Aquatic foods are increasingly being recognized as having an important role to play in an environmentally sustainable and nutritionally sufficient food system. Proposals for increasing aquatic food production often center around species, environments, and ambitious hi-tech solutions that mainly will benefit the 16% of the global population living in high-income countries. Meanwhile, most aquaculture species and systems suffer from large performance gaps, meaning that targeted interventions and investments could significantly boost aquatic food supply and access to nutritious foods without a concomitant increase in environmental footprints. Here we contend that the dialogue around aquatic foods should pay greater attention to identifying and implementing interventions to improve the productivity and environmental performance of low-value commodity species that have been relatively overlooked in this regard to date. We detail a range of available technical and institutional intervention options and evaluate their potential for increasing the output and environmental performance of global aquaculture.

Indonesia is the world's second largest producer and third largest consumer of seafood. Fish is therefore essential to the nation, both financially and nutritionally. Overfishing and the effects of climate change will, however, limit future landings of capture fisheries, so any increases in future seafood production will need to come from aquaculture. The ecological effects of aquaculture are dependent upon the choice of species, management, and where it is sited. In the present study we use life cycle assessment (LCA) to evaluate how possible interventions and innovations can mitigate environmental impacts related to the aquaculture sector's growth. The mitigation potential of six interventions were also quantified, namely (1) FCR reductions for whiteleg shrimp, carp, and tilapia;(2) sustainable intensification of milkfish and Asian tiger shrimp polyculture; (3) shifting groupers from whole fish diets to pellets; (4) favoring freshwater finfish over shrimp; (5) renewable electricity; and (6) reduced food waste and improved byproduct utilization. If all six interventions are implemented, we demonstrate that global warming, acidification, eutrophication, land occupation, freshwater use, and fossil energy use could be reduced by between 28% and 49% per unit of fish. The addition of many innovations that could not be quantified in the present study, including innovative feed ingredients, suggest that production could double within the current environmental footprint. This does not, however, satisfy the expected 3.25-fold increase under a business-as-usual scenario, neither does it satisfy the government's growth targets. We therefore also explore possible geographical areas across Indonesia where aquaculture expansions and ecological hotspots may conflict. Conclusively, we advocate more conservative production targets and investment in more sustainable farming practices. To accelerate the implementation of these improvements, it will be central to identify the most cost-effective aquaculture interventions.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract