Báo cáo khoa học nông nghiệp " Development of Better Management Practices for Catfish Aquaculture in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam " pptx

Development of Better Management Practices for Catfish Aquaculture in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam RISK ASSESSMENT August, 2009 Introduction For purposes of meeting medium-long term indu

Development of Better Management Practices for Catfish

Aquaculture in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam

RISK ASSESSMENT

August, 2009 Introduction

For purposes of meeting medium-long term industry sustainability imperatives, the development of Better Management Practices (BMPs) is considered a priority for the catfish farming sector in the Mekong Delta of south Vietnam To this end, the

following project entitled,:

Development of Better Management Practices for Catfish Aquaculture ibn the

Mekong Delta, Vietnam

has been funded by AusAid as part of the Collaboration for Agricultural Rural

Development (CARD 001/07/VIE) As part of this project it is a requirement to undertake a formal risk assessment of the industry to identify information gaps and key risks to be addressed by the proposed BMPs This report is a summary of the key

findings and recommendations of this assessment

Methods

This risk assessment is based on a modified combination of methods from the

National ESD Framework for aquaculture(Fletcher et al 2004), Finfish Aquaculture

in Western Australia: Final ESD Risk Assessment Report for Sea-cage and Land-based Finfish Aquaculture (Vom Berg 2008) and Risk Management Planning for DPI Projects (Halligan and Linehan 2008)

The process for undertaking the risk assessment is as follows:

1 Compile initial Risk Register (list of key risks) categorised according to generic BMP framework

2 Review score key risks in terms of ‘likelihood’ and ‘consequence’ of risks occurring to provide Risk Ratings

3 Risk Ratings are ranked (= sum of likelihood + consequence scores) to

provide the Risk Ranking

4 Risk Ranking determines appropriate level of management response according

to Risk Ranking Matrix and associated BMP outcome

The Risk Register (Attachment 1) was initially compiled by the CARD project team, following a process of industry consultation, project planning workshops and

associated stakeholder needs analysis, field investigations in the Mekong Delta during 2008/09, and consideration of interim results for the recently completed

socio-economic survey of the catfish aquaculture industry in the Mekong Delta

The generic framework used to summarise the risks is based on the key categories (Table 1) used for many Better Management Practice (BMP) guidelines in the

aquaculture industry (Boyd 2003; Tucker 2003; De Silva et al 2006; World Bank

2006; ADB/ACIAR/AwF/BRR/DKP/FAO/GTZ/IFC/MMAF/NACA/WWF 2007; Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services 2007; Tucker and

Hargreaves 2008), supplemented by categories of more contemporary and/or localised relevance These categories will subsequently form the basis of the draft Catfish Aquaculture BMP for the Mekong Delta, according to the customised schematic logframe (Attachment 2) The main aim of the risk assessment is to determine if current management is sufficient and to consider risks on a prioritised basis to be used

in the development of a BMP for catfish farming The original key categories

included a category for “Records” This was combined into the “Markets, Regulation

& Finance” category as the specific risks identified under the Records category were implicit in the Markets, Regulation & Finance category

The risk ranking is determined using the risk analysis tool outlined in the Risk

Management Planning for DPI Projects, which was based on the Australian Standard for Risk Management (Standards Australia 2004a,b) To assign a level of risk (= risk ranking score) to an issue, two factors must be determined:

• the likelihood of a particular activity/event/circumstance occurring, and

• the consequence of this particular activity/event/circumstance, should it occur

•

Table 1 BMP Key Categories

Site Selection & Farm Design Culture System Preparation Farm Management Hatchery Management Nursery Management Seedstock Supply & Stocking Feed Management Water Management Waste Management Climate Change Fish Health Management & Biosecurity

Post-Harvest Markets, Regulation & Finance Communications & Training

The format for the scoring of Risk Ratings is provided in Attachment 3, with

descriptions of scores and associated values summarised in Tables A3.1 & A3.2 (Attachment 3) Risk ratings are assigned a level of consequence (from ‘insignificant’

to ‘catastrophic’) and likelihood (from ‘rare’ to ‘almost certain’) This stage was undertaken using an expert-panel consisting of the CARD project team, nominated experts and key stakeholders associated with the catfish aquaculture sector in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam Seven risk assessments were completed; five by individual experts (two individuals from Fisheries Victoria (Department of Primary Industries), one from NACA, one from RIA2 and one from an industry consultant) and two by groups of experts from CTU (group of four) and RIA2 (group of four) Each of the seven risk assessments was assigned equal weight in consolidating and averaging the scores for analysis The combination of consequence and likelihood produces (as a summation of risk rating scores) an estimate of the associated risk (= Risk Ranking score) The Risk Ranking scores are then reconciled against the Risk Ranking Matrix (Table 2) to identify the relative Risk Ranking Profile (Table 3) and appropriate BMP response as a new and/or additional Control measure (Attachment 2)

Table 2 Risk Ranking Matrix

Consequence

Insignificant Minor Moderate Major Catastrophic

Almost Certain

5

Likely

4

Possible

3

Unlikely

2

Rare

1

Table 3

Results and Discussion

Complete results for risk assessment are provided in appendix 1 A summary of the number of identified high, significant and moderate risks is summarised by BMP category in table 4

Table 4 Summary of risk levels by BMP Category

Risk

Moderate Risk

These findings will provide a key checklist against which draft BMPs will be

prepared for Project no CARD 001/07/VIE, with specific emphasis on ensuring all high, significant and moderate risks (Table 4) are appropriately addressed within each

of the designated BMP categories

Acknowledgements

The following personnel contributed to this risk assessment:

College of Aquaculture and Fisheries, Can Tho University, Can Tho City, Vn

Dr Nguyen Thanh Phuong, Mr Bui Minh Tam, Mr Pham Thanh Liem and Mr Duong Nhut Long

Research Institute for Aquaculture #2, Ho Chi Minh City, Vn

Dr Nguyen Van Hao, Mr Phan Lam, Mr Tran Quoc Chuong, Mr.Doan Van Bay, Mr.Ha Tan and Ms.Nguyen Thi Hoai An (Inland Fisheries Resources and Capture Division)

Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific

Prof Sena De Silva, Dr Thuy Nguyen and Mr Bryan Davy (consultant)

Fisheries Victoria, Department of Primary Industries, Australia

Dr Brett Ingram

Mr Geoff Gooley

References

ADB/ACIAR/AwF/BRR/DKP/FAO/GTZ/IFC/MMAF/NACA/WWF (2007) Better

management practices for tambak farming in Aceh Asian Development Bank ETESP, Australian Centre for International Agriculture Research, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, International Finance

Corporation of the World Bank Group, Banda Aceh

Boyd, C E (2003) Guidelines for aquaculture effluent management at the farm-level

Aquaculture 226, 101-112

De Silva, S S., Amarasinghe, U S., and Nguyen, T T T (2006) Better-practice

approaches for culture-based fisheries development in Asia ACIAR, ACIAR Monograph No 120

Fletcher, W J., Chesson, J., Fisher, M., Sainsbury, K J., and Hundloe, T J (2004)

National ESD Reporting Framework: The 'How To' Guide for Aquaculture Version 1.1 FRDC, Canberra, Australia

Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (2007) Aquaculture Best

Management Practices Manual - January 2007 Division of Aquaculture, Tallahassee, Florida

Halligan, S., and Linehan, C (2008) Risk Management Planning for DPI Projects

Practice Change Capacity Development Booklet No 6

Standards Australia (2004a) AS/NZS 4360:2004 Risk Management

Standards Australia (2004b) HB 436:2004 Risk Management Guidelines -

Companion to AS/NZS 4360:2004

Tucker, C (2003) Best Management Practices for Flow-Through, Net-Pen,

Recirculating, and Pond Aquaculture Systems United States Environmental Protection Agency

Vom Berg, F (2008) Finfish Aquaculture in Western Australia: Final ESD Risk

Assessment Report for Sea-cage and Land-based Finfish Aquaculture

Government of Western Australia - Department of Fisheries

World Bank (2006) Guidelines for Environmental Management of Aquaculture

Investments in Vietnam Institute of Fisheries Management Research Institute for Aquaculture Number 1, Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific, Can Tho University and World Wide Fund for Nature

Appendix 1 Complete Risk Assessment Results

BMP

Category Specific Risk

Mean Risk Score

Risk Ranking Profile

BMP Response

Site Selection &

Farm Design

Increased disease/pathogen issues and

Significant

Site Selection &

Farm Design

Poor/unsustainable water abstraction practices from river/stream/channels degrades environment and/or impacts

public amenity

Site Selection &

Farm Design

Poor/unsustainable land use practices degrade the environment and/or impact

public amenity

Site Selection &

Farm Design

Sewage from farm/surrounding area

Moderate

Site Selection &

Farm Design

Poor/unsustainable water use from surrounding farms negatively effects

your farm

Site Selection &

Farm Design

Poor farm design limits ability to farm

Moderate

Site Selection &

Moderate

Site Selection &

Farm Design

Farm is vulnerable to extreme tides,

Site Selection &

Culture System

Preparation

Ponds/equipment are not properly

Significant

Culture System

Preparation

Ponds are not adequately de-sludged

Moderate

Farm

Significant

Farm

Management

Poor quality effluent can negatively

Significant

Farm

Management

Increased incidence of disease related

Significant

Farm

Management

Poor husbandry practices can lead to

Significant

Farm

Significant

Farm

Management

Data is collected but not communicated

Moderate

Farm

Moderate

Farm

Moderate

Farm

Management

Insufficient/outdated/dysfunctional

Moderate

Farm

Management

Increase incidence of OH&S issues for

Moderate

Farm

Moderate

Hatchery

Management

Poor broodstock selection causing genetic inbreeding can lead to reduced quality of seedstock and overall

productivity

Hatchery

Management

Hatchery quarantine systems not in

Significant

Hatchery

Management

Poor broodstock conditioning leads to lower fecundity and/or poor quality

eggs/larvae

Hatchery

Management

Poor water quality and/or unsuitable temperature can lead to reduced to reduced survival of eggs/larvae

Hatchery

Management

Incorrect type/size/quantity of food and/or poor water quality for first feeding larvae leads to reduced survival

Hatchery

Management

Inefficient breeding techniques lead to

Moderate

Nursery

Management

Nursery quarantine systems not in

Significant

Nursery

Moderate

Seedstock

Supply &

Stocking

Poor quality seedstock can lead to poor

Significant

Seedstock

Supply &

Stocking

Too many fish stocked and carrying

Moderate

Seedstock

Supply &

Stocking

Lack of sufficient number of seedstock

Moderate

Seedstock

Supply &

Stocking

Seedstock are not stocked at appropriate time of year, time of day

(temperature)

Seedstock

Supply &

Stocking

Feed

Moderate

Feed

Moderate

Feed

Moderate

Feed

Management

Feed ingredients are sourced by unsustainable means (e.g trash fish,

fish meal)

Feed

Management

Incorrectly stored feed leads to reduced

Moderate

Feed

Management

Inefficient feed delivery methods/frequency leads to wasted feed, poor water quality and productivity

Feed

Management

Incorrect food type/size fed to different

Water

Management

Untreated water is discharged back into

Water

Management

Settlement ponds absent or not properly

Water

Management

Incomplete/inadequate monitoring fails

Significant

Water

Management

Intake water is not filtered for unwanted

Significant

Water

Management

Insufficient water exchange results in

Significant

Water

Management

Lack of supplementary aeration leads to

Moderate

Waste

Management

Reuse of the processing waste as a

Significant

Waste

Management

Poor disposal of mortalities creates productivity, health, environmental &

social problems

Waste

Management

non-biodegradable waste is not properly

Moderate

Significant

Significant

Moderate

Moderate

Fish Health

Management &

Biosecurity

Disease/pathogen occurrence resulting from inadequate monitoring, management and treatment reduces

productivity

Fish Health

Management &

Biosecurity

Disease/pathogen occurrence in effluent can affect other farms/general

environment

Fish Health

Management &

Biosecurity

Introduction of disease/pathogen from

Significant

Fish Health

Management &

Biosecurity

Improper chemical/pesticide use affects

Significant

Fish Health

Management &

Biosecurity

Introduction of disease/pathogens from incoming seedstock/broodstock/trash fish and/or human activity

Fish Health

Management &

Biosecurity

Escaped fish alter genetics in natural

Moderate

Fish Health

Management &

Biosecurity

Exotic species will be introduced to the

Fish Health

Management &

Biosecurity

Competition for food with wild stock due

Post-harvest

Ad hoc use of antibiotics and other banned chemicals compromises food

safety

Post-harvest

Consumer expectations not being met for taste, appearance, nutritional value

(credence values)

Markets,

Regulation &

Finance

Inability to comply with export market standards (lack of or inappropriate standards/certification/traceability

systems)

Markets,

Regulation &

Finance

Ineffective marketing of product and/or

Significant

Markets,

Regulation &

Finance

Ineffective strategic development of

Significant

Markets,

Regulation &

Finance

Market chain lacks orderly structure &

Significant

Markets,

Regulation &

Finance

Markets,

Regulation &

Finance

Inaccurate or absent data fails to inform industry/government on performance

measures

Markets,

Regulation &

Finance

Lack of industry compliance leads to

Significant

Markets,

Regulation &

Finance

Bureaucratic constraints from regulatory

Moderate

Markets,

Regulation &

Finance

Inability to fund investment/operating

Moderate

Markets,

Regulation &

Finance

Increased competition from

Moderate

Communication &

Training

Poor information exchange on

Significant

Communication &

Moderate

Communication &

Training

Ineffective communication/networking between government, technical experts, and farmers prevents implementation of

BMP