Development Southern Africa Vol 15, No I, Autumn 1998

Sustainable rural livelihoods? Evaluatingthe potential of small-scale aquaculturein the Western Cape

Najma Mohamed & Belinda Dodson'

Rural unemployment is exacerbated by the decrease in demand for farm labour on com-mercial farms: therefore, alternative livelihood opportunities for rural dwellers requireinvestigation. The production offtsh in farm dams offers such an opportunity. A researchproject was undertaken to evaluate the potential of small-scale aquaculture to createsustainable rural livelihoods. An existing aquaculture project in De Doorns in the West-ern Cape was evaluated in terms of its ability to provide an alternative source of incomeand a cheap animal protein source. A needs assessment of the local community and anevaluation of the pilot project in terms of its potential to meet the identified needs werecarried out. The results indicated that, subject to the implementation of the recommenda-tions, the project has the potential to create sustainable livelihoods, but that socio-political issues should ba accorded equal consideration to biotechnical and economicfeasibility.

1. INTRODUCTION

Chambers (1988: 1) defines a sustainable rural livelihood as the 'secure access toadequate stocks and flows of food and cash to meet basic needs ... where securityis defined in terms of ownership of (or access to) resources and income-earningactivities, embracing the need for reserves and assets to offset risk'. Chambers(1988: 15) goes on to state that there are both moral and practical imperatives formaking sustainable livelihood security the focus for development action: 'It is bystarting with the priorities of the poorer, and enabling them to gain the liveli-hoods that they want and need, that both they and sustainable development canbest be served.' This article examines the potential of an aquaculture develop-ment initiative in the Western Cape intended to create such sustainable rurallivelihoods. With approximately 2 500 irrigation dams in the province, the man-agement agencies have set their sights on identifying 1 000 suitable dams anddeveloping them for small-scale aquaculture (McVeigh, 1995). This independent

' Respectively, Coordinator and Lecturer. Enviro Unit, Department of Environmental andGeographical Science, University of Cape Town. We wish to thank the community ofDe Doorns for their assistance and participation, as well as our student assistant for herhelp with the fieldwork. We would like to acknowledge the Oppenheimer Institute forAfrican Studies for assisting in funding the research, and the Rural Foundation and De-partment of Agriculture for their assistance and for involving us in this project. Thankyou to my supervisor cum co-author. Dr Belinda Dodson, for her support, advice andinput into this research.

103

^ Mohamed <t B Dodson

evaluation of the project indicates that, subject to some changes and improve-ments, the aquaculture programme has a contribution to make towards the Re-construction and Development Programme, especially in nurturing entrepreneur-ship within rural communities.

2. THE DEVELOPMENT OF AQUACULTURE

According to Safriel & Bruton (1984: 1), 'aquaculture aims at the human-controlled cultivation and harvest of aquatic organisms for commercial utilisa-tion'. As early as 1981 it was stated that more than half the world's populationdepends on fish as a principal source of animal protein (Shang, 1981). One ofthereasons for the recent and projected rapid growth of aquaculture is the growingworld demand for protein. The natural advantages of fish as a food source indi-cate the value ofthe increased use of that product in diet-deficient areas oftheworld (Bell & Canterbury, 1976). Fish cultivation shows high biological produc-tivity in diverse situations and fish are protein-rich, as opposed to starchy staplefood sources (Bardach et al, 1972). Aquaculture has certain advantages over ag-riculture: environmental conditions can be more readily controlled and it canoften be conducted on land unsuitable for agriculture (Shang, 1981). However, itshould be kept in mind that 'neither aquaculture, nor any other method of foodproduction will be a panacea for human nutritional problems, but all can, andmust contribute if the spectre of hunger is to be banned' (Bardach et al, 1972: 2).

In Africa and Latin America fish farming is still in the early stages of develop-ment (Brown, 1987), while Asian countries, with their centuries-old tradition ofaquaculture, have been the forerunners in the industry (Hecht & Britz, 1990). InAfrica, the principal objectives of aquaculture development are to 'enhance theproduction offish as human food and to improve the livelihood of farm families,by upgrading household nutritional status and/or cash or in-kind income'(ICLARM, 1991: 1). Inland fisheries represent a considerable resource on thiscontinent, with the total potential yield of freshwater fish estimated to be2,7 million metric tons while actual production is 1,9 million metric tons (Tved-ten et al, 1994). These authors believe that fish comprises 35 per cent ofthe totalprotein intake of African people, although this intake varies from region to re-gion. Fish is most important in Southern Africa, and in Malawi it contributes asmuch as 47,1 per cent to the total animal protein intake.

Inland fisheries are, however, not as economically viable as marine production.This can be seen especially in South Africa, Namibia and Angola, countrieswhich have developed their marine fisheries considerably (Tvedten et al, 1994).Many inland aquaculture initiatives in Africa have failed either because theywere not integrated into the rural and agricultural economy surrounding them(World Bank, 1991), or because investigation into the viability of aquacultureproduction was flawed (Cross, 1991). A study which evaluated aquaculture re-search capabilities and needs in Africa indicated that a lack of national aquacul-

104

Sustainable rural livelihoods? Evaluating the potential of small-scale aquaculture

ture development plans and local expertise were further factors limiting the suc-cess of aquaculture projects (World Bank, 1991).

Although the South African aquaculture industry is in its infancy, trout farming,the longest established freshwater aquaculture industry in the country, producesan extremely high-quality, high-value product which is sold into a well-established market infrastructure (Hecht & Britz, 1990). Other species whichhave been introduced include catfish and tilapia, but neither has been as com-mercially successful as trout. However, the primary limiting factor in freshwaterfish farming in South Africa is the availability of suitable waters, as well as theseasonal temperature variation (Department of Agriculture, 1994). In addition,no national policy on aquaculture development exists.

In 1981, an Aquaculture Working Group was appointed by the Council for Sci-entific and Industrial Research (CSIR) to develop a research strategy for aquac-ulture development (Safriel & Bruton, 1984). It stated that aquaculture in SouthAfrica must be seen as a complementary development to the harvesting of natu-ral resources and that aquacultural products are likely to be valuable for importreplacement and as commodities for local consumption and export. In rural ar-eas, the integration of aquaculture into agriculture could also contribute to amore rational use of water and land so as to increase yields and profitability perproduction unit (Safriel & Bruton, 1984). With South Africa's incorporation intothe Southern African Development Community (SADC), a great deal can also belearnt from other member countries regarding their development of inland fish-eries. A number of factors therefore point to the feasibility of aquaculture devel-opment in South Africa, and rural development organisations have begun to im-plement pilot projects to test that feasibility in particular environmental and so-cio-economic contexts.

3. PROJECT HISTORY

The Small Farmer Aquaculture Programme forms part of the Rural EnterprisesProgramme of the Rural Foundation, a non-governmental rural developmentorganisation. Rural enterprises are defined as economic activities undertaken byrural people that serve to constitute or supplement a livelihood, where a liveli-hood is seen as the generation of sufficient income to prevent at least absolutepoverty (Rural Foundation, 1994). The aquaculture enterprise focuses on creat-ing livelihood opportunities for farmworkers, small farmers and rural dwellersthrough the production offish in farm dams (Rural Foundation, 1994).

The aquaculture development programme is managed jointly by the Rural Foun-dation, the University of Stellenbosch and the Department of Agriculture (West-ern Cape). These management agencies are responsible for project identificationand socio-economic aspects, technological development, and extension andtraining respectively. Each project is intended as an enterprise to be managed byfarmworkers with proven entrepreneurial abilities, enabling them to supplement

105

N Mohamed & B Dodson

their wages. Another objective is to produce a cheap source of animal protein forconsumption by low-income groups in particular. The enterprise can be run byfarmworkers for their individual economic benefit or in partnership with com-mercial fanners.

The project involves setting up a cage in a suitable farm dam for rearing fish in acontrolled system. Cage culture can be used in most bodies of water; it is rela-tively cheap, simple in design and can be adapted to local conditions (Coche,1976). The project requires an initial capital outlay to build the cages, afterwhich it is immediately operational. The establishment costs can be covered inthe first year of operation (McVeigh, 1995). Currently trout and tilapia are rearedin a rotational production system throughout the year, with trout (Oncorrhyncusmykiss) produced during the winter months and the warmer-water species, tilapia(Oreochromis mossambicits) during the summer months. At least one monthshould be set aside between the two production seasons to give the dam a restingperiod and to increase its water quality for the next production phase. A singleunit can produce 2—3 tons of both tilapia and troUt. Trout fingerlings are cur-rently supplied by the University of Stellenbosch and feed is available from localfeed companies. The tilapia fingerlings are harvested in the wild, although researchis being conducted into the establishment of hatchery facilities. The viability ofother species such as freshwater mullet and carp is also being investigated.

According to the Rural Foundation (1994), trout can be marketed through exist-ing marketing channels, while the tilapia should be marketed locally to lower-income groups on the farm and surrounding areas, priced to compete with thecheapest animal protein source available. The income from tilapia sales is likelyto cover the production cost only and will not necessarily generate a profit,whereas the trout will yield a profit and thus benefit the entrepreneur financially(Salie, 1996). In his recently published manual Salie (1996) outlines a step-by-step procedure for implementing an aquaculture production enterprise, as sum-marised below:

1. Obtain permission from the farm owner to implement the project on the farm.2. Assess the location of the farm to determine its proximity to the nearest town

or metropolitan area as well as to the sea. (This plays a vital role in market-ing, input provision, extension and support services.)

3. Determine the suitability of the dam for aquaculture by undertaking physicaland chemical analyses of the water quality.

4. Select entrepreneur(s) - criteria for the selection of the entrepreneur(s) willdiffer on each farm.

5. Market the product.6. Erect the floating cage structure.7. Train the prospective fish farmer.8. Introduce the fingerlings.9. Grow the fingerlings to marketable size.

106

Sustainable rural livelihoods? Evaluating the potential of small-scale aquaculture

10. Obtain initial financing for the project by means of a loan scheme, afterwhich the project should become self-sufficient.

The Ganskraal aquaculture project at De Dooms in the Hex River Valley, thepilot project of the Small Fanner Aquaculture Programme, was initiated in 1994.Our research on this project was conducted in 1995, after the decision to proceedwith the project had been made and the pilot project had been in operation forone full annual cycle. This article therefore presents an evaluation of the pilotproject at Ganskraal and the perceptions of the community towards the benefitsand potential of this initiative.

4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The methodological approach in this project assessment incorporated both RapidRural Appraisal (RRA) and Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) approaches.The research methods employed were situated along the continuum between thetwo approaches (Chambers, 1994a). The aims were to encourage communityparticipation and to develop a relationship of accountability, mutual respect andtrust with the community. According to Chambers (1993), the key to facilitatingparticipation is rapport. In much development research, the attitudes and behav-iour required for this rapport have been largely absent, but 'PRA approaches andmethods have opened up a new range of practical choices for local research andaction which seemed increasingly to fit the priorities of the 1990s' (Chambers,1994b: 1450). The main methods utilised were questionnaires and semi- andunstructured interviews. Fieldwork was conducted during a two-week period inJuly 1995, which coincided with the winter season.

The focus throughout was on the intended beneficiaries of the project. Whatwere their needs and circumstances? What was their awareness and assessmentof the pilot project? How would the availability of fish affect their diets andhousehold budgets? What opportunities and constraints did they envisage intaking up aquaculture themselves? Altogether 138 respondents, comprising bothseasonal and full-time farmworkers, were interviewed. In addition, informal in-terviews were held with farmworkers, farm owners and key informants.

5. THE STUDY AREA

The pilot study was located in De Doorns (Figure I), a scenic export grape-growing area enclosed by mountains and situated in the Hex River Valley in theBoland. Settlers came to the Hex River Valley in 1709, not as grape farmers butas cattle farmers, the water-rich valley providing excellent pasture (Conradie,1952). The indigenous peoples, formerly subsistence hunters or nomadic cattlefarmers, were incorporated into the changed agrarian system of the valley as sea-sonal workers hired by the settler farmers.

Geographically, the valley is on the edge of the Boland and forms part of theBree River region. De Dooms is situated approximately 140 km from Cape Town

107

N Mohamed & B Dodson

Figure 1

V s

0 50 km

De Dooms /"^

Worcester

\ SOUTH AFRICA /^

on the national road, Nl. (See Figure 1.) This winter rainfall region receives itswater supplies from the Hex River and other tributaries of the Bree River, whilethe mountain streams are also an important source of water. The total populationof De Dooms, incorporating both rural and municipal areas, was not available inthe 1991 census, but tourist pamphlets put the total population at 16 000 (HexRiver Valley Tourist Association, n.d.).

De Dooms is principally a farming area and has as its main activity the produc-tion of grapes for export. It produces approximately 65 per cent of South Africa'stotal export grapes. From the original four farms, 186 farms with 7,8 millionvines have developed and have made the Hex River Valley prosperous (HexRiver Valley Tourist Association, n.d.). I

Despite this healthy local economy, a report completed by Operation Hunger in .1994 identified many socio-economic problems in the area, including inadequate jhousing, overcrowding and the absence of good health services. Little had |

I108

Sustainable rural livelihoods? Evaluating the potential of small-scale aquaculture

changed since a 1984 study of De Dooms (Louw, 1984), in which it was foundthat housing was urgently required in the community and that existing housingwas not of a good standard. In response to the housing shortage, an informal set-tlement sprang up in 1992 when some fannworkers and seasonal labourersstarted to erect temporary housing structures, giving rise to the poverty-strickencommunity of Epukumleni. While the conditions in the informal settlement ap-pear to be far worse than on the farms, some respondents said that here they feltmuch more in control of their lives than when they were living on the farms.Labour practices on many farms are said to be very poor, with workers beingpaid low wages. As one farmworker stated, 'they want maximum but give mini-mum'. There are many characteristics of an impoverished society to be foundamidst the beauty and wealth of the Hex River Valley, highlighting the gap be-tween the 'haves' and the 'have-nots'. It is in this broader socio-economic con-text that the pilot project must be evaluated.

6. PROJECT ASSESSMENT

6.1 Evaluating the pilot project

The Small Farmer Aquaculture Programme currently being implemented on thefarm Ganskraal was initiated in 1994. De Doorns was selected by the projectcoordinators for a number of reasons, inter alia: the site had to be suitably distantfrom the coast in order to limit competition with marine fish; the water quality inthe area was good; and it was felt that commercial farmers in the area would bewell-disposed to the socio-economic upliftment of fannworkers (McVeigh,1995).

The project is run jointly by the farm manager, a farmworker and the farmowner, though the latter does not panicipate actively in the project. The farm-worker was selected by a farmworkers' committee and received training inaquaculture production methods from the University of Stellenbosch. The projectemploys two 10 m^ floating cages with a depth of 5 m in a 2 ha irrigation dam.The farm owner has indicated a willingness to make a second dam available foradditional cages should the project prove to be economically attractive.

As part of the evaluation, in-depth interviews were held with the farmworker andthe farm manager involved in the pilot project. Interviews covered various as-pects of the project, as well as the problems that were being experienced. Thetwo interviews were conducted separately to facilitate ease of communicationand enable the interviewees to air their opinions more freely.

Biotechnical and environmental aspects of the project

Technicians, entrepreneurs and voluntary workers on the farm built the floatingcage structure with the assistance of the management agency. Old equipment,like pipes and poles, was used to assemble the cage structure, and plastic drumswhich had contained herbicides and pesticides were sealed with silicon and used

109

/V Ktohamed & B Dodson

to keep the cage afloat. Feed was obtained from a local feed company, while theflngerlings were obtained from the University of Stellenbosch. Though trout fin-gerlings were obtained from a hatchery, tilapia flngerlings had to be harvestedfrom the wild. Only 1 000 fingerlings with an average weight of 175 g could beobtained. This would not always be a feasible or reliable way of obtaining fin-gerlings, and the project managers felt that their costs could be lowered consid-erably if they could obtain feed and fingerlings at cheaper rates.

The environmental impact of aquaculture production on the water quality oftheirrigation dam is an important aspect ofthe initiative. The Hex River Valley waschosen for the good water quality of its dams, and while no increased algalgrowth was witnessed during the first months of the project, both managers feltthat the environmental effects on the dam warrant further monitoring and study.

Technology transfer, training and extension aspects

The project managers received intensive practical and theoretical training inaquaculture production and management at the University of Stellenbosch'sAquaculture Research Unit at Jonkershoek. Both commended the training pro-vided. The practical, hands-on approach was especially successful, as the farm-worker felt able to assist and teach other entrepreneurs about fish farming. Theauthors feel, however, that the transfer of management and business skills hasbeen limited, as the farm manager continued to handle most ofthe administrativecomponents ofthe project, albeit in consultation with the farmworker.

Economic and marketing aspects

Currently profits from the project are shared equally between the worker, man-ager and farm owner. The latter indicated that should the project increase to anextent where more workers would be offered part-time employment, he wouldconsider forfeiting his third of the profit. By utilising old farm equipment theproject managers were able to reduce the cost of the cage structure fromR20 000-R25 000 to R5 000. This constituted an important saving on capitalinput into the project.

Unfortunately, in the single year that the project was in operation, the growntilapia were removed too early as people were eager to buy the fish, and earningswere thus reduced. In addition, the fish could only be sold to a very small sectionofthe community, as the initial input of tilapia fingerlings was relatively low.The project objective of providing a cheap source of animal protein to low-income households was not achieved in the first year of operation, although thisremains a primary goal. The trout were sold to a market pre-arranged by themanagement agencies, and the project managers shared the profits.

Legal aspects

A legal contract is an important part of an entrepreneurial enterprise such as the

110

Sustainable rural livelihoods? Evaluating the potential of small-scale aquaculture

aquaculture project. However, some dissatisfaction was expressed with thenegative attitude of the lawyer who drew up the contract towards the profit-sharing arrangement. The project managers also felt that the roles and responsi-bilities of the various management agencies should be more clearly defined.These are both problems which could lead to potential conflict and which meritserious attention if the project is to be continued and replicated.

Overview and summary

The purpose ofthe pilot project was to identify problems so that these might beaddressed when planning and implementing future projects. Ofthe successes ofthe pilot project, the most significant have been the technology transfer, cuttingthe costs of the cage structure, and the creation of an entrepreneur. However,research into a number of aspects of the project is still required before itsachievements can be properly assessed.

While no profit was realised with the tilapia production, the trout were success-fully harvested and marketed, resulting in substantial profits for the project man-agers. The problems identified by the project managers are primarily institutionaland technical in nature. These aspects should be resolved as soon as possible asthey could pose severe limitations to the success ofthe initiative.

6.2 Evaluating international experiences

Such institutional and technical problems in aquaculture development are com-mon to many international case studies, including examples from Africa. Despitedifferences in both sociocultural and economic backgrounds, a great deal can belearnt from the experience of these other countries. In Malawi (Kalinga, 1993),the main obstacles to aquaculture development were a lack of government sup-port and poor technical support and extension services. In Nigeria (Thomas,1994), inadequate institutional back-up and socio-economic research limited thedevelopment of aquaculture. In an article evaluating the Food and AgricultureOrganisation's (FAO) aquaculture programmes in Africa, Cross (1991) high-lights how inappropriate aquacultural programmes have failed. For example, inEgypt, Mali and Malawi, aquaculture programmes initiated by the FAO and thevarious governments failed on the basis of inappropriate and often inefficientplanning. Poor investigation into the feasibility of aquaculture in terms of techni-cal considerations such as soil stability and water availability, as well as inade-quate infrastructure to sustain aquacultural production (Cross, 1991), contributedto the subsequent failures. There is a danger in adopting and making large-scaleinvestment in aquaculture as it is definitely a high-risk enterprise, requiring in-depth study to establish technical, economic, environmental and socioculturalfeasibility.

6.3 Community response to the aquaculture initiative

Community needs were regarded as especially pertinent to this study, as were

III

yV Mohamed A B Dodson

consumer preferences with respect to animal protein sources. This section high-lights the findings of the research conducted in and with the community of DeDoorns.

Community characteristics

A questionnaire survey and interviews were conducted with 138 farmworkers infive sample areas in De Dooms. The sample areas were chosen on the basis oftheir distance from the pilot project and incorporated four farms and the informalsettlement of Epukumleni. The questionnaire attempted to elicit basic informa-tion about the characteristics of the community as well as its response to andperception of the aquaculture initiative. It was supplemented by less formal in-terviews with fannworkers to gain insight into their problems and grievances andto move away from the rigid, prescriptive format of the questionnaire. Interviewswere also held with farmers and key informants in the area. The gender break-down of the respondents was 42 male and 96 female. In subsequent statisticalanalysis no significant correlations were found to exist between gender and anyof the other variables analysed, and therefore gender is not considered a factorwhich infiuences the findings significantly.

The respondents consisted of both seasonal and full-time workers, and were afairly good representation of workers from the different hierarchies on the farm(eg general labourer and overseer). Unemployed respondents were interviewedmostly at Epukumleni, and seasonal labourer respondents were all from this in-formal settlement. Most of the respondents (70,3 per cent) are employed in full-time jobs, with the sample farms all having a resident population of farmworkers.Many of the problems in the area can best be understood in the light of labourrelations, especially the expanding seasonal labour force which is placing in-creasing demands on off-farm housing and service provision.

Nutritional and consumer-related questions

Nutritional and consumer-related questions established which animal proteinsources were eaten most often, along with their availability, affordability and theperception of their nutritional value. Respondents were then asked whether theyhad eaten the freshwater fish from the project and whether they would eat thefish if it were to become available. The animal protein found to be most fre-quently eaten is poultry (57,2 per cent), while meat was the most common sourcefor 31,9 per cent of the respondents and marine fish accounted for only 10,1 percent (Table 1). The high proportion of meat is probably attributable to the factthat pigs and sheep are reared on two of the sample farms and farmworkers pur-chased the meat at the farm. In general, fi-eshwater fish is not eaten by any sig-nificant proportion of the respondents, though some indicated that they had eatenfreshwater fish from dams and rivers in the area. Results showed that the animalprotein sources were not equally accessible to all respondents, due either to highprices or distance from markets. Poultry was indicated as the most accessible

112

Frequencies

44

79

14

1

Percentage*

31,9

57,2

10,1

0.7

Sustainable rural livelihoods? Evaluating the potential of smalt-scale aquaculture

source (53,6 per cent), whereas the majority of respondents indicated meat asbeing inaccessible (54,3 per cent), possibly due to high prices. Marine fish wasrated as accessible by most of the respondents while 84,8 per cent of respondentssaid that they had no knowledge of the accessibility of freshwater fish.

Table 1: The animal protein source eaten most often by respondents

Ciitegories

Meat

Poultry

Marine fish

Freshwaler tisli

*AII percentages have been rounded olTlo the first decimal and total percentages therefore add up to

amounts either just below or above 100 per cent.

The protein sources were then ranked in terms of their affordability. A tolal of65,2 per cent of the respondents indicated that meat was the most expensive.Poultry was generally rated as cheap (50,7 per cent), but the cheapest proteinsource was reported to be marine fish, which 58,7 per cent of the respondentsindicated as being the most affordable. In an earlier survey amongst the residentsof Epukumleni, the cheapest source of animal protein had been given as chicken(McVeigh, 1995). For the freshwater fish to be marketed correctly - given thatrespondents indicated that they had no knowledge of its price - it would have tobe sold at a competitive price to be economically viable. Since one of the aims ofthe project is to introduce a cheap source of animal protein into the area, theprice of the tilapia should not exceed that of the cheapest source at present - ma-rine fish. As poultry is eaten most frequently by the respondents and is also themost widely available animal protein source, even simple economic logic dic-tates that tilapia would have to be sold at a price competitive with that of poultry.Ideally, income generated from tilapia sales should cover tilapia production costsand not necessarily generate lucrative profit margins, whereas trout productionwould yield substantial profits for the entrepreneur (Salie, 1996). However,much research is still required to establish the feasibility of tilapia production,given actual production costs.

Their perception of the nutritional value of the various protein sources was as-certained by asking respondents to rate them from most to least nutritious (Table2). Wliile 47 per cent earmarked meat as 'unhealthy', or as the 'most unhealthy'source, the equivalent figure for poultry was 60 per cent. Respondents felt thatpoultry would spoil quickly and some also said that battery-reared frozen chick-ens were fed steroids and were not as healthy as free-range chickens. Marine fishwas rated as the most nutritious source by 54,3 per cent of the respondents. Mostrespondents felt that they did not possess the necessary knowledge to judge onthe nutritional value of the freshwater fish. Although initial consumer preference

113

N Mohamed & B Dodson

Studies were conducted by the management agencies, consumers still need to beinformed about the nutritional value of freshwater fish in particular.

Table 2: The nutritional value of animal protein sources as perceived bythe respondents

Most nutritious

Nutritious

Unhcaltliy

Most unhealthy

No response

Meat

47

23

44

21

3

%

34,0

16,7

31,9

15,2

2,2

Poultry

14

38

51

33

2

%

10,1

27,5

36,9

23,9

1,5

Fish(Marine)

75

40

19

2

2

%

54,4

28,9

13,8

1,5

1,5

Fish %(Freshwater)

5

40

18

15

60

3,6

29,0

13,0

10,9

43,5

Ofthe 138 respondents, only 8 per cent indicated that they had eaten the fishproduced at Ganskraal farm. This low response is due to the fact that the tilapiaharvest had been removed too early and sold very quickly to the surroundingfarms only. Although 91,3 per cent ofthe respondents had not eaten the fish, themajority indicated that they would buy the fish should it become available tothem on a regular basis. A total of 89,1 per cent of respondents said they wouldbuy the fish and only 10,1 per cent said that they would not (Table 3). A par-ticular need exists for a cheap animal protein source which would be availableduring the difficult times ofthe year when work is scarce and wages are lower.

Table 3: Proportion

Categories

Yes

No

No response

of respondents who would

Frequencies

123

14

1

buy the fish

Percentage

89,8

10,1

0,7

It appears therefore that the community is willing to purchase the fish should itbecome available. The nutritional benefits of freshwater fish need to be ex-plained to the farmworkers, who have already indicated that they regard marinefish as the most nutritious of the four protein sources. When asked to rate thenutritional value of freshwater fish, most indicated that they did not knowenough to be able to do this. Contrary to the findings ofthe management agen-cies, a reasonable supply of marine fish does reach the local shops in the area,usually as frozen fish, and is an important protein source which many ofthe re-spondents reported buying. As respondents in five sample areas indicated awillingness to purchase the fish, it is likely that a receptive market exists on the186 farms in the area, provided that criteria of affordability and availability aremet.

114

Su.itainable rural livelihoods? Evaluating the potential of small-scate aquaculture

Community perception of project benefits

In assessing the needs of the community, the respondents were asked to rankcertain needs in terms of their importance. To most, the greatest perceived needwas financial: 37,7 per cent ofthe respondents rated income as the most impor-tant need and a further 42,8 per cent rated it as important. This refiects the prob-lems in the area, many of which can be traced to low wages. As many respon-dents reasoned, without money other goods and services such as education,health, water, electricity and agricultural land were not accessible to them.

When asked to identify the possible benefits of an aquaculture project, 60,9 percent of the respondents indicated income as a benefit. The income-generatingpotential of this project is thus clearly recognised by the respondents (Table 4). Afurther 12,3 per cent saw it as an etnployment opportunity and only 6,5 per centas a valuable food source. In reality, the employment-generating potential ofaquaculture is limited, and even its income-generating potential is subject to thelaws of supply and demand. A slight mismatch therefore exists between the proj-ect objective of providing a cheap and nutritious foodstuff and the community'sdesire to find a source of supplementary income. Any expansion ofthe aquacul-ture initiative would need to overcome the problem of inaccurate and unrealisticexpectations.

Table 4: The benefits respondents hope to gain from an aquaculturalinitiative

Categories

Income

Work

Food source

Status

Other

No response

The respondents were then questioned about the Ganskraal project specificallyand whether they would participate in such an initiative. Ofthe respondents 84,1per cent indicated that they had not heard ofthe project and only 15,9 per centthat they had. A large part ofthe interviewer's time was therefore spent explain-ing the project to the respondents. Despite not having heard ofthe project, 81,9 percent ofthe respondents indicated that they would participate in such an initiative.

The survey yielded very positive results, demonstrating community interest inthe initiative. The majority regard it as having potential as an income-generatingactivity. Fanners who were interviewed mostly noted the nutritional benefits ofthe project, which they felt would contribute substantially to increasing the nu-tritional intake ofthe poor population of De Dooms.

115

Frequencies

84

17

9

3

1

24

Percentage

60,9

12,3

6,5

2,2

0,7

17,4

N Mohamed c? B Dodson

Community needs assessment

The in-depth interviews and discussions held with farmworkers and key infor-mants in the area yielded very similar results to the questionnaire survey in theiridentification of the problems in the community. Complaints of unfair labourpolicies and poor housing were reiterated on most ofthe farms visited, though onsome the housing was in a very good condition. Housing and income were iden-tified as two important needs in the area and are issues which should be placedhigh on the agenda of local authorities and development agencies. In the face ofsuch enormous development challenges, aquaculture cannot be expected tohave a significant impact, although it may bolster the livelihoods of somehouseholds.

At the informal settlement, Epukumleni, a major issue raised was that for ap-proximately eight months of every year the respondents had no work. They alsoreported a shortage of food, especially during the winter months when employ-ment is not available. The services in the area are in need of upgrading as theyare inadequate for the large number of people who live there. Again, apart fromsupplementing diets, the aquaculture development initiative can do little to ame-liorate these desperate conditions.

Other problems identified include a lack of community development andempowerment, the need for a workers' union and the shortage of health and rec-reation services in the area. The most overwhelming problem was the unfair andexploitative labour practices, characteristic ofthe apartheid era which continue toexist on farms in the area.

The aquaculture initiative must be considered in this broad developmental con-text in order to ascertain the ways in which it could contribute to meeting com-munity needs. The project's financial benefits would accrue only to those par-ticipating, and the greatest benefit to the community would be the introduction ofa relatively cheap, nutritious animal protein source. In addition, the job creationcapacity of such an initiative is not significant and other initiatives such as mu-nicipal work, tourism and construction work require investigation as potentialgenerators of employment. The aquaculture project could at best provide a pal-liative measure for some of the problems in the area, especially those of nutri-tion. But fundamental change, incorporating improved labour practices andcommunity empowerment, is what is really required- yet much more difficult to 'achieve.

7. RECOMMENDATIONS i

The pilot project and community assessment have been very instructive in indi- 'eating the various aspects ofthe project which require improvement and further •research. The following recommendations have been put forward to the man- jagement agencies to assist them with fine-tuning the aquaculture programme. I

116

Sustainable rural livelihocxb? Evaluating the potential ofsntalt-scate aquaculture

7.1 Biotechnical aspects of the project

The most significant cost item in fish production is the cost of feed, which canconstitute 50 per cent or more of the total costs of production. Research into suit-able low-cost feed and feed alternatives should be a priority (Shang, 1981). Thisis especially pertinent in terms of tilapia production, because, as Bardach et al(1972) state, where tilapia are being reared to offset protein deficiencies in hu-man diets, it is not economically feasible to use expensive feeds. In addition, byimproving the feed formula to suit the requirements of the species, one can bothreduce wastage of feed and improve the conversion ratio of feed to fish, therebyincreasing fish production and thus profitability (Coche, 1976).

Hatchery facilities for the production of tilapia fingerlings are another priority.Not only is it labour-intensive and time-consuming to obtain fingerlings in thewild, but this is also not the most reliable method, and if one does not obtain asufficient number of fingerlings, the harvest is negatively affected. Applied re-search should be undertaken into the cage structure, feed and fingerling supplyand the biological viability of other species for aquaculture production. Thoughdetailed technical aspects of increasing the productivity of aquaculture have notbeen discussed in this article, they nevertheless form an important part of themanagement of aquaculture projects.

7.2 The environmental aspects of the project

Aquaculture is often thought of as an ecologically sound activity, but as it be-comes more technologically intensive, its environmental effects become morepertinent (Pillay, 1992). In the pilot project under review, establishing the bio-physical effects of the initiative on the water quality of the irrigation dam beingused is of the utmost importance, as the water is also used to irrigate prime agri-cultural land. One of the most serious negative impacts of cage aquaculture is'the pollution of surrounding waters and the bottom with wastes' (Neal, 1984:27). The waste constitutes the feed and metabolic wastes of the fish and the dilu-tion of the wastes can be limited by restricting the circulation of'fresh' water.

Secondly, the indiscriminate release of exotic fish species could pose a problemto indigenous fish populations (Pillay, 1992), although in the Western Cape,legislation pertaining to the transportation and cultivation offish is stringent andwell controlled. As aquaculture expands, so its environmental effects will in-crease. It should be stressed that the very existence of the industry depends onthe quality of the environment, so it is essential that technologies and proceduresthat do not degrade the environment are followed if environmental sustainabilityis to be ensured (Pillay, 1992).

7.3 The economics and marketing of aquaculture products

The year-long production process, in which both a cheap protein source and ahigh market value species are produced, is a potentially effective way of balanc-

117

/V Mohamed & B Dodson

ing the motives of profit and equity. To date, however, the production of trouthas been most successful, and much research and experimentation are still re-quired to fine-tune the production of tilapia.

The pilot project under evaluation showed some promise in the reduction ofcapital input into the building of the cage structure. This requires further study,and, if found to be a feasible way of reducing costs, could serve as a model forfuture projects. In terms of marketing strategies, the evaluation of the marketingpotential of any prospective aquaculture species is of the utmost importance(Shang, 1981; Hecht & Britz, 1990). A species has commercial developmentpotential, in addition to biotechnical feasibility, if there is a high market demandfor the product and if existing marketing infrastructure and channels can bereadily exploited (Shang, 1981). Further market research is required before theeconomic feasibility of aquaculture in the region can be determined, although theresults of this survey suggest that a potential market does exist. Should this ini-tiative expand, research should be conducted into the viability of freezing thefish and making it available when most needed by the community, that is, whenwork is scarce in the Hex River Valley.

Obtaining credit at reasonable interest rates also poses a major challenge to thedevelopment of fish-farming entrepreneurs. Training in business and manage-ment skills for the farmworker is crucial, while the establishment of trust fundsfor small-scale fish farmers would aid in mustering collective bargainingpower.

7.4 Legal and institutional factors

A legal contract is essential in establishing the rights and respective roles of thepersons involved in the project. It should be clearly set out and agreed upon byall parties concerned, as the aquaculture initiative is essentially a developmentproject aimed at the cultivation of entrepreneurship. Institutional back-up shouldbe improved and the respective roles and responsibilities of the various manage-ment agencies should be clearly defined.

The development of a national aquaculture plan enabling legislation, increasedfunding and state-driven research (Hecht & Britz, 1990) could greatly assist inthe expansion of the aquaculture industry. Pillay (1976) has stated that in coun-tries where sufficient importance has been afforded to aquaculture developmentin the national economic development plans, and where investment and supportservices exist, major increases in production have occurred. In addition, as SouthAfrica increasingly establishes relations with other SADC countries an exchangeof information, technology and expertise could occur, as many countries inSouthern Africa have long-standing traditions of aquaculture development. Thiscooperation could enhance the development of aquaculture on the subcontinentand contribute to creating food security in the region.

118

Sustainable rural livelihoods? Evaluating the potential of small-scale aquacxdture

8. CONCLUSION

An important shift in the development literature has been the call for develop-ment to align itself to the concept of sustainable development. Although thisconcept is riddled with ambiguities (Redclift, 1992), it fundamentally requiresthe incorporation of environmental sustainability into development planning,policy formulation and practice. However, development projects do not switchfrom 'unsustainable to sustainable simply by altering the style of developmentplanning, the nature of consultation with affected people and the scale of proj-ects' (Adams, 1990: 198). A political commitment, dealing with the 'power vari-able' (Redclift, 1992: 34) to effect a change in human welfare, is needed.

The aim of this article has been to present the findings of an evaluation of a pilotaquaculture project and to consider the extent to which the aquaculture develop-ment initiative could contribute to the creation of sustainable rural livelihoods.Subject to the implementation of the above recommendations, the aquacultureinitiative does have a positive contribution to make. Through the creation of en-trepreneurship within rural communities, greater diversification in the ruraleconomy and increased livelihood opportunities for rural dwellers could be cre-ated. The project objective of providing a reasonably affordable and nutritiousprotein source to low-income groups still has potential. Poverty and malnutritionare closely linked to the high incidence of tuberculosis in the Western Cape, andimproved nutrition could definitely enhance the living conditions of thousands ofrural dwellers who live in abject poverty. The need for an affordable and acces-sible protein source exists, but a more detailed assessment of the viability ofaquaculture in providing this source still needs to be conducted. If alternativesources of animal protein, such as small-scale poultry production, prove to bemore viable in meeting this objective, the management agencies would have toreconsider the objectives of the aquaculture programme.

The management agencies of the aquaculture initiative have displayed a firmcommitment to the economic, biotechnical and environmental sustainability ofthe initiative. However, these aspects must be taken together with the redistribu-tive and empowering aims of sustainable development. Through the creation ofentrepreneurs, the aquaculture initiative contributes greatly to the empowermentof farmworkers, but the poor labour relations in many rural areas are not so eas-ily overcome. Such socio-economic and political issues deserve the same atten-tion as financial and technological feasibility. For sustainable rural livelihoods tobe achieved, ail the needs of rural dwellers should be recognised and acknowl-edged. Until this occurs, small-scale aquaculture projects such as that evaluatedin this article will remain little more than a palliative measure.

REFERENCES

ADAMS, WM, 1990. Green development: Environment andsustainabitity in theThird Wortd. London: Routledge.

119

N Mohamed & B Dodson

BARDACH, JE, RYTNER, JH & McLARNEY, WO, 1972. Aquaculture: Thefarming and husbandry of freshwater and marine organisms. London: John Wiley.BELL, FW & CANTERBURY, ER, 1976. Aquaculture for the developingcountries: A feasibility study. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.BROWN, LR, 1987. The promise offish farming. Dialogue, 74(4): 40-3.CHAMBERS, R, 1988. Sustainable rural livelihoods: A key strategy/or people,environment and development. In Conroy, C & Litvinoff, M (Eds), The greeningof aid. London: Earthscan.

CHAMBERS, R, 1993. Treading more carefully: Participatory rural appraisals -past, present and future. New Ground, Spring.CHAMBERS, R, 1994a. The origins and practice of participatory rural appraisal.World Development, 22 (7): 953-69.CHAMBERS, R, 1994b. Participatory rural appraisal: Challenges, potentials andparadigms. World Development, 22(10): 1437-54.COCHE, AG, 1976. A review of cage fish culture and its application in Africa.In Piliay, TVR (Ed), Advances in aquacultttre. Paper presented at the FAOTechnical Conference on Aquaculture, Kyoto, Japan, 26 May - 2 June. Surrey:Fishing News Books.CONRADIE, JJ, 1952. Geskiedenis van die Hexvallei tot 1952. Uitgegee by diegeleentheid van die Van Riebeeck-fees. Worcester: Worcester Standard ElectricPress.CROSS, D, 1991. FAO and aquaculture: Ponds and politics in Africa. TheEcologi.st, 21 (2): 73-6.DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, 1994. Aquaculture. In Department ofAgriculture (Ed), Agriculture in South Africa. Melville: Chris van RensburgPublications.HECHT, T & BRITZ, PJ, 1990. Aquaculture in South Africa. Pretoria: Aqua-culture Association of South Africa.HEX RIVER VALLEY TOURIST ASSOCIATION, n.d. Information guide.Worcester: Handy Printing Works.INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR LIVING AQUATIC RESOURCESMANAGEMENT (ICLARM), 1991. The context of small-scale integrated agri-culture: Aquaculture systems in Africa - A case study of Malawi. Manila:ICLARM.KALINGA, OJM, 1993. Early attempts at aquaculture in Malawi and implica-tions for future projects. Journal for African and Asian Studies, 28(3/4): 145-61.LOUW, JW, 1984. 'n Sosio-ekonomiese ondersoek na 'n woongebied in DeDooms, met spesiale verwysing na behuisingsprobleme. Instituut vir SosialeOntwikkeling. Bellville: Universiteit van Wes-Kaapland.MCVEIGH, S, 1995. Ganskraal - The first small-scale fish farm. Farmer'sWeekly, 12 May: 8-11.NEAL, RA, 1984. Aquaculture expansion and environmental considerations.Mazingira, July: 24-8.

120

Siislainahie rural livelihoods? Evaluating the potential of smail-scale aquacuiture

OPERATION HUNGER, 1994. Western and Northern Cape region: De Doomscommunity assessment. Cape Town: Operation Hunger.PILLAY, TVR, 1976. The state of aquaculture, 1976. In Pillay, TVR (Ed), Ad-vances in aquacitlture. Paper presented at the FAO Technical Conference onAquaculture, Kyoto, Japan, 26 May - 2 June. Surrey: Fishing News Books.PILLAY, TVR, 1992. Aquacitltitre and the environment. Oxford: Fishing NewsBooks.REDCLIFT, M, 1992. Sustainable development: Exploring the contradictions.London: Routledge.RURAL FOUNDATION, 1994. Notes on the rural enterprise aquaculture proj-ect. Stelienbosch: Rural Foundation.SAFRIEL, O & BRUTON, MN, 1984. Aquaculture in South Africa: A coopera-tive research programme. South African National Scientific Programmes ReportNo 89. Foundation for Research and Development.SALIE, K, 1996. Small farmer aquaculture programme: Procedure manttal forthe implementation and management of an aquacitlture project. Stelienbosch:Rural Foundation.SHANG, YC, 1981. Aquaculture economics: Basic concepts and methods ofanalysis. Boulder, CO: Westview.THOMAS, DHL, 1994. Socio-economic and cultural factors in aquaculture de-velopment: A case study from Nigeria. Aquaculture, 119: 329—43.TVEDTEN, I, GIRVANN, L, MAASDORP, M, POMUTI, A & VAN ROOY,G, 1994. Freshwater fisheries and fish management in Namibia: A socio-economic background study. Social Sciences Division, Multidisciplinary Re-search Centre. Windhoek: University of Namibia.WORLD BANK, 1991. Fisheries and aquacullure re.search capabilities andneeds in Africa. World Bank Technical Paper No 149, Fisheries Series. Wash-ington DC: World Bank.

Revised version submitted /Ipril 1997: accepted for publication August 1997.

121