Advertisement

Water Use by Inland Aquaculture in Thailand: Stakeholder Perceptions, Scientific Evidence, and Public Policy

  • Louis LebelEmail author
  • Phimphakan Lebel
  • C. Joon Chuah
Article

Abstract

This paper assesses the significance of stakeholder discourses on uses of water by aquaculture for public policy. Our discourse analysis focuses on the experiences with inland aquaculture in Thailand, drawing from interviews with stakeholders, and evidence in public documents such as newspapers and television news reports. A key finding is that fish farms suffer significant losses from polluted run-off entering water bodies where fish are grown. Mass mortality events in river cage culture, in particular, attract media attention and are the core of the aquaculture-as-victim discourse. Fish farms are also adversely impacted by river management and current water allocation policies. Inland shrimp farming has received more negative media and scientific attention than fish farming, and is the focus of the aquaculture-as-villain discourse. A third, aquaculture-as-benign discourse, is used widely to describe fish pond culture, and more rarely to promote aquaculture in low-quality water bodies or as part of integrated nutrient and waste re-use farming systems. The findings strongly imply that aquaculture farmers should be included as a stakeholder in the management of watersheds and rivers, as well as the negotiation and allocation of water resources. They also suggest a need for aquaculture development policies to pay closer attention to water quality and allocation issues.

Keywords

Aquaculture Mass mortality Water pollution Water use Discourse 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by a grant from the Institute of Water Policy, National University of Singapore, and with the aid of a grant from the International Development Research Centre, Ottawa, Canada, under Grant 108526 as a contribution to the AQUADAPT-Mekong project. Thanks to Chatta Duangsuwan for helping with data collection and Boripat Lebel for editorial assistance.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict on interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Abate TG, Nielsen R, Nielsen M (2016) Stringency of environmental regulation and aquaculture growth: a cross-country analysis. Aquac Econ Manag 20:201–221.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13657305.2016.1156191 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. ASTV Manager (2014) Fish cage farmers in Nakhon-sri-tammarat faced with mass mortalities of fish costing millions of baht. ASTV Manager, Bangkok, 24 October 2014Google Scholar
  3. Bangkok Post (1995) Shrimp farms to be listed as source of pollution. Bangkok Post, 10 February 1995Google Scholar
  4. Bangkok Post (1998a) Agro-industry: discord over shrimp farming in fields—top fishery officials against proposed ban. Bangkok Post, Bangkok, 7 May 1998Google Scholar
  5. Bangkok Post (1998b) Aquaculture—inland prawn farms seen as threat. Bangkok Post, Bangkok, 10 December 1998Google Scholar
  6. Bangkok Post (2011) Shrimpers hope to net reprieve with new definition. Bangkok Post, Bangkok, 2 October 2011Google Scholar
  7. Bangkok Post (2014) Righting the waterway wrongs. Bangkok Post, Bangkok, 16 February 2014Google Scholar
  8. Bangkok Post (2017) Fish farmers protest pig farm fouling waterways. Bangkok Post, Bangkok, 20 June 2017Google Scholar
  9. Barton JR, Fløysand A (2010) The political ecology of Chilean salmon aquaculture, 1982–2010: a trajectory from economic development to global sustainability. Glob Environ Change 20:739–752.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.04.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Belton B, Little DC (2011) Immanent and interventionist inland Asian aquaculture development and its outcomes. Dev Policy Rev 29:459–484.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7679.2011.00542.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bene C (2005) The good, the bad and the ugly: discourse, policy controversies and the role of science in the politics of shrimp farming development. Dev Policy Rev 23:585–614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Boontanon SK, Kunacheva C, Boontanon N, Musirat N, Fujii S, Tanaka S (2013) Occurrence of perfluorooctane sulfonate in the water environment of Bangkok, Thailand. J Environ Eng 139:588–593.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EE.1943-7870.0000603 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Braaten R, Flaherty M (2001) Salt balances of inland shrimp ponds in Thailand: implications for land and water salinization. Environ Conserv 28:357–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bunting SW, Edwards P (2018) Global prospects for safe wastewater reuse through aquaculture. In: Jana BB, Mandal RN, Jayasankar P (eds) Wastewater management through aquaculture. Springer Singapore, Singapore, p 55–72.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7248-2_3
  15. Chuenpagdee R, Kooiman J, Pullin R (2008) Assessing governability in capture fisheries, aquaculture and coastal zones. J Transdiscipl Environ Stud 7:1–20Google Scholar
  16. DOF (2015) Fisheries Act B.E. 2558 (2015). Department of Fisheries, BangkokGoogle Scholar
  17. Flaherty M, Szuster B, Miller P (2000) Low salinity inland shrimp farming in Thailand. Ambio 29:174–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. GooSiam (2015) Fish deaths from drought in Surin—irrigation department does not release water [in Thai]. GooSiam News, Bangkok, 7 May 2015Google Scholar
  19. Hajer M, Versteeg W (2005) A decade of discourse analysis of environmental politics: achievements, challenges, perspectives. J Environ Policy Plan 7:175–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Janchitfah S (2011) Floundering under debt. Bangkok Post, Bangkok, 24 April 2011Google Scholar
  21. Kardsakun P, Chaibu P, Chitmanat C, Mangumphan K (2014) Appropriate density of recirculating system Nile tilapia culture in aquaponic [in Thai]. J Fish Technol Res 8:23–32Google Scholar
  22. Kengkaj W (2015) Fish farmers’ utilization of social networks in adapting to drought and water pollution in Upper Northern Thailand. AQUADAPT Working Paper 32. Unit for Social and Environmental Research, Faculty of Social Sciences, Chiang Mai University, Chiang MaiGoogle Scholar
  23. Khaosod (2007) Four factories inspected after fish deaths in Chao Phraya River [in Thai]. Khao Sod, Bangkok, 13 March 2007Google Scholar
  24. Kupkanchanakul W, Kwonpongsagoon S, Bader HP, Scheidegger R (2015) Integrating spatial land use analysis and mathematical material flow analysis for nutrient management: a case study of the Bang Pakong River Basin in Thailand. Environ Manag 55:1022–1035.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-014-0441-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lebel L, Lebel P, Chuah CJ (2018) Governance of aquaculture water use. International J Water Resour Dev 1–23  https://doi.org/10.1080/07900627.2018.1457513
  26. Lebel L, Lebel P, Garden P, Giap DH, Khrutmuang S, Nakayama S (2008) Places, chains and plates: governing transitions in the shrimp aquaculture production-consumption system. Globalizations 5:211–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lebel L, Lebel P, Lebel B (2016) Impacts, perception and management of climate-related risks to cage aquaculture in the reservoirs of northern Thailand. Environ Manag 58:931–945.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-016-0764-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lebel P, Whangchai N, Chitmanat C, Promya J, Chaibu P, Sriyasak P, Lebel L (2013) River-based cage aquaculture of Tilapia in northern Thailand: sustainability of rearing and business practices. Nat Resour 4:410–421.  https://doi.org/10.4236/nr.2013.45051 Google Scholar
  29. Lebel P, Whangchai N, Chitmanat C, Lebel L (2015a) Climate risk management in river-based Tilapia cage culture in northern Thailand. Int J Clim Change Strateg Manag 7:476–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lebel P, Whangchai N, Chitmanat C, Lebel L (2015b) Risk of impacts from extreme weather and climate in river-based Tilapia cage culture in Northern Thailand. Int J Glob Warm 8:534–554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lebel P, Whangchai N, Chitmanat C, Promya J, Lebel L (2015c) Perceptions of climate-related risks and awareness of climate change of fish cage farmers in northern Thailand. Risk Manag 17:1–22.  https://doi.org/10.1057/rm.2015.4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mazur NA, Curtis AL (2006) Risk perceptions, aquaculture, and issues of trust: lessons from Australia. Soc Nat Resour 19:791–808.  https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920600835551 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. McGinnis MV, Collins M (2013) A race for marine space: science, values, and aquaculture planning in New Zealand. Coast Manag 41:401–419.  https://doi.org/10.1080/08920753.2013.822284 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. NBT KhonKaen (2016) Fish farmers push for irrigation department to take responsibility for fish deaths in cages [in Thai]. NBT Khon Kaen Television Station, Khon Kaen, 17 August 2016Google Scholar
  35. Osmundsen TC, Olsen MS (2017) The imperishable controversy over aquaculture. Mar Policy 76:136–142.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2016.11.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pant J, Demaine H, Edwards P (2004) Assessment of the aquaculture subsystem in integrated agriculture–aquaculture systems in northeast Thailand. Aquac Res 35:289–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Panuwet P, Siriwong W, Prapamontol T, Ryan PB, Fiedler N, Robson MG, Barr DB (2012) Agricultural pesticide management in Thailand: status and population health risk. Environ Sci Policy 17:72–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Phitsanulokhotnews (2013) Flooding! More than 10 fish farmers are out of business [in Thai]. PhitisanulokGoogle Scholar
  39. Pigeon LE, Létourneau L (2014) The leading Canadian NGOs’ discourse on fish farming: from ecocentric intuitions to biocentric solutions. J Agric Environ Ethics 27:767–785.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-014-9489-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pimolrat P, Whangchai N, Chitmanat C, Promya J, Lebel L (2013) Survey of climate-related risks to Tilapia pond farms in northern Thailand. Int J Geosci 4:54–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. RYT9 (2015) Polluted water from Saraburi reaches Ayutthaya fish farms [in Thai]. RYT9 Channel, Bangkok, 3 April 2015Google Scholar
  42. Sanook (2012) Irrigation diversions affect villagers fish farms killing 3 hundred thousand red tilapia [in Thai]. Sanook, Bangkok, 3 March 2012Google Scholar
  43. Schwantes VS, Diana JS, Yi Y (2009) Social, economic, and production characteristics of giant river prawn Macrobrachium rosenbergii culture in Thailand. Aquaculture 287:120–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Simachaya W (2009) Wastewater tariffs in Thailand. Ocean Coast Manag 52:378–382.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2009.04.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Soontornprasit K, Meksumpun C (2008) Analysis of aquatic ecosystem response for zone management of Ban Pho Town, Chachoengsao Province, Thailand. Kasetsart J – Nat Sci 42:513–521Google Scholar
  46. Szuster BW, Flaherty M (2002) Cumulative environmental effects of low salinity shrimp farming in Thailand. Impact Assess Proj Apprais 20:189–200.  https://doi.org/10.3152/147154602781766672 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tanavud C, Yongchalermchai C, Bennui A, Densrisereekul O (2001) The expansion of inland shrimp farming and its environmental impacts in Songkhla Lake Basin. Kasesart J – Nat Sci 35:326–343Google Scholar
  48. ThaiPBS (2013a) Maejo fisheries tests water quality in the Ping River after death of more than 1 million red tilapia [in Thai]. Thai Public Broadcasting Service News, Bangkok, 7 June 2013Google Scholar
  49. ThaiPBS (2013b) Saraburi Governor accelerates completion of sewage treatment plant after illegal releases of waste water into the Pasak River cause many fish deaths [in Thai]. Thai Public Broadcasting Service News, Bangkok, 17 January 2013Google Scholar
  50. Thai Rath (2016a) Factory release of polluted water kills 17 tonnes of fish [in Thai]. Thai Rath Online, Bangkok, 30 November 2016Google Scholar
  51. Thai Rath (2016b) More than 10 million fish in cages dead [in Thai]. Thai Rath, Bangkok, 19 August 2016Google Scholar
  52. The Nation (1998) Inland shrimp farms to be controlled. The Nation, Bangkok, 12 April 1998Google Scholar
  53. The Nation (2006) Farmers upset over huge floodwater diversions. The Nation, Bangkok, 6 December 2006Google Scholar
  54. The Nation (2007a) No easy out for river polluters. The Nation, Bangkok, 23 March 2007Google Scholar
  55. The Nation (2007b) Polluted river water reaches city. The Nation, Bangkok, 15 March 2007Google Scholar
  56. TNN24 (2016) Polluted water flowing into the Phong River kills 15 tonnes of fish in pens [in Thai]. TNN24 Television Station, BangkokGoogle Scholar
  57. TVChannel 7 (2016) China releases more water from dams impacts fish cage farms [in Thai]. Channel7, Bangkok, 16 March 2016Google Scholar
  58. TVChannel 8 (2016) Hundreds of thousands of fish die in cages north of Ayutthaya. Channel8, Bangkok, 24 September 2016Google Scholar
  59. Young N, Matthews R (2007) Experts’ understanding of the public: knowledge control in a risk controversy. Public Underst Sci 16:123–144.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662507060586 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Unit for Social and Environmental Research, Science and Technology Research InstituteChiang Mai UniversityChiang MaiThailand
  2. 2.Institute of Water Policy, Lee Kuan Yew School of Public PolicyNational University of SingaporeSingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations