaluation-planning framework template (DPI 2009)

The design of this study considers a matrix of ‘context’ scenarios to assist data analysis (see below) The use of two studies at different times, one pre and one post BMP implementation, is designed to give a greater diversity of responses Within each study there are further sources of variation for a more detailed analysis to measure impact The Phan et al (2009) study considered both

farmers planning on being involved in the BMP project as well as other catfish farmers The new survey in the present study considers primarily the response

of farmers involved in the BMP demonstration trials

Sources of variation Pre-existing data (Phan

et al 2009)

Evaluation Fieldwork Component

Time period Pre BMP implementation Post BMP

implementation

Type of farmers All scales of production Primarily

household-scale BMP farmers (and variation with level of BMP implementation on each farm, pond basis or entire farm)

Location of farmers Four provinces- An

Giang, Can Tho, Dong Thap and Vinh Long

All provinces with emphasis on An Giang and Can Tho

Survey respondents Individual Individual and group Focus of study Broader understanding;

quantitative and qualitative aqnalysis

Deeper understanding (of each farmer’s reactions; more probing) and qualitative analysis

Qualitative analysis of survey results for BMP demonstration trials

A three-phase qualitative analysis approach was utilized, guided by the

conceptual framework and research objectives of Miles and Huberman (1994) and Kitchin and Tate (2000) The process was concurrent, iterative and reflexive

in nature

The first phase involved identifying key themes in the interview transcripts The original interview transcripts were segregated into separate files based on the identified key descriptive categories or themes, while ensuring data was not stripped from the context it occurred in (e.g farmer characteristics) This

approach reduced the data into a more analytical and readable format and a new way of thinking about the data The new transcripts were then interrogated for patterns such as common issues, differences, and changes over time, space and society

Following this, a second phase of analysis broke down the new thematic

transcripts into further, analytical categories that had emerged during the first phase The new transcripts were again searched for commonalities, differences and changes over time The process finished when there were no more emerging categories or ideas

The third phase of data analysis then involved piecing the categories back

together in a holistic and integrative way that provided an explanatory

framework or coding structure according to Hay (2005) This coding structure (or framework) allows data to be organized in way that patterns commonalities, and relationships, correspondences and even disjuncture are identified and brought out for scrutiny Categories that were explored by the largest amount of data (i.e across a number of farmers) and responded most directly to the

research objectives of the study provided a basis for the conceptual, thematic framework, and categories were grouped together under each theme based on similarities between categories, substantive relationships and conceptual links (s

& c) Other, more marginal categories were then also incorporated into the

framework as appropriate

2.3. Results

Semi structured interviews were conducted with 23 different farmers, laborers, technicians or managers, depending on who was available at the time of the interview, and five informal discussions were held with other key farmer

stakeholders In total, this consisted of nine BMP farmers and 14 non-BMP

farmers located in 5 different provinces of the Mekong Delta, Can Tho, Dong Thap, Vinh Long, An Giang and one farm in Hau Giang province BMP farmers had been selected prior to the study (see Phan et al., 2009 for methodological

process) and non-BMP farmers were identified through random, opportunistic sampling within the logistical limitations of the study

2.3.1. Existing Survey Data

Existing survey data from Phan et al (2009) and associated qualitative analysis

is summarized and described in Attachment 3)

2.3.2. BMP Demonstration Evaluation & Conceptual framework

The conceptual framework for analysis of the BMP demonstration evaluation survey data identified three key overarching themes that had become apparent both through the data collection and analysis phases Data categories were

subsequently assembled and interpreted under the three themes and together this produced a holistic representation of the survey data

The three overarching themes are as follows;

1 The diversity and complexity of the industry,

2 The constant process of change in farming practices,

3 The relationships and connections farmers hold both between each other and others in the community

1 The diversity and complexity of the catfish farming industry

Broadly speaking there are three categories of different farmers represented in the survey sample, which in simplistic terms effectively reflects the overall

organizational structure of the ‘producer’ component of the industry in the

Mekong Delta Indeed the analysis revealed that farm size, production output (tonnes/yr) and investment strategies became important determinants and working definitions of which category a farm would fall into for the present study(see Table 1) It is however, noted that these are preliminary classifications based on a relatively small sample size It is very difficult at times to accurately define farms, as producers engage in complex farm and business enterprise arrangements at any given time On the basis of these classifications and in

consideration of the broader survey and CARD project results to date, a

simplified schematic summary of the existing catfish market chain is provided in Attachment 4, showing differing levels of vertical and horizontal integration between catfish farming and processing sectors

Table 1 - Preliminary classifications of surveyed growout farmers and broader industry structure:

Small Household-scale

Large Household-scale

Industrial scale

part of processing company)

Farm size (ha) Less than 2ha Greater than 2ha,

less than 15ha

Greater than 15ha

Total production

(tonnes/yr)

Less than 500T at present (although with potential to produce more if markets are favourable)

Production greater than 500T, less than 2 000T

at present (although with potential to produce more if markets are favourable)

in ponds

Generally only produce striped catfish on the farm, although may also have other ‘non/off-farm’ enterprise

as additional income

May have multiple culture areas, and /or are involved

in other sectors of the industry (e.g processing, feed manufacturing)

Through segregating farmers into these classifications it became clear there were a general downgrading and/or diversifying trend within the household-scale farmers This was evident in the language used to talk about current and future farming practices and aspirations In contrast there was a certain sense of optimism expressed by industrial-scale farmers (Table 2) The downgrading and diversifying trend of small-scale farmers was also supported by the comments made by several extension officers and research assistants For example, one research assistant said, “ it is becoming increasingly difficult to culture catfish, investment costs keep increasing, which means the industry is out of the

everyday farmer’s reach.” He further said, “catfish culture belongs to processors, and that 40% of small scale farmers will leave.” The industrial scale farmers also all expressed awareness about the need to certify their farms for access to

international markets Two farms were beginning to change practices in the future anticipation of receiving GlobalGAP certification In contrast, a number of household-scale farmers had limited or no awareness of such market schemes, despite risks to maintaining ongoing market access and associated impacts on market demand from processors and other buyers

Table 2: Summary of statements from survey respondents providing general perspective on production practices and current/future industry

status/potential

Producer classification Quote (general perspective on

production practices and current/future industry status/potential) small household-scale “I love to culture catfish, however am

loosing money so will maybe change to another species, like snakehead or lotus” (future)

large household-scale “I would look younger but catfish

farming makes me older” (current) large household-scale “I have worked for ten years in catfish

culture, feed, growout and share in processing company, yet I still don’t see a future of this catfish company.” (Past)

industrial scale “Expects things to improve (in future),

but short term is a problem.”

industrial scale “ Just invested US 500 000 in own feed

mill, and wants to lease processing plant and then be fully self-contained

to export directly “ (Future) Complexity of the economic concerns of different farmers

Another key difference observed between surveyed farms is the complexity of economic concerns that exist presently Although the low market price situation (effectively at or less than production cost presently) was a key general concern across all farmers, there seems to be more to this arrangement than a simple low price problem In particular, the need to having a ‘social’ connection to facilitate a contract with a processing company seems to be an ad hoc/opportunistic but otherwise crucial determinant of economic success for some of the household-scale farmers surveyed From the field data, four types of farmer:processor relationships exist which seem to be linked with the productive potential of the farms

1 Farmers that have no relationship with a processor: Only small scale farmers depicted this situation (7 farmers) They sell their fish at the last minute, which puts the farmer in a low bargaining position and leads

household-to difficulties obtaining a reasonable price for their fish These farmers also expressed concerns about processors not giving their payments in sufficient time One farmer commenting he had to wait up to one year to receive the full payment for his harvest This creates further financial difficulties for farmers who said they often have an outstanding debt with

a bank or other informal credit arrangements that charge high interest rates

processing company ”

3 Farmer’s who don’t have a relationship with a processor but are

experienced negotiators: Two farmers (one industrial and one large

household-scale), who didn’t report the same problems as the small

household-scale farmers in selling their fish They said they could

negotiate with 2 to 3 processors and choose which one gave the best price for their fish One farmer said he had a quite good relationship with 2 main processors because his farm produced a large volume of high quality fish, which gave him good bargaining power

4 Farmers connected to processors directly: Five farms (4 industrial, 1 large household-scale) either own or have shares in a processing plant, so reported no problems selling their fish, however the low price was still a problem affecting overall profitability if not overall economic viability

In summary, farmers with Type 2, 3 & 4 relationships with buyers seem to have the market for their product, but the problem at present is the general price low, whereas farmers with Type 1 relationships seem to have market and price problems

2 Process of change

Historical dimension to process of change

Throughout discussions with different farmers and through the data analysis process it became clear the historical aspect or dimension of different farms provided valuable contextual information about the current diversity in farming practices For example, one industrial-scale farmer started with one cage of catfish culture in 1974 and gradually built up the business whereby today he is a major producer, with five farm areas, one processing plant and a second plus a feed mill on the way In contrast, several household-scale farmers used to be rice farmers and have converted parts or all of their land to catfish farming within the last 10 years In contrast another large-scale farm used to be a fruit farmer but converted to catfish culture 5-6 yrs ago This diversity of different historical dimensiosn has implications for how farmers perceive their farming and future farming practices and strategies, in particular their investment and degree of engagement and commitment to the industry

Current strategies as part of process of change

An emerging issue is the way all farmers are constantly trialing and testing

different strategies to optimize financial returns There is significant diversity and variation in these practices, which is mainly based on the different scales of production and financial capacity of farmers, as well as to some extent their knowledge about the industry and social/business connections they may also possess For example, one industrial-scale farmer has five farms and is investing

in a feed mill and wants to lease a processing plant This company is also

horizontally integrated by growing red tilapia in cages along the Mekong River, and has diversified interests in a ceramics business The farm also has good connections with key R & D agencies and is involved in several projects including the CARD BMP project, an eel farming trial, a ‘clean aquaculture’ project, and a feed trial with support from the provincial government As another example, another large household-scale farmer started as a grow-out farmer but has since added vertically integrated nursery and feed milling and owns 10% of a

processing company, in attempts to boost overall profitability This farmer has also now started red tilapia production in cages along the riverfront and has started growing climbing perch in attempts to offset recent financial losses from catfish culture One large-scale hatchery farmer with tertiary training

qualifications has a good relationship with researchers and regularly undertakes on-farm R&D trials

On a different level, several small household-scale farmers are trialing different strategies and techniques to optimise profit For example, one farmer only has one pond but also manages an aquaculture cooperative of 36 farmers The

cooperative helps to reduce production costs as they buy feed and chemicals in bulk, collectively, and at the same time produce uniform products in large

quantity that help to improve the negotiating power with processors and reduce transportation costs In contrast, another small household-scale farmer has recently stopped producing catfish because of financial losses due to low market prices This farmer tried nursery catfish culture before but now switching to an alternative species with higher market price (climbing perch), but hopes to

return to catfish farming when he has accumulated enough money for

reinvestment when market prices improve Other small household-scale farmers also said they produced fruit, rice and lotus plant on their farms for

supplementary income and grew other low-value fish for own consumption One such farmer has multiple business enterprises, including acting as a market chain middleman, and has a fish feeding business These examples highlight not only the complexity and diversity of farmers in the industry but also the capacity of farmers to diversify and adopt multiple strategies or perhaps coping on fallback mechanisms, and otherwise highlights a strong degree of resilience held by small household-scale farmers

Another point of difference between survey respondents is how producers

acquire knowledge and used that information In particular, 3 industrial-scale farmers seem to be receiving effective extension from government sources In contrast many household-scale farmers said there was very little government support For example,“this is the cradle of catfish culture yet no support from government, ….even made a complaint to provincial government, no response however” Another farmer said he has attended workshops run by the

government and universities but didn’t find them helpful, “too much theory and not enough practice, ate cake and drank tea, given money, talk too much, no hands on practice” Several farmers mentioned the role of chemical and medical companies in helping them to generate new knowledge As a pertinent example one large scale farmer said he gets “new knowledge from medical manufacturers, (who) advertise their product, although product has good qualities, price is very high” other responses include: “has discussions on price with feed seller,

chemical sellers… Medical seller has also shown how to take care of the fish and treat the water environment”, Such anecdotes highlight the continued influence

of chemical and medical manufacturers and retailers have in the catfish farming industry

BMPs as current process of change

Within the context of the present study and the associated CARD project, the development and demonstration of BMPs exemplifies the way farmers’ trial different strategies, and demonstrates the differential effects BMPs have on the diversity of producers

Positive effects from BMPs:

There were some notable farm level achievements from the BMP program in relation to catfish farming practices Several farmers said BMPs were producing good farm guidelines and management strategies that they didn’t have before In particular, a key result of the BMPs was the “courage” as one farmer put it to not use chemicals, “BMPs are an eye opening for people using too many chemicals, antibiotics and other products such as probiotics With disease, BMPs give

courage to not apply chemicals/antibiotics but trying to improve water quality instead We save lots of money from not using probiotics and chemicals”

Another farmer said, “before BMPs I was using more chemicals, now no longer uses so many chemicals ” Another farmer said a positive from the BMP program was that he was now recycling sludge more thoroughly and understood why it is important to do so This farmer also said he was getting a better price for his BMP larvae compared to non-BMP larvae, noting that disease is less and survival

is higher under the BMP program Another key result was how BMPs helped farmers improve feeding practices e.g “I was too stupid before, putting too much feed in ponds” By applying alternative feeding schedule, this farmer was able to save up to ~US$20,000.00 per ha per crop Overall FCR was reduced from 1.6 to 1.5 In addition, number of disease occurrence was also much less, reduced from 6-7 times to 3-4 times per cycle Furthermore, fish cultured using this

method was much preferred by the processors as less fat was observed and fillet rate was much higher (from 1:3 to 1:2.5) The practical results of the BMPs in producing good farm level guidelines are readily apparent and a good

achievement for many framers

The industrial-scale farms also mentioned positive benefits from BMPs, however responses were more geared towards general management level improvements rather than the improvements and changes in specific farm practices mentioned

by small-scale farmers Interestingly, 4 of the industrial-scale farms also said

they saw BMPs as an important avenue towards certification Responses

included:

• The farmer’s processor liked the BMPs, as they were keen for the farmer

to progress to GlobalGAP certification Another responded by saying they planned to continue BMPs on their hatchery to assist GlobalGAP

accreditation, which the provincial government was going to provide a grant to obtain

• A farmer said he saw BMPs as a bottom-up first approach for farmers, whereas GlobalGAP is a top down commercial approach that is a lot

stricter; either pass or fail and BMPS should be the way to go at farm level These results show the value of BMPs providing support to farmers On a more specific level, several farmers suggested improvements to the current BMP

program For example one farmer would like more specific guidelines on feed management, and another farmer suggested there needs to be a dead fish count

in the BMP manual These are valuable and practical suggestions directly from farmers and should be taken into consideration into the next phase of the BMP program, including future drafts of the BMPs themselves They also demonstrate farmers understanding and active engagement with project

Limitations of the BMPs

There are several issues in the catfish industry that were identified for the BMP program to address Of prime importance is the need to create better linkages in the process of progressing from BMPs to certification, as certification is now a commercial reality in the industry The need for certified catfish products is an increasingly important aspect of catfish farming in the Delta so it is important that the BMPs provide a tangible framework for achieving certification standards for farmers to maintain market access Relevant responses included:

• At one farm, employees said they think other farmers would be more interested in the BMP program if it were to provide a certificate of

achievement, further noting, “processing plants demand certification before exporting We have to have certification before exporting”

• A key component of certification and this process, as one farmer noted is the need to create an improved traceability element in the BMP program, which he said it was starting to do with the recording diary but that he wanted to see more traceability elements in the BMP program

Further, if other farmers are going to adopt BMPs there is a critical need to link BMPs with the market place in order to create a tangible price incentive for farmer’s to adopt BMPs Although a positive response was that one farmer had told other catfish farmers nearby about the benefits of BMPs and they were informally trialing the program, he also said there was a general skepticism towards the (benefits of) BMPs and that is why these farmers were only testing the BMPs informally at this stage Similarly, several non-BMP farmers said they

wanted guarantees that BMPs will link with the market and that they can get better financial returns from BMPs before they try them For example:

• “ in future I think will apply BMPs but want assurance from manager of program that they will be able to find a stable market.”

• While two other farmers said they wanted to see BMPs getting a higher price before applying

This general skepticism may be a result of the proliferation of standards and certification arrangements in the industry that are overwhelming farmers Also, previous certification schemes such as SQF 1000 and VietGAP, a government initiative have largely failed in the past as they are expensive to implement and there was no price incentive for farmers to apply (see Bush 2010) As one farmer noted, “processing plant is making easy money from SQF, not the farmer”

Other important BMP perspectives of farmers include:

• the “most important change is I no longer use chemicals However because the feed price has increased there has been no profit change”, and “BMPs work, price is the problem”

It is apparent to farmers that there is a need for programs such as BMPs that help farmers to sell their product at an enhanced price BMP implementation strategies need to therefore consider price negotiations and relationships of particularly small household-scale farmers with processors

Having said that, it is also clear that BMPs in themselves are primarily simple farm guidelines for farmers which have obvious and reasonable limitations in terms of addressing all attendant market-related problems within the existing catfish sector in Vietnam Accordingly, BMPs cannot be seen as a panacea for the industry’s problems, and therefore multiple, targeted strategies, incorporating BMPs and other industry development and marketing elements will be required to address the different issues that are plaguing the industry at present Such

on-strategies would need to take into account the range of different farming and production practices that occur at a range of scales

Future strategies as element of process of change

There was a striking distinction in the outlook different farmers expressed about their future farming practices Notably, all industrial-scale farmers said the

future would be relatively positive or stable, with two farmers planning to

significantly expand production in the future This contrasts with a number of household-scale farmers who suggested the future would be more difficult for their farms and they were considering other investment options In particular, several farmers said they were thinking of diversifying practices and/or have already significantly downgraded production due to reduced profitability

Responses included:

• one small household-scale said the future was difficult and he may change

to growing snakehead or lotus plant as he is loosing too much money

• another small household-scale farmer said the future would be difficult as there would be more standards to meet and pressures to restructure farms He gave the example of GlobalGAP certification, which will be

required to access all EU markets by 2011

• Another farmer said he is an experienced aquaculturist and would like to stay in the industry, however if doesn’t get some support from the

government he will have to stop producing He used to farm rice when he was younger and learnt the techniques from his father Therefore he will probably return to this occupation and use the ponds for trash fish for eating

• In contrast, the only household-scale farmers that expressed a positive future outlook were those farms with a personal connection to a

processor For example one farmer said he thinks “in the future the farm will develop as the owner has advantage with a good relationship with a processing company.”

The emerging picture of the increasing rationalisation and consolidation of the industry towards larger industrial-scale farms is also supported by

conversations during the survey with provincial extension officers and

researchers who have observed that the industry is increasingly controlled by large corporations, and that it is too difficult for the small-scale farmer to

practice as high investment costs mainly driven by high feed prices make it

specifically difficult for small-scale farmers to survive” Bush et al (2009)

suggests the role for small-scale farmers is mainly in ‘boom’ crop times only, as

an additional supply of product when demand is large, rather than as a stable source of product for processors at every harvest

Such a trend raises a number of issues about the extent to which the industry will continue to support local livelihoods of household-scale farmers, and in particular what is the role of BMPs to facilitate long term viability and how best BMPs should be adopted and implemented at an industry-wide scale

3 Network relationships and connections

Relationships between catfish farmers

Informal cooperative arrangements between catfish farmers suffuse the industry and highlight the implicit and explicit roles of farmer associations in accessing and sharing information (and therefore likely role in BMP adoption and

implementation going forward) It seems that these relationships, usually

involving informal conversations about sharing information on price and disease and often based around existing social networks, are particularly important for small-scale farmers For example:

• one small household-scale farmer, who doesn’t have a connection with a processor, calls another farmer who does have a contract arrangement with a processor to get information about price just before harvest

• one small household-scale farmer calls another to get information about the market demand 4-5months in advance so that he can adjust his

production practices This farmer also has an informal group of 9 other household farmers who work together if a company orders a large

volume of fish

There are also a few notable cases of more formalized cooperative arrangements between catfish farmers For example, a hatchery cooperative in Dong Thap, which has 27 members and 90 ha total farm area share production together Different farmers work at different stages of the fish life cycle; one farmer

produces the embryo, then another farmer cultures the larvae, another the fry and finally another farmer produces the fingerling They do this to improve the traceability and ensure a higher quality product Significantly the farmers

organized this cooperative themselves without any governmental support This shows the innate capacity of the farmers to network and work together

Another example of farmer networking is an existing grow-out cooperative in which farmers contribute a fee to culture their fish under a single cooperative (‘brand’) name There are 36 members with approximately 30 ha of grow-out ponds in total One farmer thinks this cooperative is working as it gets the

farmers together to reduce costs for bulk-buying of feed and chemicals, however they have not been able to change the low selling price situation Another farmer member thinks they “need to have a bigger organisation to….talk the farmer’s voice… and help to bring the producers and buyers together which is currently lacking”

In contrast to these arrangements three of the industrial-scale farms expressed a sense of reluctance to engage in cooperative arrangements For example, an employee from one such farm said the farm had “no other connections with fish farmers, as they need to separate from other farmers Management is difficult with others and exchanging information because the farm is also a processor.” While an employee from another industrial-scale farm said there were two key reasons why the farm didn’t cooperate, because it is a bigger farm and therefore more isolated, and it is in competition with other farms Particularly he said

“…there is a bad culture in Vietnam that if you are successful others don’t like you”

Relationships between catfish farmers and other resource users

The results of the present study suggest that farm location and surrounding environment also play an active role in influencing the ability of farmers to

cooperate For example, the manager of one industrial-scale farm said problems with disease meant he didn’t want to cooperate with others such as rice farmers

as this would spread the disease risk While three other farmers said it was

difficult to cooperate as their farms are located in a predominately fruit and/or rice producing region, which means there are few other catfish farmers nearby

One farmer aptly commented on this, “cooperation with other resource users depends on location.”

Another key finding of this survey is the way in which a significant number of farmers are also involved in informal cooperative arrangements with other

resource users For example, several farmers share their sludge with

neighboring farmers for use on fruit and rice crops as it acts as a very good

fertilizer due to the high nutrient content from production of catfish waste Some farmers also engage in arrangements where they release their wastewater to neighboring rice fields, again because it provides a very good fertilizer source, thereby reducing the need and costs associated with applying artificial

fertilizers Such arrangements are valuable as they show a sense of how catfish farming may be integrated within broader agricultural landscapes to the benefit

of local communities and the broader environment

Formal cooperative arrangements within the industry

As previously stated, some farmers are already involved in formal cooperatives and associations at a local level (e.g Can Tho Fisheries Association), and in

industry representative bodies at a national level (e.g VASEP) but there was little evidence from survey respondents that these formal arrangements were helpful to their farm Relevant comments included that they either do not

support farmers or they have stopped working for one reason or another For example, one farmer said he has attended VASEP meetings and is angry that it supports processors only and not producers One industrial-scale farmer also said VASEP was good for the processing component of its company to get

information from companies wanting to buy its product, but it doesn’t support the production aspect of its company

Several farmers said they have been a part of local associations in the past but they have stopped working because many of the members have stopped

culturing catfish For example, Can Tho Fisheries Association is now considered

‘dead or defunct’ as according to one farmer “it has stopped working, not

effective, even leader cannot sell own product” While another farmer said he is part of an association of small household-scale operators (even though he is an industrial-scale farmer), however 50% of the members closed this year due to low market price, and therefore the cooperative has gone into recess A

provincial extension officer advised that in every district there is a formal

cooperative for each of fish, rice and fruit farmers These cooperatives have rules and an entry fee, and there are arrangements where farmers can gather to share information He said they are mostly effective only work if farmers are

successful, and that competition between farmers is a bad habit in Vietnam and the desire to work individually, especially between larger producers, is a key problem with promoting cooperative arrangements

There seems to be some very clear limitations with the current cooperative arrangements within the catfish industry, particularly formal representative bodies, as they are not perceived by many farmers to empower them or

otherwise advocate on their behalf As one farmer said “there needs to be (an association) capable of carrying the voice of farmers to meet exporters

demands”, and.“we need to have an association speaking the farmers voice” A number of farmers expressed the need for cooperative arrangements to support farmers, but a key concern of household-scale farmers is that their opinion and voice is not being heard in the industry They think cooperatives can potentially help to harmonise price, support projects like BMPs and provide market

information and links with exporters For example, one farmer said “there needs

to be an organisation to provide capital and to help them culture and buy

products The organisation should help farmers connect with buyers, culturing catfish without market and price information is very difficult” In particular one farmer aptly summed up the future association role….“there needs to be an

association to help farmers and solve problems with processors, demands of exporters and help with inputs” The recent introduction of a new cooperative law (see Bush 2010) that gives legal status and thus power to cooperatives in Vietnam would be a key new benefit to such arrangements

Despite the desire of many surveyed farmers for putting in place cooperative arrangements between farmers and processors, there seems to be some inherent barriers that are preventing such an outcome In an informal meeting with

several different catfish farmers, all were saying they wanted a cooperative to help them with their farming practices, and yet it was not immediately apparent

to them that the discussion at the time was a working example of ‘cooperation and information sharing’ As one farmer commented, “we have no association,

…there are talks with others to get information on price, but it is not official, just people gathering together” In short, in some cases they seem to lack direction and support to productively utilize existing social networks and/or are

otherwise reluctant to mobilize such informal arrangements without third-party assistance

Either way, there are salient lessons here for consideration of the role of existing and new farmer associations for facilitating adoption and implementation of BMPs, and there is a real need to provide farmers with support that mobilizes and strengthens the current informal arrangements

2.4. Conclusions

Three key overarching themes emerged through the fieldwork and data analysis process in the present study that have been used to summarize and explain farmers concerns These are the 1) diversity and complexity of the industry, 2) the inherent, constant process of change, and 3) the network relationships and connections that exist between different actors in the industry These three themes combine to provide some preliminary insights on the socio-economic and environmental circumstances catfish farmers in Vietnam are confronted with broadly in the context of industry development and, more specifically in relation to BMP adoption and implementation going forward Such complex issues need to be considered in any management approaches designed to

address the problems facing producers, such as BMPs In particular, the existing general downgrading trend small and several large household-scale producers are facing due to low market prices, difficult relationships with processes and the need for more functional and relevant cooperative arrangements between