Advertisement

Food Security

, Volume 9, Issue 1, pp 39–60 | Cite as

Increasing productivity and improving livelihoods in aquatic agricultural systems: a review of interventions

  • O.M. Joffre
  • S.A. Castine
  • M.J. Phillips
  • S. Senaratna Sellamuttu
  • D. Chandrabalan
  • P. Cohen
Review

Abstract

The doubling of global food demand by 2050 is driving resurgence in interventions for agricultural intensification. Globally, 700 million people are dependent on floodplain or coastal systems. Increased productivity in these aquatic agricultural systems is important for meeting current and future food demand. Agricultural intensification in aquatic agricultural systems has contributed to increased agricultural production, yet these increases have not necessarily resulted in broader development outcomes for those most in need. Here we review studies of interventions that have sought to improve productivity in aquatic agricultural systems in Bangladesh, Cambodia and Zambia. We review evidence of development outcomes from these interventions and the particular role of participatory approaches in intervention design and deployment. There was evidence of increases in productivity in 20 of the 31 studies reviewed. Yet, productivity was only measured beyond the life of the intervention in one case, income and food security improvements were rarely quantified, and the social distribution of benefits rarely described. Participatory approaches were employed in 15 studies, and there was some evidence that development outcomes were more substantial than in cases that were less participatory. To explore the impact of participatory approaches further, we examined five empirical cases. Review and empirical cases provide preliminary evidence suggesting participatory approaches contribute to ensuring agriculture and aquaculture interventions into aquatic agricultural systems may better fit local contexts, are sustained longer, and are more able to deliver development benefits to those most in need. A worthy focus of future research would be comparison between outcomes achieved from interventions with differing levels of participation, and the social differentiation of outcomes.

Keywords

Aquatic agricultural systems Productivity Food security Nutrition Income Participatory approaches 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank research and field officers from CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems (AAS) in the Khulna Hub office (Bangladesh) and Bangladesh WorldFish Office, Zambia WorldFish Office and Mekong WorldFish Regional Office. The contributions of Kim Miratori, Alan Brooks, Ahmed Orko Nur, Golam Faruque, Karim Mandjurul, Sarwer Rayhan Hayat, Kevin Kamp, Mohammad Mokarrom Hossain, Murshed-E-Jahan, Khondker, Andrew Ward and Maravanyika Tendayi are particularly appreciated. The authors wish to thank Simon Attwood for his comments and feedback during the early parts of this research. The preparation of this paper was supported by funding from the CGIAR Research Programs on Aquatic Agricultural Systems (AAS).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

12571_2016_633_MOESM1_ESM.docx (63 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 63.1 kb)

References

  1. Apgar, M., Douthwaite, B. (2013). Participatory Action Research in the CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems. CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems. Penang, Malaysia. Program Brief: AAS-2013-27.Google Scholar
  2. Ahmed, N., Allison, E. H., & Muir, J. F. (2010). Rice fields to prawn farms: a blue revolution in Southwest Bangladesh? Aquaculture International, 18, 555–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ahmed, N., & Garnett, S. T. (2011). Integrated rice-fish farming in Bangladesh: meeting the challenges of food security. Food Security, (3), 81–92.Google Scholar
  4. Aktar, S., & Faruque, G. (2015). Engaging community in RinD. Visioning, Action Planning & Issue Prioritization. Southern Bangladesh Polder Zone. World Fish Internal. Report. 19 pp.Google Scholar
  5. Alexandratos, N., & Bruinsma, J. (2012). World agriculture towards 2030/2050: the 2012 revision. ESA Working paper No. 12–03. Rome, FAO. Google Scholar
  6. Alam, M. J., Islam, M. L., Saha, S. B., Tuong, T. P., & Joffre, O. (2007). Improving the productivity of the rice-shrimp system in the south-west coastal region of Bangladesh. In C. T. Hoanh, B. W. Szuster, K. Suan-Pheng, A. M. Ismail, & A. D. Noble (Eds.), Tropical deltas and coastal zones: food production, communities and environment at the land-water Interface. Oxfordshire: CAB International.Google Scholar
  7. Amilhat, E., Lorenzen, K., Morales, E. J., Yakupitiyage, A., & Little, D. C. (2009). Fisheries production in southeast Asian farmer managed aquatic systems ( FMAS ) II. Diversity of aquatic resources and management impacts on catch rates. Aquaculture, 298, 57–63.Google Scholar
  8. Anthofer, J. (2004). The potential of the system of rice intensification (SRI) for poverty reduction in Cambodia. Conference on International Agricultural Research for Development, October 5–6, 2004. Berlin: Deutscher Tropentag.Google Scholar
  9. Arksey, H., & O’Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Azim, M. E., Rahaman, M. M., Wahab, M. A., Asaeda, T., Little, D. C., & Verdegem, M. C. J. (2004). Periphyton-based pond polyculture system: a bioeconomic comparison of on-farm and on-station trials. Aquaculture, 242, 381–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Barman, B. K., & Little, D. C. (2011). Use of hapas to produce Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus L.) seed in household foodfish ponds: a participatory trial with small-scale farming households in Northwest Bangladesh. Aquaculture, 317, 214–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Baran, E., Zalinge, N. V., & Ngor, P. (2001). Floods, floodplains and fish production in the Mekong Basin: present and past trends. In A. Ali et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Second Asian Wetlands Symposium (pp. 920–932), 27–30 August 2001 (p. 1116pp). Penang, Malaysia: Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia.Google Scholar
  13. BBS (2006). Report on labor force survey, 2005. Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics. Dhaka: Ministry of Planning, government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh.Google Scholar
  14. Belton, B., Karim, M., Thilsted, S., Murshed-E-Jahan, K., Collins, W., & Phillips, M. (2011). Review of aquaculture and fish consumption in Bangladesh. Studies and Reviews, 2011, 53.Google Scholar
  15. Béné, C., Barange, M., Subasinghe, R., Pinstrup-Andersen, P., Merino, G., Hemre, G.-I., & Williams, M. (2015). Feeding 9 billion by 2050 – putting fish back on the menu. Food Secur., 7, 261–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Béné, C., Arthur, R., Norbury, H., Allison, E. H., Beveridge, M., Bush, S., Campling, L., Leschen, W., Little, D., Squires, D., Thilsted, S. H., Troell, M., & Williams, M. (2016). Contribution of fisheries and aquaculture to food security and poverty reduction: assessing the current evidence. World Development, 79, 177–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Biggs, S. (1989). Resource-poor farmer participation in research: a synthesis of experiences from nine national agricultural research systems. OFCOR comparative study paper. The Hague: International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR).Google Scholar
  18. Borin, K., & Frankow-Lindberg, B. E. (2005). Effects of legumes-cassava intercropping on cassava forage and biomass production. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, 27, 139–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Buhler, W., Morse, S., Arthur, E., Bolton, S., & Mann, J. (2002). Science, agriculture, and research: a compromised participation? London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  20. Cagauan, A. (1995). In P. Pingali & P. Roger (Eds.), Impact of pesticides on farmer health and the Rice environment (pp. 203–248). Boston: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Castine, S.A., Sellamuttu, S.S., Cohen, P., Chandrabalan, D., & Phillips, M. (2013). Increasing productivity and improving livelihoods in aquatic agricultural systems: a review of interventions. CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems. Penang, Malaysia. Working Paper: AAS-2013-30.Google Scholar
  22. CEDAC. (2008). Evaluation study: Adoption and non-adoption of system of rice intensification (SRI) in Cambodia. Cambodia Center for Study and Development in Agriculture.Google Scholar
  23. Chambers, R. (2007). From PRA to PLA and pluralism: practice and theory. IDS working paper 286.Google Scholar
  24. CGIAR. (2012). CGIAR research program on aquatic agricultural systems: Program proposal. Penang, Malaysia. The World Fish Center. AAS-2012-07.Google Scholar
  25. CGIAR. (2015). CGIAR Strategy and Results. Framework 2016–2030. 52 pp.Google Scholar
  26. Cole, S.M., Kantor P., Sarapura S., & Rajaratnam S. (2014) Gender-transformative approaches to address inequalities in food, nutrition and economic outcomes in aquatic agricultural systems. Penang, Malaysia: CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems. Working Paper: AAS-2014-42.Google Scholar
  27. CSISA. (2014). Life–Changing Stories of Successful Women Farmers. Cereal Systems Initiatives for South Asia in Bangladesh (CSISA-BD). 15 ppGoogle Scholar
  28. Datta, D., Chattopadhyay, R. N., & Guha, P. (2012). Community-based mangrove management: a review on status and sustainability. Journal of Environmental Management, 107, 84–95.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Dethier, J.-J., & Effenberger, A. (2012). Agriculture and development: a brief review of the literature. Economic Systems, 36, 175–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Dobermann, A. (2004). A critical assessment of the system of rice intensification (SRI). Agricultural Systems, 79, 261–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Doss, C. (1999). Twenty-Five Years of Research on Women Farmers in Africa: Lessons and Implications for Agricultural Research Institutions (International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center, D.F., Mexico).Google Scholar
  32. Douthwaite, B., Apgar, J. M., Schwarz, A., McDougall, C., Attwood, S., Senaratna Sellamuttu, S., & Clayton, T. (Eds.) (2015). Research in development: Learning from the CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems. Penang, Malaysia: CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems. Working Paper: AAS-2015-16.Google Scholar
  33. Dugan, P., Apgar, M., & Douthwaite, B. (2013). Research in Development: the approach of AAS. AAS Working Paper. Penang: World Fish.Google Scholar
  34. Edwards, P. (1993). Environmental issues in integrated agriculture-aquaculture and wastewater-fed fish culture systems. In R. S .V. Pullin, H. Rosenthal, & J. L. MacClean (Eds.), Environment and aquaculture in developing countries. ICLARM Conf. Proc. 31, pp. 139–170.Google Scholar
  35. ESRC (2003). Fit for purpose? Assessing research quality for evidence based policy and practice. UK Centre for Evidence Based Policy and Practice, Working Paper 11.Google Scholar
  36. Fan, S., & Hazell, P. (2001). Returns to public investments in the less-favored areas of India and China. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 83, 1217–1222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Foley, J. A., DeFries, R., Asner, G. P., Barford, C., Bonan, G., Carpenter, S. R., Chapin, S. F., Coe, M. T., Daily, G. C., Gibbs, H. K., Helkowski, J. H., Holloway, T., Howard, E. A., Kucharik, C. J., Monfreda, C., Patz, J. A., Prentice, I. C., Ramankutty, N., & Snyder, P. K. (2005). Global consequences of land use. Science, 309, 570–573.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Godfray, H. C. J., Beddington, J. R., Crute, I. R., Haddad, L., Lawrence, D., Muir, J. F., Pretty, J., Robinson, S., Thomas, S. M., & Toulmin, C. (2010). Food security: the challenge of feeding 9 billion people. Science, 327, 812–818.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Gregory, R., Guttman, H., & Kekputherith, T. (1996). Poor in all but fish. AIT Aquaculture working paper No. 4, Cambodia. Bangkok: Asian Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
  40. Gupta, M.V., Sollows, J.D., Mazid, M.A., Rahman, A., Hussain, M.G., Dey, M.M. (1998). Integrating aquaculture with rice farming in Bangladesh: feasibility and economic viability, its adoption and impact, vol. 55. International Center for Living Aquatic Resources Management (ICLARM) Tech. Rep, 90 pp.Google Scholar
  41. Halwart, M., & Gupta M.V. (2004). Culture of fish in rice fields. FAO and World Fish Center. 83 ppGoogle Scholar
  42. Haque, M. M., Little, D. C., Barman, B. K., & Wahab, M. A. (2010). The adoption process of ricefield-based fish seed production in Northwest Bangladesh: an understanding through quantitative and qualitative investigation. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension, 16, 161–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Hazell, P. (2003). Agricultural Research and Poverty Reduction: Some Issues and Evidence. In S. Mathur & D. Pachico (Eds.), Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT) (pp. 43–58). Colombia: Cali.Google Scholar
  44. Hoffmann, V., Probst, K., & Christinck, A. (2007). Farmers as researchers: how can collaborative advantages be created in participatory research and technology development? Agriculture and Human Values, 24, 355–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Hortle, K.G. (2007). Consumption and yield of fish and other aquatic animals from the lower Mekong basin. MRC Technical Paper No. 16. Vientiane, Lao PDR: Mekong River Commission.Google Scholar
  46. Hossain, M., Bose, M., & Mustafi, B. A. A. (2006). Adoption and productivity impact of modern rice varieties in Bangladesh. The Developing Economies, XLIV-2, 149–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Hossain, M., Lewis, D., Bose, M. L., & Chowdhury, A. (2007). Rice research, technological progress, and poverty: the Bangladesh case. In M. R. M. D. Adato (Ed.), Agricultural research, livelihoods, and poverty: studies of economic and social impacts in six countries (pp. 56–102). Baltimore and Washington: Johns Hopkins University Press and International Food Policy Research Institute.Google Scholar
  48. Howlader, M.Z.H., & Biswas, S.K. (2009). Screening for nutritionally rich and low glycemic index Bangladeshi rice varieties. National Food Policy Capacity Strengthening Programme.Google Scholar
  49. IFAD. (2010). Rural poverty report. Rome, Italy: IFAD.Google Scholar
  50. Joffre, O., & Sheriff, N. (2011). Conditions for collective action: Understanding factors supporting and constraining community-based fish culture in Bangladesh, Cambodia and Vietnam. World Fish Center Studies and Reviews 2011–21 (p. 46pp). Penang, Malaysia: The World Fish Center.Google Scholar
  51. Joffre, O., Kosal, M., Kura, Y., Sereywath, P., & Thuok, N. (2012). Community fish refuges in Cambodia: lessons learned. Phnom Penh, Cambodia: The World Fish Center.Google Scholar
  52. Johnson, N., Lilja, N., Ashby, J., & Garcia, J. A. (2004). The practice of participatory research and gender analysis in natural resource management. Natural Resources Forum, 28, 189–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Kadir, A., Kundu, R. S., Milstein, A., & Wahab, M. A. (2006). Effects of silver carp and small indigenous species on pond ecology and carp polycultures in Bangladesh. Aquaculture, 261, 1065–1076.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Karim, M., Little, D. C., Kabir, M. S., Verdegem, M. J. C., Telfer, T. & Wahab, M. A. (2011). Enhancing benefits from polycultures including tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) within integrated pond-dike systems: A participatory trial with households of varying socio-economic level in rural and pen-urban areas of Bangladesh. Aquaculture, 314, 225–235.Google Scholar
  55. Kawarazuka, N., & Béné, C. (2010). Linking small-scale fisheries and aquaculture to household nutritional security: a review of the literature. Food. Security, 2(4), 343–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Kuntashula, E., Sileshi, G., Mafongoya, P. L., & Banda, J. (2006). Farmer participatory evaluation of the potential for organic vegetable production in the wetlands of Zambia. Agriculture, 35, 299–305.Google Scholar
  57. Lambrou, Y. (2001). A typology: Participatory research and gender analysis in natural resource management research. Working document No. 15. Cali, Colombia: CGIAR Participatory Research and Gender Analysis Program, CIAT (Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical).Google Scholar
  58. Levac, D., Colquhoun, H., & O’Brien, K. (2010). Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implementation Science, 5(1), 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Lilja, N., J.A. Ashby, & L. Sperling. (2001). Assessing the impact of participatory research and gender analysis. Cali, Colombia: Participatory Research and Gender Analysis Program, CIAT (Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical).Google Scholar
  60. Loevinsohn, M., & Sumberg, J. (2013). Under what circumstances and conditions does adoption of technology result in increased agricultural productivity? A Systematic Review Prepared for the Department for International Development.Google Scholar
  61. Ly, P., Jensen, L. S., Bruun, T. B., Rutz, D., & de Neergaard, A. (2012). The system of rice intensification: adapted practices, reported outcomes and their relevance in Cambodia. Agricultural Systems, 113, 16–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Masset, E., Haddad, L., Cornelius, A., & Isaza-Castro, J. (2012). Effectiveness of agricultural interventions that aim to improve nutritional status of children: systematic review. British Medical Journal, 344, d8222.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  63. Maxwell, T. W., You, S., Boratana, U., Leakhna, P., & Reid, J. (2012). The social and other impacts of a cattle/crop innovation in Cambodia. Agricultural Systems, 107, 83–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. McIntyre, B.D., Herren, H.R., Wakhungu, J., Watson, R.T. (2009). Agriculture at a Crossroads: The Global Report. International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  65. Miratori K. 2015. Good governance of rice field fishery management. Penang, Malaysia: World Fish. Program Brief: 2015–19.Google Scholar
  66. Molden, D. (2007). Water for food, water for life. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  67. Mondal, M.K., Tuong, T.P., Sharifullah, A.K.M., & Sattar, M.A. (2010). Water supply and demand for dry-season rice in the coastal polders of Bangladesh. In Tropical Deltas and Coastal Zones: Food Production, Communities and Environment at the Land-Water Interface. C.T. Hoanh (Eds.). CAB International.Google Scholar
  68. Mueller, N. D., Gerber, J. S., Johnston, M., Ray, D. K., Ramankutty, N., & Foley, J. A. (2013). Closing yield gaps through nutrient and water management. Nature, 409. doi: 10.1038/nature11420.
  69. Mukanda, N. (1998). Wetland classification for agricultural development in eastern and Southern Africa: the Zambian case, in FAO (ed) Wetland characterization and classification for sustainable development, Proceedings of a sub-regional consultation, 3–6 December 1997, Harare, Zimbabwe.Google Scholar
  70. Murshed-E-Jahan, K., Beveridge, M. C. M., & Brooks, A. C. (2008). Impact of long-term training and extension support on small-scale carp polyculture farms of Bangladesh. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society, 39, 441–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Murshed-E-Jahan, K., & Pemsl, D. E. (2011). The impact of integrated aquaculture-agriculture on small-scale farm sustainability and farmers' livelihoods: experience from Bangladesh. Agricultural Systems, 104, 392–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Mustafa, M. G., & Brooks, A. C. (2009). A comparative study of two seasonal floodplain aquaculture systems in Bangladesh. Water Policy, 11(S1), 69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Nao, T. (2009). Community fish refuge husbandry in lowland agricultural ecosystem (p. 211). Phnom Penh: Build Bright University.Ph.D. thesisGoogle Scholar
  74. Ndiyoi, M., Sampa, J.B., Thawe, P., & Wood, A. (2009). Striking Balance: maintaining seasonla dambowetlands in Malawi and Zambia. In wetland International. 2009. Planting trees to eat fish: Field experiences in wetlands and poverty reduction. Wetlands International, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  75. Neef, A., & Neubert, D. (2011). Stakeholder participation in agricultural research projects: a conceptual framework for reflection and decision-making. Agriculture and Human Values, 28(2), 179–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Oakley, E., & Momsen, J. H. (2005). Gender and agrobiodiverstiy: a case study from Bangladesh. The Geographical Journal, 171, 195–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. OECD.. (2010). Glossary of Key Terms in Evaluation and Results Based Management.Google Scholar
  78. Paris, TR. (1998). Impact of Rice Research, Eds Pingali PL, Hossain M (International Rice Research Institute), 241–262. Los Banos, Phillipines.Google Scholar
  79. Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  80. Pingali, P. L., & Rosegrant, M. W. (1994). Confronting the environmental consequences of the green revolution in Asia. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute.Google Scholar
  81. Pingali, P. L. (2012). Green revolution: impacts, limits, and the path ahead. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109, 12302–12308.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  82. Pretty, J., Toulmin, C., & Williams, S. (2011). Sustainable intensification in African agriculture. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 9, 5–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Ratner, B.D. (2012). Collaborative Governance Assessment. CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems. Penang, Malaysia. Guidance Note AAS-2012-27.Google Scholar
  84. Ratner, B. D., Cohen, P., Barman, B., Mam, K., Nagoli, J., & Allison, E. H. (2013). Governance of aquatic agricultural Systems : analyzing representation, power, and accountability. Ecology and Society, 18(4).Google Scholar
  85. Rhoades, R. E., & Nazarea, V. (2006). Reconciling local and global agendas in sustainable development: participatory research with indigenous Andean communities. Journal of Mountain Science, 3(4), 334–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. RFFEP (2015). Rice Field Fisheries Enhancement Project (RFFEP). Catch & Consumption survey trends over 3 years. Draft report. World Fish. 33p.Google Scholar
  87. Roos, N., Wahab, M. A., Hossain, M. A. R., & Thilsted, S. H. (2007). Linking human nutrition and fisheries: incorporating micronutrient-dense, small indigenous fish species in carp polyculture production in Bangladesh. Food and Nutrition Bulletin, 28, 280–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Sampa, J. (2007). Sustainable dambo cultivation. Report of Striking a Balance Project.Google Scholar
  89. Scoones, I., & Thompson, J. (1994). Beyond farmer first: rural people’s knowledge, agricultural research, and extension practice. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Shankar, B., Halls, A., & Barr, J. (2004). Rice versus fish revisited: on the integrated management of floodplain resources in Bangladesh. Natural Resources Forum, 28, 91–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Shankar, B., Halls, A., & Barr, J. (2005). The effects of surface water abstraction for rice irrigation on floodplain fish production in Bangladesh. International Journal of Water, 3, 61–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. So N., and Touch, B. (2011). Fisheries resources in Cambodia: Implications for food security, human nutrition and conservation. Proceedings for the International Conference on Asian Food Security (ICAF 2011), 10–12 August 2011, Singapore.Google Scholar
  93. Stür, W. W., Horne, P. M., Gabunada, F. A., Phengsavanh, P., & Kerridge, P. C. (2002). Forage options for smallholder crop-animal systems in Southeast Asia: working with farmers to find solutions. Agricultural Systems, 71, 75–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Suryavanshi, P., Singh, Y. V., Prasanna, R., Bhatia, A., & Shivay, Y. S. (2013). Pattern of methane emission and water productivity under different methods of rice crop establishment. Paddy and Water Environment, 11, 321–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. The World Bank & UKAID. (2011). What would it take for Zambia's beef and dairy industries to achieve their potential?Google Scholar
  96. The World Fish Center. (2011). CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems: Program brief. Penang, Malaysia. http://www.worldfishcenter.org/resource_centre/WF_2934.pd.
  97. Thilsted, S.H., & Wahab, M.A. (2014). Increased production of small fish in wetland combats micronutrient deficiencies in Bangladesh. CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems. Penang, Malaysia. Policy Brief: AA-2014-10.Google Scholar
  98. Thompson, P. M., Sultana, P., & Islam, N. (2003). Lessons from community based management of floodplain fisheries in Bangladesh. Journal of Environmental Management, 69(3), 307–321.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. Thompson, P. M., Firoz Khan, A., & Sultana, P. (2006). Comparison of aquaculture extension impacts in Bangladesh. Aquaculture Economics and Management, 10(1), 15–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Tilman, D., Blazer, C., Hill, J., & Befort, B. L. (2011). Global food demand and the sustainable intensification of agriculture. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 108(50), 20260–20264.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  101. Tittonell, P., & Giller, K. E. (2013). When yield gaps are poverty traps: the paradigm of ecological intensification in African smallholder agriculture. Field Crops Research, 143, 76–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Viseth, H., Leap, H., Savry, C., Thon, H., & Doi, M. (2008). Propagation of rice-field fish resources for rural communities through establishment of dry season fish refuges in Cambodia. Freshwater aquaculture improvement and extension project (FAIEX). Phnom Penh, Cambodia: Fishery Administration.Google Scholar
  103. Wahab, M. A., Ahmad-Al-Nahid, S., Ahmed, N., Haque, M. M., & Karim, M. (2012). Current status and prospects of farming the giant river prawn Macrobrachium rosenbergii (de man) in Bangladesh. Aquaculture Research, 43, 970–983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Webb, P.J.R. (2009). Fiat Panis: For a World Without Hunger. Eiselen H (eds), 410–434 Hampp Media/Balance Publications, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  105. World Food Summit. (1996). Rome declaration on World Food SecurityGoogle Scholar
  106. Young, J. R., O’Reilly, R., Ashley, K., Suon, S., Leoung, I. V., Windsor, P., & Bush, R. D. (2014). Impacts on rural livelihoods in Cambodia following adoption of best practice health and husbandry interventions by smallholder cattle farmers. Transboundary and Emerging Diseases, 61(1), 11–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht and International Society for Plant Pathology 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • O.M. Joffre
    • 1
  • S.A. Castine
    • 2
  • M.J. Phillips
    • 2
  • S. Senaratna Sellamuttu
    • 3
  • D. Chandrabalan
    • 4
  • P. Cohen
    • 2
    • 5
  1. 1.WorldFish, WorldFish Greater Mekong OfficePhnom PenhCambodia
  2. 2.WorldFishBayan LepasMalaysia
  3. 3.International Water Management Institute (IWMI), Southeast Asia Regional OfficeVientianeLaos
  4. 4.Bioversity InternationalSerdangMalaysia
  5. 5.Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef StudiesJames Cook UniversityTownsvilleAustralia

Personalised recommendations