Poster IMTA AAintegrate-imta.eu/wp-content/uploads/INTEGRATE_EAS_2019... · 2020. 5. 14. · view...
1
INTEGRATE ATLANTIC AREA IMTA DEFINITION; BEST-PRACTICES; STATUS & NEEDS Over the course of the INTEGRATE project we have held various events that have been instrumental in forming a view of Integrated Multi-Trophic Aquaculture (IMTA) in the Atlantic Area. This poster provides a summary of some of the information gained from the following events: • 4 thematic roundtables in each of 5 AA countries (UK, Ireland, France, Spain and Portugal) • An IMTA definition event with invited experts from inside and outside the AA • A questionnaire targeted to IMTA experts • A review of IMTA operations in the AA More information can be found at: www.integrate-imta.eu J RATCLIFF & B JACQUEMIN Irish Seaweed Research Group, National University of Ireland, Galway Centre d’etude et de Valorization des Algues, Pleubian, France WHAT THE DEFINITION IS: The definition of IMTA must be broad, all-encompassing, simple, and appropriate for all stakeholders. Regulators will potentially look to restrict it, so it is imperative to keep the initial definition loose and flexible. The core elements for a definition are clear, but need wording and validation: 0. AQUACULTURE = enhanced production + harvest + aquatic 1. MULTI-TROPHIC = more than two different functional groups 2. INTEGRATED = managed (controlled/semi-controlled) nutrient flux Conclusions from the event will be uploaded to the INTEGRATE website as they become available. DEFINITION STATUS BEST-PRACTICES NEEDS WHY DO WE NEED A DEFINITION? Food production needs aquaculture, and aquaculture needs to be sustainable and efficient. Therefore, the final definition should facilitate this via improved regulatory procedures and a possible eco-label. Neither a definition per se, nor IMTA eco-certification are end goals, but aim at stimulation of good practice in industry via an economic incentive. WHAT THE DEFINITION IS NOT: Presriptive - it is important not to constrain the definition too tightly and limit its use. Prescriptive formulae such as ‘IMTA must include an excretive only organism’, or ‘IMTA must include both inorganic and inorganic extractive groups’ are not appropriate. Similarly, quantification of the degree of trophic connectivity should not be specified as there should be broad scope for inclusion of all IMTA systems. What matters are not absolute values, but that IMTA farms do not compromise functionality of the ecosystems in which they are situated. THE IMTA DEFINITION EVENT IN PORTUGAL To develop the definition a questionnaire was distributed to IMTA experts in order to understand where there was conceptual agreement and where more consensus needed to be sought. In May 2019, 44 experts convened in Porto to try to achieve this. Through a series of facilitated discussions the following points emerged, amongst many others. Best-practices for mono-cultivation of many organisms exist and provide a solid basis from which to develop IMTA b-p’s. However, IMTA is a system approach to aquaculture and as such the best-practices, while incorporating the organism specific b-p’s, should aim to make the system the focus. REVIEW OF IMTA IN THE AA An exploration of AA IMTA publications led us to review 88 academic papers and grey literature reports from which an analysis of the state of IMTA in the AA was undertaken. Quantitative analysis revealed a dominance of: • Marine rather than freshwater systems • Land-based rather than sea- based systems • Fish + invertebrates or Fish + seaweeds (FR, P, IE, UK) • Seaweeds + various (SP) Illustrated in the diagrams to the right Qualitative analysis showed a strong dominance of technical questions across all 5 countries, mostly focused on remediation. This reflects the early development of the industry and the necessity to answer basic ‘how to’ questions. Countries varied strongly in the species cultivated in IMTA systems: • DATA! More data is needed in every respect. As more technical questions are answered we will be better placed to start understanding the environmental, economic and social aspects of IMTA systems. • Development of new species for integrated systems; benthic, high-value macroalgae & summer season extractives • Understanding of pathogen interactions between organisms & the potential for IMTA species to act as disease reservoirs, vectors or mitigators. • Demonstration/proof of environmental benefits via ‘standard models’ • Quantification and qualification of ecosystem services of IMTA operations and ways to captitalise on these • More at-scale economic data to facilitate financial modelling and forecasting • An eco-label to facilitate consumer recognition • Market development, especially of ‘secondary’ species – niche, local, high quality • Facilitate cooperation and cross-training across aquaculture sectors • Educate – consumers and regulators GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL SOCIAL & REGULATORY ECONOMIC TECHNICAL - Should know and optimise the degree of trophic integration - Should aim at complementarity of seasons between organisms - Should use local species and/or strains - Should aim at minimisation of pathogen / contaminant transfer ENVIRONMENTAL - Should gain enough experience to be able to define the parameters - Should address potential trophic competition with wild species - Should aim towards biodiversity enhancement - Should establish baseline data on initiation of IMTA operations SOCIAL & REGULATORY - Education! IMTA must be part of a broad discussion about sustainable aquaculture - IMTA should be specifically incorporated into regulatory texts - IMTA should be sensitive to territory and activities already in place in an area, and not do any harm to more traditional practices ECONOMIC Defining economic b-p’s was thought unnecessary at this point, as the market will determine in what way IMTA will be able to be implemented. It cannot be implemented without a solid financial base; this should be at the heart of IMTA thought and design and depends largely on technical, social and regulatory aspects. Organisms Portugal Spain France Ireland UK Fishes 11 1 5 5 3 Molluscs 2 7 4 1 Echinoderms 2 1 2 1 Crustaceans 2 2 Cnidarians 1 Worms 1 1 1 Seaweeds 8 18 4 5 3 Phytoplankton 2 Zooplankton 1 Micro-algae 1 Fresh water macro-algae 1 higher plants 1 1 1 TOTAL 25 29 23 12 10 TECHNICAL The Networking Initiative is funded by the Marine Institute under the Marine Research Programme with the support of the Irish Government.
Transcript of Poster IMTA AAintegrate-imta.eu/wp-content/uploads/INTEGRATE_EAS_2019... · 2020. 5. 14. · view...
-
INTEGRATEATLANTIC AREA IMTA
DEFINITION; BEST-PRACTICES; STATUS & NEEDS
Over the course of the INTEGRATE project we have held various events that have been instrumental in forming a view of Integrated Multi-Trophic Aquaculture (IMTA) in
the Atlantic Area. This poster provides a summary of some of the information gained from the following
events:
• 4 thematic roundtables in each of 5 AA countries (UK, Ireland, France, Spain and Portugal)
• An IMTA definition event with invited experts from inside and outside the AA
• A questionnaire targeted to IMTA experts• A review of IMTA operations in the AA
More information can be found at:www.integrate-imta.eu
J RATCLIFF & B JACQUEMINIrish Seaweed Research Group, National University of Ireland, Galway
Centre d’etude et de Valorization des Algues, Pleubian, FranceWHAT THE DEFINITION IS:
The definition of IMTA must be broad, all-encompassing, simple, and appropriate forall stakeholders. Regulators will potentially look to restrict it, so it is imperative tokeep the initial definition loose and flexible. The core elements for a definition areclear, but need wording and validation:
0. AQUACULTURE = enhanced production + harvest + aquatic1. MULTI-TROPHIC = more than two different functional groups 2. INTEGRATED = managed (controlled/semi-controlled) nutrient flux
Conclusions from the event will be uploaded to the INTEGRATE website as they become available.
DEFINITION STATUS
BEST-PRACTICES
NEEDS
WHY DO WE NEED A DEFINITION?
Food production needs aquaculture, and aquacultureneeds to be sustainable and efficient. Therefore, thefinal definition should facilitate this via improvedregulatory procedures and a possible eco-label. Neithera definition per se, nor IMTA eco-certification are endgoals, but aim at stimulation of good practice inindustry via an economic incentive.
WHAT THE DEFINITION IS NOT:
Presriptive - it is important not to constrain thedefinition too tightly and limit its use.
Prescriptive formulae such as ‘IMTA must include anexcretive only organism’, or ‘IMTA must include bothinorganic and inorganic extractive groups’ are notappropriate. Similarly, quantification of the degree oftrophic connectivity should not be specified as thereshould be broad scope for inclusion of all IMTA systems.What matters are not absolute values, but that IMTAfarms do not compromise functionality of theecosystems in which they are situated.
THE IMTA DEFINITION EVENT IN PORTUGAL
To develop the definition a questionnaire was distributedto IMTA experts in order to understand where there wasconceptual agreement and where more consensusneeded to be sought. In May 2019, 44 experts convened inPorto to try to achieve this. Through a series of facilitateddiscussions the following points emerged, amongst manyothers.
Best-practices for mono-cultivation of many organisms exist and provide a solid basis from which to develop IMTA b-p’s. However, IMTA is a system approach to aquaculture and as such the best-practices, while incorporating the organism
specific b-p’s, should aim to make the system the focus.
REVIEW OF IMTA IN THE AA
An exploration of AA IMTApublications led us to review 88academic papers and greyliterature reports from which ananalysis of the state of IMTA inthe AA was undertaken.
Quantitative analysis revealed a dominance of:
• Marine rather than freshwater systems
• Land-based rather than sea-based systems
• Fish + invertebrates orFish + seaweeds (FR, P, IE, UK)
• Seaweeds + various (SP)
Illustrated in the diagrams to the right
Qualitative analysis showed astrong dominance of technicalquestions across all 5 countries,mostly focused on remediation.This reflects the earlydevelopment of the industry andthe necessity to answer basic‘how to’ questions. Countriesvaried strongly in the speciescultivated in IMTA systems:
• DATA! More data is needed in every respect. As more technical questions are answered we will be better placed to start understanding the environmental, economic and social aspects of IMTA systems.
• Development of new species for integrated systems; benthic, high-value macroalgae & summer season extractives• Understanding of pathogen interactions between organisms & the potential for IMTA species to act as disease reservoirs, vectors
or mitigators.
• Demonstration/proof of environmental benefits via ‘standard models’• Quantification and qualification of ecosystem services of IMTA operations and ways to captitalise on these
• More at-scale economic data to facilitate financial modelling and forecasting• An eco-label to facilitate consumer recognition• Market development, especially of ‘secondary’ species – niche, local, high quality
• Facilitate cooperation and cross-training across aquaculture sectors• Educate – consumers and regulators
GENERAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
SOCIAL & REGULATORY
ECONOMIC
TECHNICAL - Should know and optimise the
degree of trophic integration - Should aim at complementarity of
seasons between organisms - Should use local species and/or
strains - Should aim at minimisation of
pathogen / contaminant transfer
ENVIRONMENTAL - Should gain enough experience to
be able to define the parameters - Should address potential trophic
competition with wild species - Should aim towards biodiversity
enhancement - Should establish baseline data on
initiation of IMTA operations
SOCIAL & REGULATORY - Education! IMTA must be part of a
broad discussion about sustainable aquaculture
- IMTA should be specifically incorporated into regulatory texts
- IMTA should be sensitive to territory and activities already in place in an area, and not do any harm to more traditional practices
ECONOMIC Defining economic b-p’s was thought unnecessary at this point, as the market will determine in what way IMTA will be able to be implemented. It cannot be implemented without a solid financial base; this should be at the heart of IMTA thought and design and depends largely on technical, social and regulatory aspects.
Organisms Portugal Spain France Ireland UK
Fishes 11 1 5 5 3Molluscs 2 7 4 1Echinoderms 2 1 2 1Crustaceans 2 2Cnidarians 1Worms 1 1 1Seaweeds 8 18 4 5 3Phytoplankton 2Zooplankton 1Micro-algae 1Fresh water macro-algae 1higher plants 1 1 1
TOTAL 25 29 23 12 10
TECHNICAL
The Networking Initiative is funded by the Marine Institute under the Marine Research Programme with the support of the Irish Government.
