Site selection and carrying capacity in Mediterranean ... - FAO Sipam

66 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9
5.6 Social conflicts
In the context of selecting potential sites, it is best to gather environmental knowledge once spatial
information on possible conflicting uses has been obtained. In this sense, demands by aquaculture on
natural and social resources can be competitive, compatible or conflicting with other users (Chong,
1988). Areas can thus be narrowed down and efforts concentrated in places ‘free’ from other uses. If
aquaculture is located in public owned sites that are common property, for example, ones in use by
artisanal fishers, controversies may arise about free access through farm sites, leading to lack of
cooperation at the local level (Pillay, 1990). Thus, depending on the area where it is intended to locate
the project and the type of aquaculture proposed, the most appropriate parameters needed to achieve
technical viability can be chosen.
Socio-economical aspects must be assessed in the light of safety and security of aquaculture facilities.
Site selection should consider the potential risk of stealing and sabotage, to avoid future costs of
establishing precautions. Precautionary measures cost money to carry out. Exposure to loss from
pilferage and theft is of prime importance because without the assurance of getting an economic
return, the farm would fail. The costs of surveillance and protection show up in production costs
(Chong, 1988).
These considerations could be very important if aquaculture facilities will be located near densely
populated areas, in areas with heavy maritime traffic or in the vicinity of fishery grounds. These risks
must be considered especially if there are community concerns about the development of aquaculture
in a certain area and, therefore, it could necessitate the implementation of security against damage,
poaching and sabotage (Lawson, 1995). In any case, an additional cost of patrol and security should
be considered for avoiding vandalism or poaching. The farmer can make use of video recording, real
time cameras connected to the internet or security personnel. Therefore, in addition to the political,
legal and environmental aspects of aquaculture, it is important to get to know its culture and
traditions, as well as the ideas and images associated with its practice. An in-depth study of this kind
can help in designing the best procedure for site selection and management, with the aim of gaining
the social acceptance that will facilitate the implementation of the aquaculture project (IUCN, 2009).
Therefore, in addition to the environmental consequence of a bad farm siting (e.g. habitat destruction,
introduction of non-native species, eutrophication and benthic anoxia), a site selection process that
also considers social aspects is a crucial planning issue. An inappropriate location can favour the
abandonment of unviable enterprises because the additional operational cost due to poaching and
sabotage is unsustainable.
5.7 Infrastructural needs
Infrastructure refers to the background facilities, which are needed for the development of aquaculture
in a determined region. Operational and marketing concerns are important factors in determining the
location of an aquaculture facility, in addition to the environmental characteristics of the location. For
correct site selection assessment, one of the most important aspects to be considered is the presence of
a nearby harbour and an optimal road system, as well as other transport system to consumers (e.g.
airports). Suitable distances from ports to aquaculture facilities can be established by making a cost
analysis. The farther away a potential site for aquaculture is from a port, the more time and cost is
needed to reach the installations, and therefore the less suitable it will be.
Other important factors are cost and aspects of the facility’s construction. To avoid the coastal zone,
which is a high conflict area that places limitations and constraints on aquaculture development,
aquaculture facilities can be located at sites that are further offshore. However, cost and technical
difficulties increase with water depth and distance to the harbour, thus increasing the total cost of
construction and maintenance.
66