Science of the Total Environment 652 (2019) 851–861

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Science of the Total Environment

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/scitotenv

Review

The blue dimensions of aquaculture: A global synthesis

Nesar Ahmed ⁎, Shirley Thompson
Natural Resources Institute, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3T 2M6, Canada

H I G H L I G H T S G R A P H I C A L A B S T R A C T

• The rapid development of aquaculture

contributes to global food production.
• Increasing aquaculture has greater de-
mand for fresh, brackish, and marine
water.
• Aquaculture is concerned with a wide
range of environmental issues.
• Blue carbon emissions occur from man-
grove deforestation due to shrimp culti-
vation.
• The blue economy of aquaculture has a
potential for increasing seafood
production.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The rapid development of aquaculture has been considered the blue revolution, which is an approach to increas-
Received 13 June 2018 ing global fish production in order to contribute to human nutrition and food security. The use of blue water
Received in revised form 10 October 2018 (i.e., surface and groundwater) in aquaculture also makes a significant contribution to global fish production.
Accepted 11 October 2018
However, the blue revolution of aquaculture is associated with a wide range of environmental concerns, includ-
Available online 12 October 2018
ing habitat destruction, water pollution, eutrophication, biotic depletion, ecological effects, and disease out-
Editor: Damia Barcelo breaks. In addition, blue carbon (i.e., carbon in coastal and marine ecosystems) emissions from mangrove
deforestation due to shrimp cultivation are accumulating. To increase fish production for a growing global pop-
Keywords: ulation, aquaculture must grow sustainably while at the same time its environmental impacts must reduce sig-
Aquaculture nificantly. There is blue growth potential for increasing seafood production through the expansion of coastal
Blue revolution and marine aquaculture, which is essential for sustainable development of the blue economy.
Blue water © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Environmental concern
Blue carbon
Blue economy

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852
2. Blue revolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852

⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: nesar.ahmed@umanitoba.ca (N. Ahmed).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.10.163
0048-9697/© 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
852 N. Ahmed, S. Thompson / Science of the Total Environment 652 (2019) 851–861

3. Blue water aquaculture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 853

4. Blue frontiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 855
5. Blue carbon emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 856
6. Blue economy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 857
7. Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859

1. Introduction growth potential. This article focuses on five dimensions of global aqua-
culture (Fig. 1), particularly the blue revolution of aquaculture affecting
Aquaculture, the farming of aquatic animals (e.g., finfish, mollusks, water (e.g., surface and groundwater) use, environmental impacts,
and crustaceans) and seaweeds, is the fastest growing food production emission of sequestered carbon, and aquaculture growth potential.
sector in the world, with an average annual growth rate of 5.8% during The aim of this article is to highlight key issues for aquaculture with
the period 2000–2016 (FAO, 2018). Global aquaculture production its environmental sustainability. Finally, this paper concludes with
reached 80 million tons of food fish in 2016, of which inland aquaculture some recommendations for sustainable aquaculture production.
produced 51.4 million tons (64%) while both coastal aquaculture and
mariculture (i.e., aquaculture in marine environment) produced
2. Blue revolution
28.7 million tons (36%) (FAO, 2018). Inland, coastal, and marine aqua-
culture are mainly practiced in freshwater (b0.05 ppt salinity), brackish
Aquaculture has been practiced for millennia, having a long and rich
water (0.5–30 ppt salinity), and seawater (N30 ppt salinity) environ-
history in ancient China, Egypt, and Rome (Costa-Pierce, 2010; Smith,
ments, respectively. Globally, aquaculture occupied 18.8 million ha of
2012). Aquaculture started around 4000 years ago during the period
land in 2010, of which 12.8 million ha (68%) was inland and
2000–1000 BCE in China (Rabanal, 1988). According to Balon (2004),
6 million ha (32%) was coastal1 (Waite et al., 2014). Aquaculture is
the common carp was the first domesticated fish. However, one of the
mainly practiced in tropical and subtropical regions. Asia accounted
most ancient evidences of aquaculture was tilapia harvesting from
for 89% of global aquaculture production in 2016 and China is ranked
ponds in Egypt during 2500 BCE (Bardach et al., 1972). Around
first (61.5% of global production) among aquaculture producing coun-
500 BCE, coastal aquaculture also started in the ancient Roman civiliza-
tries, followed by India, Indonesia, Vietnam, Bangladesh, Egypt,
tion for farming fish and oysters (Basurco and Lovatelli, 2003). During
Norway, Chile, Myanmar, and Thailand (FAO, 2018). A total of 598 spe-
the period 500 BCE–500 CE, aquaculture was considered the Golden
cies were recorded for aquaculture in 2016 and the production of carp,
Age of common carp (Rabanal, 1988). According to Nash (2011), the
catfish, and tilapia with high-value fish including salmon and shrimp2
history of aquaculture are: fish seeds in antiquity (2000 BCE–500 CE),
has considerably increased (FAO, 2018).
subsistence farming through the Middle Ages (500–1450), the slow
Aquaculture has been responsible for the supply of fish for human
start of aquaculture science (1450–1900), the roots of modern aquacul-
consumption. In order to meet the demand for food from a growing
ture (1750–1880), and farming the sea (1880–1920). After World War
global population, aquaculture production must be increased to fill the
II (1939–1945), aquaculture received attention and became a commer-
gap between supply and demand with rapidly expanding global fish de-
cial practice in Asia during the 1960s (Thia-Eng, 1997). Since then,
mand and relatively stable capture fisheries. Global capture fisheries
global aquaculture has significantly developed towards diversification
production has been stagnated since the late 1980s, reached
and intensification (Table 1).
90.9 million tons in 2016, of which 79.3 million tons (87%) was from
The rapid development of aquaculture has been considered the blue
marine fisheries and 11.6 million tons (13%) was from inland fisheries
revolution (Costa-Pierce, 2002; Simpson, 2011), which refers to the sig-
(FAO, 2018). Global population is 7.6 billion in 2017 that is currently in-
nificant emergence of aquaculture as a vital and very productive agricul-
creasing by 83 million each year creating a daunting challenge of feed-
tural activity (McGinn, 1998; Movik et al., 2005). The blue revolution is
ing a growing global population, which is expected to reach 8.6 billion
the result of huge fish production that contributes to human nutrition in
by 2030 (United Nations, 2017). Because of increasing population,
similar ways to the “green revolution” (Simpson, 2011). The blue revo-
global aquaculture production is projected to reach 109 million tons in
lution of aquaculture is becoming increasingly an attractive approach to
2030, with a growth of 37% over 2016 (FAO, 2018).
enhance food production (White et al., 2004). In fact, aquaculture is in-
Although there is a high market demand for fish, growth of aquacul-
creasing food production and contributing to human nutrition and food
ture poses environmental challenges. Environmentally sustainable
security (Béné et al., 2016). Globally, fish provide about 3.2 billion peo-
aquaculture is limited by a wide range of environmental concerns
ple with 20% of their animal protein intake, and per capita fish con-
(Hall et al., 2011; Naylor et al., 2000, 2005), resulting from ecological
sumption has increased from 9 kg in 1961 to 20.3 kg in 2016 (FAO,
impacts of aquaculture inputs and resources, including land, water,
2018). Global aquaculture production (excluding aquatic plants) in-
feed, and energy (Waite et al., 2014). Thus, environmental impacts of
creased six-fold between 1990 and 2016, resulting in production by
aquaculture must be addressed for its long-term sustainable develop-
aquaculture becoming nearly equal to wild caught fisheries production.
ment. Long-term growth of the aquaculture industry needs both envi-
Compared to capture fisheries, the contribution of aquaculture to the
ronmentally sound practices and sustainable resource management
world fish production (capture and culture) has increased from 26% in
(Naylor et al., 2000). In fact, aquaculture can potentially increase resil-
2000 to 47% in 2016 (FAO, 2018). The production of intensive
ience through diversification of cultured species with efficient resource
polyculture3 in China has increased from 12–15 tons/ha/year to 30–40
use (Troell et al., 2014).
tons/ha/year (Miao and Yuan, 2007). Even, intensive monoculture of
This article reviews global aquaculture production in terms of its de-
striped catfish produces 300 tons/ha/crop in Vietnam (Phan et al.,
velopment, farming systems, environmental concerns, and further
2009).

1 3
There is no record of recent global aquaculture area. Aquaculture can be classified as monoculture (single species culture), polyculture
2
Salmon (including trout) is the most traded product among fish in terms of value (multiple species co-culture), and integrated farming with agriculture and livestock. Based
followed by shrimp (including prawns), while carp is the leading group of aquaculture fish on culture intensity and farming inputs (e.g., seed, feed, fertilizer), aquaculture can be di-
in terms of volume (FAO, 2018). vided into extensive, semi-intensive, and intensive farming.
 N. Ahmed, S. Thompson / Science of the Total Environment 652 (2019) 851–861 853

Blue Rapid development of

Revolution aquaculture

Blue Water Surface and groundwater

Aquaculture use in aquaculture

Blue
Dimensions of Blue Environmental
Aquaculture Frontiers challenges in aquaculture

Blue Carbon Mangrove deforestation

Emissions by shrimp cultivation

Blue Growth Blue economy of coastal

Potential and marine aquaculture

Fig. 1. A framework of the blue dimensions of global aquaculture.

Small-scale freshwater rural aquaculture contributes to food secu-
rity, poverty alleviation, and socioeconomic benefits in many countries
(ADB, 2005; Bondad-Reantaso and Subasinghe, 2013). Integrated
Aquaculture–Agriculture (IAA) systems including pond-dike cropping
and rice-fish culture are practiced in some Asian and African countries
for maximizing benefits from land, water, and labor to increase produc-
tivity, profitability, and sustainability (Dey et al., 2010; Nhan et al., 2007;
Prein, 2002). Open-water aquaculture including cage culture, floodplain
aquaculture, pen culture, and culture-based fisheries has significantly
developed in South and Southeast Asian countries. Biofiltration systems
including aquaponics and Recirculating Aquaculture Systems (RAS)
have become popular in recent years (Bostock et al., 2010; Edwards,
2015).
Globally, coastal aquaculture including shrimp farming expanded
rapidly in the 1980s and 1990s, mostly in the tropical and subtropical
regions of Asia and South America, driven by growing international de-
mand and high market prices (Lebel et al., 2002; Primavera, 2006).
However, coastal aquaculture including shrimp farming has been criti-
cized because of its socioeconomic and environmental impacts (Bush
et al., 2010; Pàez-Osuna, 2001; Primavera, 1997). In recent years, eco-
friendly biofloc4 shrimp farming technology with microorganisms has
been developed for maintaining water quality and reducing feed appli-
cation (Emerenciano et al., 2013).
Mariculture mainly involves high-value species, including barra-
mundi, salmon, seabass, seabream, and trout with bivalve mollusks
(e.g., clams, mussels, oysters, and scallops) and seaweeds (Bostock
et al., 2010; FAO, 2018). Commercial salmon production is significant
in Canada, Chile, Norway, and Scotland. Although mollusk and sea-
weed farming are environmentally friendly due to reducing
nutrient-pollution (Rose et al., 2015; Xiao et al., 2017), salmon aqua-
culture is often criticized for environmental impacts (Naylor et al.,
2005; Taranger et al., 2015). Nevertheless, Integrated Multi-Trophic
Aquaculture (IMTA) is environmentally friendly, which is a process
of growing finfish (fed-fish), shellfish (organic extractive species),
and seaweeds (inorganic extractive species) from different trophic
levels in an integrated farm to create balanced environment for eco-
nomic viability (Chopin et al., 2012; Troell et al., 2009). Valuing local
environmental conditions and human innovations could help IMTA
for responsible aquaculture practices in the future (Diana et al.,
2013).
4
Biofloc is a waste treatment system by removing metabolic wastes in aquaculture,
which increases water quality through balancing carbon and nitrogen.
3. Blue water aquaculture
There are two types of water utilization in food production: (1) blue
water and (2) green water (Fig. 2). Green water refers to soil water,
which is formed by rainfall and consumed by plants for biomass produc-
tion (Johansson et al., 2016; Liu and Savenije, 2008; Menzel and
Matovelle, 2010). Green water also denotes precipitation that is stored
as soil moisture (Chapagain and Hoekstra, 2011; Falkenmark and
Rockström, 2006). About 60% of rainfall turns into green water, which
does not reach a river or aquifer (Molden, 2007). Over 85% of green
water is consumed by plants in agriculture (Rost et al., 2008). Globally,
most food is produced from green water (Falkenmark and Rockström,
2006; Sulser et al., 2010), and the amount of green water utilization in
global food production is 4–5 times higher than consumptive use of
blue water (Hoff et al., 2010).
Rainfall that does not absorb the soil is blue water (Sood et al., 2014).
Blue water implies groundwater and surface runoff in lakes, ponds, and
rivers that can be withdrawn for irrigation and human utilization
(Chapagain and Hoekstra, 2011; Falkenmark and Rockström, 2006;
Hoff et al., 2010; Menzel and Matovelle, 2010; Rockström et al., 2009).
Globally, 39% of rainfall contributes to blue water of which 36% goes to
seas and oceans (Molden, 2007). Thus, water in aquifers, seas, and
oceans is also known as blue water.
Aquaculture primarily depends on blue water due to the availability
of surface and groundwater (Table 2). Access to blue water is vital for
aquaculture as a considerable amount of water is required to grow
fish. Globally, aquaculture used 201 km3 of freshwater in 2010
(Mungkung et al., 2014). Aquatic ecosystems fully depend on blue
water, which support and maintain aquaculture, aquatic biodiversity,
and fisheries (Molden, 2007; Rockström et al., 2007). Blue water in
ponds, lakes, rivers, estuaries, and seas are used for inland, coastal,
and marine aquaculture. Utilizing blue water in ponds for inland fresh-
water aquaculture is significant. Irrigation return water is also applied
for aquaculture, which is known as “Integrated Irrigation Aquaculture
(IIA)” (Halwart and van Dam, 2006). There is a substantial contribution
of IIA where fish farms have access to irrigation return water from ca-
nals and tributaries. Cage culture, floodplain aquaculture, and pen cul-
ture are also important for using blue water resources. The blue water
of Kung Krabaen Bay shrimp farms in Thailand is an example of coastal
aquaculture (Stokstad, 2010). Similarly, farming the deep blue (offshore
aquaculture) in Ireland and Kona Blue Water Farms in Hawaii are signif-
icant for mariculture (Ryan, 2004; Sims, 2013).
Growing fish in rice fields is possible due to the availability of blue
water, and there is a significant contribution to rice-fish culture by irri-
gated blue water (Halwart and van Dam, 2006). Green water also plays
854 N. Ahmed, S. Thompson / Science of the Total Environment 652 (2019) 851–861

Table 1
The rapid development of global aquaculture over the past decades.

Aquaculture system Development Reference

Traditional to modern
aquaculture
Intensive monoculture
Polyculture
Integrated
Aquaculture-Agriculture
(IAA)
Cage aquaculture
Coastal aquaculture including
shrimp farming
Mariculture: salmon, mollusk,
and seaweed farming
Integrated Multi-Trophic
Aquaculture (IMTA)
Recirculating Aquaculture
Systems (RAS)
About 30 years ago, aquaculture was traditional in Asia; most fish ponds in China were built in the 1970s and Bostock et al. (2010); Edwards
1980s; aquaculture development in Europe and North America was rapid during the 1980s–1990s; recent (2009, 2015)
rapid increase in modern aquaculture through the application of science and technology
Intensive salmon and shrimp farming have grown rapidly since 1980s; recent remarkable success of striped Beveridge and Little (2002);
catfish farming in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam; trend towards intensive monoculture of these carnivorous Bostock et al. (2010); Edwards
species remains strong (2015)
Carp polyculture considerably improved in the 1960s when Chinese major carps were introduced to Asia Edwards (2009, 2015);
and Europe; Chinese polyculture involves stocking of 6–8 carp species; modern polyculture involves high-- Woynarovich et al. (2010)
value ‘target species’ with low-value ‘service species’ for economic and environmental sustainability
There is a long practice of IAA (including rice-fish, pond-dike, livestock) in Asia; large-scale IAA farms in Edwards (2009, 2015)
China in the 1980s and 1990s; small-scale IAA are still widespread in Bangladesh, Indonesia, and Vietnam
Commercial cage aquaculture was pioneered in Norway in the 1970s; China experienced huge break- Chen et al. (2007); Edwards
throughs in the development of cage culture techniques in the 1990s; globally cage culture expanded (2015); Tacon and Halwart
rapidly after the invention of modern cages (2007)
Coastal aquaculture has been expanded and intensified since the mid-1970s; shrimp farming expanded Bostock et al. (2010); Lebel
rapidly in the 1980s and 1990s in tropical and subtropical regions of Asia and South America et al. (2002); Primavera (2006)
The salmon farming industry first initiated in Norway during the 1960s–early 1970s, and then gradually Bostock et al. (2010); Naylor
increased in the late 1970s; subsequently, salmon farming has expanded in Canada, Chile, Scotland, and the et al. (1998); Taranger et al.
USA; significant development of marine mollusks and seaweed farming since the 1990s (2015)
IMTA emerged in western countries in the late 1980s and early 1990s; IMTA has been practicing in the Bay Chopin (2011); Chopin and
of Fundy, Canada since 2001; globally IMTA operates over 40 countries on an experimental and commercial Robinson (2006)
basis
Research on RAS first conducted in Japan in the 1950s; RAS introduced in Europe in the late 1980s which Martins et al. (2010); Murray
were developed in Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, and the UK; RAS also developed in et al. (2014)
Australia, Canada, China, and the USA

Evaporation Precipitation Evaporation

(rainwater, snow, and
glacial melt)

Evapotranspiration

Blue Water Irrigation Green Water

Green Water
(surface, ground, (taken up by
(soil water)
and aquifer water) terrestrial plants)

Irrigation return water

Saturation of soils

Aquaculture, wild fish,

shellfish, and aquatic plant
(e.g., algae, rice) production

Fig. 2. Types of water with their utilization in aquaculture and other food production.

an important role in IAA as rainfed green water is suitable for rice-fish
farming. Using rainwater in low-lying rice fields of India can support
rice-fish culture (Mishra et al., 2014). Green water is also necessary
for dike cropping in pond-based IAA as terrestrial ecosystems fully de-
pend on green water (Rockström et al., 2007). The utilization of blue
and green water in integrated mangrove-shrimp cultivation is also sig-
nificant. In fact, blue water cannot be separated from green water in in-
tegrated farming as they are complementary to each other.
Aquaculture is a water-efficient farming system due to its non-
depletive and non-consumptive5 water use (Dugan et al., 2006;
5
Non-consumptive water means water is still available for other purposes.
Halwart and van Dam, 2006). However, competition for freshwater
use between agriculture and aquaculture is rapidly increasing. Irrigation
for agriculture consumes more freshwater than any other human activ-
ity (Brauman et al., 2013). Many rivers are increasingly depleted due to
using water in irrigation, and thus, cage aquaculture in many rivers is re-
stricted. Water footprints in aquaculture are also associated with water
losses through evaporation and infiltration (i.e., seepage, bottom
percolation).
The efficient use of blue water in aquaculture can reduce water uti-
lization. IAA is a water efficient farming system, which is recognized
as “more crop per drop” (Ahmed et al., 2014). Moreover, using blue
water in aquaponics and RAS are water-efficient production techniques,
which filter and clean the water for recycling back to fish tanks. The
 N. Ahmed, S. Thompson / Science of the Total Environment 652 (2019) 851–861 855

Table 2
Blue water resources and their utilization in aquaculture.

Blue water feature Blue water type Blue water resource Use in aquaculture

• Blue water is surface runoff and groundwater Closed Aquifer, ditch, tank Inland aquaculture
freshwater Pond Fish culture, pond-based IAA⁎
Rice field Rice-fish farming⁎
Lake Cage culture
• Rainfall that infiltrate the soil and reach a river or aquifer is Semi-closed Canal Raceway aquaculture
blue water fresh and brackish water Floodplain, wetland Cage, pen, and floodplain aquaculture
Mangrove swamp Shrimp farming, integrated mangrove-shrimp
culture⁎
• About 39% of rainfall contributes to blue water Open-water with fresh, brackish, and River, stream, Cage culture
seawater tributary
Estuary Cage culture, coastal aquaculture
Bay, sea Cage and net-pen culture, other forms of
mariculture
⁎ Green water is used with blue water.

further expansion of environmentally friendly coastal and marine aqua-
culture could also help release pressure on increasingly scarce freshwa-
ter resources.
4. Blue frontiers
Aquaculture is associated with a wide range of environmental con-
cerns (Fig. 3), which are known as blue frontiers, as these environmen-
tal concerns need to be addressed for its sustainable development (Hall
et al., 2011). With the widespread conversion of lands to ponds, detri-
mental environmental effects of aquaculture occur. Transforming low-
lying rice fields and wetlands to fish farms is a common practice in
many Asian countries (e.g., Bangladesh, China, and Vietnam) as
aquaculture is more productive than agriculture (Edwards, 2015).
There are irreversible habitat destructions due to the widespread con-
version of rice fields and wetlands to fish farms. In fact, rice fields and
wetlands conserve a great variety of flora and fauna, including aquatic
plants, birds, crabs, fish, frogs, mussels, snails, and turtles. Habitat alter-
ation and land use change to aquaculture negatively impacts biodiver-
sity (Diana, 2009).
The application of antibiotics, chemicals, and medicines in intensive
aquaculture can cause water pollution, leading to imbalances in aquatic
ecosystems (Hall et al., 2011). Overstocking and overfeeding fishponds
can produce high organic matter and fish waste that affect water quality
and reduce dissolved oxygen concentration through decomposition of
waste feed and fish feces. Effluent discharged from fish farms may also

Fig. 3. Environmental concerns of the rapid development of aquaculture.

856 N. Ahmed, S. Thompson / Science of the Total Environment 652 (2019) 851–861
Table 3
Statistics related to carbon budgets associated with mangroves and shrimp cultivation.
Component Quantity Reference
Global mangrove area 16.39 Hamilton and
million Casey (2016)
ha
Average blue carbon store in mangroves 858 Kauffman et al.
tons/ha (2017)
Global mangrove area lost to coastal aquaculture 1.89 Valiela et al.
including shrimp farming million (2001)
ha
Average blue carbon emissions from conversion of 554 Kauffman et al.
mangroves to shrimp farms tons/ha (2017)
Average blue carbon emissions for each kilogram of 437 kg Kauffman et al.
shrimp production on deforested mangroves (2017)
Blue carbon stock of shrimp ponds on deforested 37–282 Kauffman et al.
mangroves tons/ha (2018)
The loss of blue carbon from mangrove 58–91% Kauffman et al.
deforestation to shrimp farms (2017, 2018)
have negative effects on local water resources. Cage and net-pen aqua-
culture releases untreated nutrients and chemicals into open-water
environment, leading to severe ecological impacts. Aquaculture contrib-
utes to nutrient pollution, which is known as eutrophication. The
contribution of mariculture to eutrophication is higher than
freshwater aquaculture. Aquaculture-related marine eutrophication
was 1.4 million tons N eq. while freshwater eutrophication6 was
0.38 million tons P eq. in 2010 (Waite et al., 2014). Eutrophication
from aquaculture has adverse effects on wild fish populations through
harmful algal blooms (e.g., red tide, cyanobacterial blooms). Economic
loss from a single harmful algal bloom fish-kill event was estimated at
US$330 million in Japan (Furuya et al., 2010).
The introduction of exotic (i.e., alien or nonindigenous) fish species
in aquaculture and their frequent escape pose severe threats to accom-
panying native species, and thus, exotic fish can have negative impacts
on biodiversity and ecosystems with biological pollution and changes
in genetic diversity of natural populations (De Silva et al., 2009;
Naylor et al., 2001). The escape of farmed salmon from net-pens can
have adverse effects on wild salmon populations through competition
and interbreeding (Naylor et al., 2005; Taranger et al., 2015). Spawning
in the wild environment of escaped farmed salmon with wild salmon
has limited success as their offspring face high mortality (Ford and
Myers, 2008; Hindar et al., 2006). The escape of farmed salmon also
has potential for disease and parasite transmission to wild salmon
(Naylor et al., 2005; Taranger et al., 2015). Intensive salmon aquaculture
accelerates parasite growth and infestation in the marine environment.
Sea lice have the greatest impact on salmon aquaculture and threaten
wild salmon and trout fisheries (Torrissen et al., 2013). Sea lice parasit-
ism in salmon aquaculture damaged US$436 million to the Norwegian
industry in 2011 (Abolofia et al., 2017).
The rapid growth of aquaculture with poor water quality and pres-
ence of toxins has become a major concern of disease outbreaks. Disease
has devastated shrimp aquaculture in some Asian countries because of
environmental degradation (De Schryver et al., 2014; FAO, 2018). Dis-
ease can cause massive shrimp mortality within a week, and thus,
many shrimp farms are abandoned (Bournazel et al., 2015; Primavera,
2006). A wide variety of diseases are found in shrimp aquaculture, in-
cluding black spot, Early Mortality Syndrome (EMS), gill diseases, soft
shell, tail rot, and white spot. Massive loss of shrimp production has
been experienced due to a disease of EMS caused by vibrio bacteria
(De Schryver et al., 2014). Epizootic Ulcerative Syndrome (EUS) or red
spot disease is also a great concern in aquaculture.
Although aquaculture has been advocated as a solution to
overfishing, ironically aquaculture is one of the reasons for declining
wild fish populations. Aquaculture is often dependent on capture
6
Phosphorus (P) is the limiting factor for freshwater aquatic environment while nitro-
gen (N) is the limiting factor for marine environments.
fisheries, as salmon farming requires a significant amount of fishmeal
and fish oil from wild-caught fish (Naylor et al., 2000; Ytrestøyl et al.,
2015). One of the long continued debates in salmon aquaculture is the
use of fishmeal and fish oil as feed, which is expressed as Fish In–Fish
Out (FIFO) ratio. FIFO values for salmon aquaculture range from 2.3 to
4.9 (Jackson, 2009; Tacon and Metian, 2008), meaning that 2.3–4.9 kg
of wild fish is required to produce 1 kg of salmon. Some aquaculture op-
erations also depend on wild-caught seed, such as eels in Europe and
Japan, groupers in Southeast Asia, milkfish in Indonesia and the
Philippines, shrimp in South Asia and parts of Latin America, tunas in
South Australia, and yellowtails in Japan (Naylor et al., 2000;
Ottolenghi et al., 2004). The use of wild-caught seed for capture-based
aquaculture has severe impacts on wild fish populations due to high
levels of bycatch (Ottolenghi et al., 2004; Primavera, 2006).
Aquaculture must take an ecosystem approach to reduce environ-
mental impacts of the blue revolution (Costa-Pierce, 2002; Neori et al.,
2007). To avoid environmental hazards in aquaculture, sustainable in-
tensification with efficient use of land and water, technological develop-
ments, Better Management Practices (BMP), better site selection within
the carrying capacity of ecosystems, and an Ecosystem Approach to
Aquaculture (EAA) must be followed (Edwards, 2015). Fish producers
need to understand and comply with environmental regulations
through BMP and EAA. Attention should be paid to management inter-
ventions that could provide improved environmental performance in
aquaculture (Hall et al., 2011).
5. Blue carbon emissions
Blue carbon7 is the organic carbon sequestered, stored, and released
from coastal and marine ecosystems, including salt marshes, seagrasses,
and mangrove swamps (Nellemann et al., 2009; Siikamäki et al., 2012).
Mangroves are the most carbon-rich forests (Alongi, 2014; Pendleton
et al., 2012), which store 3–4 times more carbon than tropical upland for-
ests (Donato et al., 2011). Globally, 10.8 billion tons of blue carbon are
stored in mangrove forests (Kauffman et al., 2018). Mangroves store
blue carbon in soils, living biomass, and non-living biomass (Kauffman
et al., 2014; Mcleod et al., 2011), ranges from 269 to 1663 tons/ha, with
an average of 858 tons/ha (Kauffman et al., 2017). Although mangroves
can grow up to 40 m height (Spalding et al., 2010), over 80% of the
mangrove's blue carbon stock is in the soils (Jardine and Siikamäki, 2014).
Global mangrove area accounts for 16.39 million ha within 105 coun-
tries (Hamilton and Casey, 2016). Southeast Asia contains 33.8% of the
global mangrove forests (Thomas et al., 2017), and the top 20 mangrove
nations contain 80–85% of the global mangrove forests (Hamilton and
Casey, 2016). However, mangrove forests are one of the world's most
threatened ecosystems (Duke et al., 2007; Valiela et al., 2001). Globally,
mangroves have suffered deforestation by 30–50% over the past
50 years (Donato et al., 2011; FAO, 2007). Global annual mangrove defor-
estation rates were 0.16–0.39% during the period 2000–2012 (Hamilton
and Casey, 2016). In Southeast Asia, mangrove forests declined at an aver-
age annual rate of 0.18% during 2000–2012, which is considerably lower
than previous decline rate of 1% per annum (Richards and Friess, 2016).
Coastal aquaculture including shrimp farming is one of the key rea-
sons for the loss of mangroves (Primavera, 2006; Richards and Friess,
2016; Thomas et al., 2017). Since 1980, about 3.6 million ha of global
mangrove forests have been declined due to aquaculture, agriculture,
tourism, urbanization, and overexploitation (FAO, 2007; Valiela et al.,
2001). Among deforested mangroves, 1.89 million ha (52%) were lost
to coastal aquaculture, of which 1.4 and 0.49 million ha are attributed
to shrimp farming and other forms of aquaculture, respectively
(Valiela et al., 2001). According to Hamilton (2013), major aquaculture
producing countries accounted for as much as 54% of total mangrove
7
The types of carbon are: (1) black carbon – dust particles, (2) blue carbon – coastal and
marine ecosystems, (3) brown carbon – fossil fuels, and (4) green carbon – terrestrial eco-
systems (Nellemann et al., 2009).
 N. Ahmed, S. Thompson / Science of the Total Environment 652 (2019) 851–861
Blue carbon Mangrove
ecosystems deforestation
Salt Over
marshes exploitation
Mangrove Coastal
Blue carbon
swamps aquaculture
Seagrass Urbanization,
other reasons
meadows
Fig. 4. Blue carbon emissions from mangrove deforestation through coastal aquaculture with possible solutions.
loss during the 1980s–1990s. Unplanned and unregulated shrimp farm-
ing caused extensive damage to mangroves in Bangladesh, Brazil, China,
India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Mexico, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, the Philippines,
Thailand, and Vietnam (FAO, 2007; UNEP, 2014). Among shrimp pro-
ducing countries, Indonesia has lost 40% of its mangroves, the highest
mangrove deforestation rate (52,000 ha/year) during 1980–2005
(FAO, 2007; Murdiyarso et al., 2015).
Carbon emissions8 are greatly increasing due to devastating effects
on mangroves by coastal aquaculture including shrimp farming
(Kauffman et al., 2017; Pendleton et al., 2012). The conversion of man-
groves to shrimp farms releases considerable amounts of blue carbon
and reduces storage facilities (Table 3). On average, blue carbon emis-
sions from the conversion of mangroves to shrimp farms is
554 tons/ha (Kauffman et al., 2017). Comparatively, carbon emissions
from 1 ha of mangrove forest conversion to shrimp farm are equal to
the emissions of 5 ha of tropical evergreen forest conversion and
11.5 ha of tropical dry forest conversion (Kauffman et al., 2014). On av-
erage, blue carbon emissions from deforested mangroves for each kilo-
gram of shrimp production is 437 kg or 1603 kg of CO2e (Kauffman et al.,
2017). Blue carbon stocks of abandoned shrimp ponds in the Dominican
Republic are 95 tons/ha, about ~11% that of mangroves (Kauffman et al.,
2014). Similarly, carbon stocks of adjacent shrimp ponds in Brazil are
37–282 tons/ha, about 58–82% decline of mangrove ecosystems
(Kauffman et al., 2018). According to Kauffman et al. (2017), the above-
ground carbon stock in shrimp ponds is 91% less than untouched man-
grove forests. Soil carbon losses from deforested mangroves to shrimp
farms are equivalent to 182 years of soil carbon accumulation
(Kauffman et al., 2018). The further growth of aquaculture will increase
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from 332 million tons in 2010 to
776 million tons CO2e in 2050 (Waite et al., 2014).
Carbon emissions with other GHG, including CH4 and N2O, are the
main reason for climate change (IPCC, 2014). Reducing blue carbon emis-
sions from mangrove deforestation by shrimp cultivation is vital to tackle
anthropogenic climate change. Preventing mangrove loss and the
conservation of mangrove forests can help to reduce blue carbon emis-
sions for climate change mitigation (Duarte et al., 2013; McLeod et al.,
2011; Murdiyarso et al., 2015; Pendleton et al., 2012; Siikamäki et al.,
2012). Mangrove restoration and conservation could increase blue
carbon sequestration9 as mangroves sequester blue carbon at the rate of
1.15–1.39 tons/ha annually (Bouillon et al., 2008; Nellemann et al.,
8
Carbon emission is the release of carbon into the atmosphere, which is attached to O2
and becomes CO2. One ton of carbon becomes 3.67 tons of CO2 in the atmosphere.
9
Sequestration is the removal of atmospheric CO2 through biological (photosynthesis)
or geological (storages in underground reservoirs) processes. Carbon sequestration is the
process of increasing the carbon content of a reservoir other than the atmosphere.
857
Mangrove deforestation Blue carbon
by coastal aquaculture sequestration
Shrimp Mangrove
cultivation restoration
Blue Possible
Mollusk Mangrove
carbon solutions
farming conservation
emissions
Other types of
aquaculture REDD+
2009; Siikamäki et al., 2012). According to Alongi (2014), the global
mean carbon sequestration rate for mangroves is 1.74 tons/ha. Integrated
mangrove-shrimp cultivation can help to reduce blue carbon emissions
through mangrove restoration, which in turn sequesters blue carbon
(Ahmed et al., 2018). The “Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and
forest Degradation (REDD+)” program can also help restore mangroves,
which in turn increases options for adaptation to climate change (Donato
et al., 2011; Duarte et al., 2013). REDD+ has potential to restore the man-
grove lost to shrimp aquaculture (Ahmed and Glaser, 2016). In fact, man-
grove restoration and conservation with REDD+ could increase blue
carbon sequestration (Fig. 4). Mangrove restoration could increase resil-
ience to climate change by providing protection from coastal flooding, cy-
clones, shoreline erosion, saltwater intrusion, and tidal surges (Baird et al.,
2009; Duarte et al., 2013). Mangrove restoration and conservation could
provide climate regulation, coastal protection, biodiversity conservation,
and fisheries production (FAO, 2007; UNEP, 2014).
6. Blue economy
The concept of the blue economy came out of the Rio + 20 confer-
ence in 2012, focused on sustainable development including ocean-
based economies (UNDESA, 2014). However, the first proposal was for-
mulated by Gunter Pauli in his book entitled “the blue economy:
10 years, 100 innovations, 100 million jobs” (Pauli, 2010). The blue
economy aims to consider economic development and ocean health as
compatible propositions (World Bank and UNDESA, 2017). The blue
economy refers to the use of oceans, seas, and coastal resources for sus-
tainable economic development through ecosystem integrity (UNDESA,
2014; WWF, 2015). The blue economy is low carbon with resource effi-
ciency, which offers a wide range of opportunities for sustainable, clean,
and equitable blue growth in traditional and emerging sectors
(UNDESA, 2014). The blue economy involves the sustainable develop-
ment of aquaculture, fisheries, tourism, maritime transport, marine bio-
technology, seabed mining, and renewable energy (World Bank and
UNDESA, 2017). A sustainable marine-based economy could provide so-
cioeconomic benefits for current and future generations, by contribut-
ing to food security, livelihood opportunities, income, poverty
alleviation, health, safety, equity, and political stability (WWF, 2015).
In 2013, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
launched the blue growth initiative from oceans, seas, and coasts, which
focuses on ecosystem-based aquaculture and fisheries with efficient use
of resources, reducing carbon footprints, employment opportunities, so-
cial protection, and decent work conditions (FAO, 2018). Aquaculture
and fisheries can be vital in the transition towards a blue economy as
both are interconnected with and rely on aquatic ecosystems
(Ababouch, 2015). Aquaculture under the blue economy should
858 N. Ahmed, S. Thompson / Science of the Total Environment 652 (2019) 851–861
Sustainable
development
Adaptation to
climate change
Environmental
sustainability
Fig. 5. Potential social, economic, and environmental benefits from finfish, shellfish, and seaweed production under the blue economy of coastal and marine aquaculture.
incorporate the value of the natural capital for its sustainable develop-
ment towards food security, income, and sustainable livelihoods
(UNDESA, 2014). The value of global aquaculture production was US
$231.6 billion in 2016 with over 59.6 million people were engaged in
the primary sector of aquaculture and fisheries for their livelihoods
(FAO, 2018). About 40% of the global population lives within 100 km
of the coast (Kummu et al., 2016). The further development of the
blue economy of coastal and marine aquaculture could provide a wide
range of social, economic, and environmental benefits (Fig. 5).
Environmentally friendly coastal aquaculture could expand in Latin
America and Africa where brackish waters are rather unexploited
(Bostock et al., 2010). Environmentally sustainable mariculture could
also expand, including shellfish farming, seaweed production, and
IMTA. The implementation of IMTA could support the blue economy
in Indonesia (Sugama and Radiarta, 2014). Globally, onshore and
offshore10 mariculture potential is large. Although most mariculture is
practiced inshore, 0.3 million km of global coastline (44% of maritime
nations) are not utilized for mariculture (Kapetsky et al., 2013). Maricul-
ture is an approach to expand seafood production, which could be a pos-
sible solution to feed the growing global population (Duarte et al.,
2009). Seafood production is expected to be predominantly sourced
through mariculture by 2050 (Diana et al., 2013). Although mollusk
farming has been growing worldwide, this increase is not keeping
pace with other aquaculture. Mollusk farming was 30% of the total
food fish production in 2000, has gradually declined to 21% in 2016
(FAO, 2018). Mollusks can grow without external feed and ecological
impacts of mollusk farming are minimal. Mollusk as well as shellfish
aquaculture could reduce eutrophication by removing organic waste
and nutrients. The range of N could be removed by shellfish aquaculture
from 12 to 152 g/m2/year (Rose et al., 2015).
There is huge economic significance for the expansion of seaweed
farming due to its demand for direct and indirect human uses. Seaweed
culture is vibrant in many Asian countries (e.g., China, Indonesia, Japan,
Korea, and the Philippines), because of export potentials for food addi-
tives with medicinal and nutritional values. Global seaweed production
under aquaculture reached over 30 million tons with a value of US$11.7
10
Offshore mariculture operations could be within continental shelf zones, usually over
2 km from shore.
Food and
nutrition Sustainable
livelihoods
Blue economy
of coastal and Poverty
marine alleviation
aquaculture
Economic
Sustainable use of growth
marine resources
billion in 2016 (FAO, 2018). Environmental impacts of seaweed farming
are minimal, as they grow in a complex marine environment. Seaweed
farming could reduce eutrophication by removing nutrients. Chinese
seaweed culture removes about 75,000 tons N and 9500 tons P annually
(Xiao et al., 2017).
A combination of climatic factors, including ocean acidification, sea
level rise, and sea surface temperature could have severe impacts on
coastal and marine aquaculture. Ocean acidification has adverse impacts
on calcifying species, which affect shell formation that undermine sea-
food production (Clements and Chopin, 2017; De Silva and Soto,
2009). Fish are highly sensitive to ecological conditions and changes in
coastal and marine ecosystems due to sea level rise and sea surface tem-
perature could have adverse effects on finfish and shellfish production.
Considering the vulnerability of climate change, adaptation strategies
must be developed to cope with the challenges. Adaptation to climate
change is an essential component of a blue economy approach (World
Bank and UNDESA, 2017). Seaweed culture can contribute to climate
change mitigation and adaptation through carbon sequestration, shore-
line protection, and lowering ocean acidification, which in turn benefits
shellfish production (Duarte et al., 2017).
7. Conclusions
The blue revolution of aquaculture has increased global fish produc-
tion in order to contribute to human nutrition and food security. The use
of blue water in aquaculture also makes a significant contribution to
global fish production. Despite increasing fish production, the blue rev-
olution of aquaculture has been under intense criticism because of its
environmental impacts, including habitat destruction, water pollution,
eutrophication, biotic depletion, ecological effects, and disease out-
breaks. Globally, coastal aquaculture including shrimp farming has
also devastating effects on mangrove forests. Reduced sequestration
and increased carbon emissions from mangrove deforestation, in
order to cultivate shrimp, are contributing to increased CO2 in the atmo-
sphere. Carbon emissions along with other GHG have been significant
causes of climate change, which could have adverse impacts on future
aquaculture production.
In order to meet the demand for food from a growing global popula-
tion, aquaculture production must increase sustainably while at the
 N. Ahmed, S. Thompson / Science of the Total Environment 652 (2019) 851–861
same time its environmental impacts must reduce considerably. Pro-
ducing fish in an environmentally sustainable way is essential. EAA
with BMP must be considered for reducing environmental impacts of
the blue revolution of aquaculture. Innovative farming systems are
also required for adaptation to climate change. Integrated mangrove-
shrimp cultivation with REDD+ can help to reduce blue carbon emis-
sions through mangrove restoration and conservation for achieving cli-
mate change mitigation.
In order to grow the blue economy of coastal and marine aquacul-
ture, seafood production must be increased through the efficient use
of brackish and seawater. Environmentally friendly mollusk farming,
seaweed production, and IMTA could expand to coastal and marine en-
vironments. Coastal and marine aquaculture could increase seafood
production to meet the global demand for food, while at the same
time reducing environmental degradation. To create a sustainable blue
economy of coastal and marine aquaculture, key stakeholders including
international agencies, researchers, policymakers, government and
non-governmental organizations, and local communities must work to-
gether to achieve social, economic, and ecological benefits. Empirical re-
search is essential to understand interlinked processes for the
expansion of blue water aquaculture towards blue growth potential.
Acknowledgments
This study was supported by the Natural Resources Institute (NRI),
University of Manitoba, Canada. Different parts of this paper were pre-
sented in a number of seminars during 2016–2017 by the first author,
organized by the NRI and the Leibniz Center for Tropical Marine Re-
search (ZMT) in Bremen, Germany. We thank audience for their positive
encouragement. The views and opinions expressed herein are solely
those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of NRI or
ZMT. We thank four anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments
and suggestions.
References
Ababouch, L., 2015. Fisheries and Aquaculture in the Context of Blue Economy. United Na-
tions Economic Commission for Africa, Senegal.
Abolofia, J., Asche, F., Wilen, J.E., 2017. The cost of lice: quantifying the impacts of parasitic
sea lice on farmed salmon. Mar. Resour. Econ. 32, 329–349.
ADB, 2005. An Evaluation of Small-scale Freshwater Rural Aquaculture Development for
Poverty Reduction. Asian Development Bank, Manila.
Ahmed, N., Glaser, M., 2016. Coastal aquaculture, mangrove deforestation and blue carbon
emissions: is REDD+ a solution? Mar. Policy 66, 58–66.
Ahmed, N., Ward, J.D., Saint, C.P., 2014. Can integrated aquaculture-agriculture (IAA) pro-
duce “more crop per drop”? Food Sec. 6, 767–779.
Ahmed, N., Thompson, S., Glaser, M., 2018. Integrated mangrove-shrimp cultivation: po-
tential for blue carbon sequestration. Ambio 47, 441–452.
Alongi, D.M., 2014. Carbon cycling and storage in mangrove forests. Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci. 6,
195–219.
Baird, A.H., Bhalla, R.S., Kerr, A.M., Pelkey, N.W., Srinivas, V., 2009. Do mangroves provide
an effective barrier to storm surges? PNAS 106, E111.
Balon, E.K., 2004. About the oldest domesticates among fishes. J. Fish Biol. 65, 1–27.
Bardach, J.E., Ryther, J.H., McLarney, W.O., 1972. Aquaculture: The Farming and Hus-
bandry of Freshwater and Marine Organisms. John Wiley and Sons Inc., London.
Basurco, B., Lovatelli, A., 2003. The aquaculture situation in the Mediterranean Sea – pre-
dictions for the future. Presented at the International Conference on the Sustainable
Development of the Mediterranean and Black Sea Environment (IASON), 28 May –
1 June 2003, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Béné, C., Arthur, R., Norbury, H., Allison, E.H., Beveridge, M., Bush, S., Campling, L., Leschen,
W., et al., 2016. Contribution of fisheries and aquaculture to food security and poverty
reduction: assessing the current evidence. World Dev. 79, 177–196.
Beveridge, M.C.M., Little, D.C., 2002. The history of aquaculture in traditional societies. In:
Costa-Pierce, B.A. (Ed.), Ecological Aquaculture: The Evolution of the Blue Revolution.
Blackwell Science, Oxford, pp. 3–29.
Bondad-Reantaso, M.G., Subasinghe, R.P. (Eds.), 2013. Enhancing the Contribution of
Small-scale Aquaculture to Food Security, Poverty Alleviation and Socio-economic
Development. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Proceedings No. 13, Rome.
Bostock, J., McAndrew, B., Richards, R., Jauncey, K., Telfer, T., Lorenzen, K., Little, D., Ross, L.,
et al., 2010. Aquaculture: global status and trends. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 365,
2897–2912.
Bouillon, S., Borges, A.V., Castañeda-Moya, E., Diele, K., Dittmar, T., Duke, N.C., Kristensen,
E., Lee, S.Y., et al., 2008. Mangrove production and carbon sinks: a revision of global
budget estimates. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 22, GB2013.
859
Bournazel, J., Kumara, M.P., Jayatissa, L.P., Viergever, K., Morel, V., Huxham, M., 2015. The
impacts of shrimp farming on land-use and carbon storage around Puttalam lagoon,
Sri Lanka. Ocean Coast. Manag. 113, 18–28.
Brauman, K.A., Siebert, S., Foley, J.A., 2013. Improvements in crop water productivity in-
crease water sustainability and food security – a global analysis. Environ. Res. Lett.
8, 024030.
Bush, S.R., van Zwieten, P.A.M., Visser, L., van Dijk, H., Bosma, R., de Boer, W.F., Verdegem,
M., 2010. Scenarios for resilient shrimp aquaculture in tropical coastal areas. Ecol. Soc.
15 (2), 15.
Chapagain, A.K., Hoekstra, A.Y., 2011. The blue, green and grey water footprint of rice
from production and consumption perspectives. Ecol. Econ. 70, 749–758.
Chen, J., Guang, C., Xu, H., Chen, Z., Xu, P., Yan, X., Wang, Y., Liu, J., 2007. A review of cage
and pen aquaculture: China. In: Halwart, M., Soto, D., Arthur, J.R. (Eds.), Cage Aqua-
culture – Regional Reviews and Global Overview. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No.
498, Rome, pp. 50–68.
Chopin, T., 2011. Progression of the integrated multi-trophic aquaculture (IMTA) concept
and upscaling of IMTA systems towards commercialization. Aquacult. Eur. 36 (4), 5–12.
Chopin, T., Robinson, S., 2006. Rationale for Developing Integrated Multi-trophic Aquacul-
ture (IMTA): An Example From Canada. Fish Farmer January/February, 20–21.
Chopin, T., Cooper, J.A., Reid, G., Cross, S., Moore, C., 2012. Open-water integrated multi-
trophic aquaculture: environmental biomitigation and economic diversification of
fed aquaculture by extractive aquaculture. Rev. Aquac. 4, 209–220.
Clements, J.C., Chopin, T., 2017. Ocean acidification and marine aquaculture in North
America: potential impacts and mitigation strategies. Rev. Aquac. 9, 326–341.
Costa-Pierce, B.A., 2002. Ecological Aquaculture: The Evolution of the Blue Revolution.
Blackwell Science Ltd, Oxford.
Costa-Pierce, B.A., 2010. Sustainable ecological aquaculture systems: the need for a new
social contract for aquaculture development. Mar. Technol. Soc. J. 44, 88–112.
De Schryver, P., Defoirdt, T., Sorgeloos, P., 2014. Early mortality syndrome outbreaks: a
microbial management issue in shrimp farming? PLoS Pathog. 10 (4), e1003919.
De Silva, S.S., Soto, D., 2009. Climate change and aquaculture: potential impacts, adapta-
tion and mitigation. In: Cochrane, K., De Young, C., Soto, D., Bahri, T. (Eds.), Climate
Change Implications for Fisheries and Aquaculture: Overview of Current Scientific
Knowledge. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper No. 530, Rome,
pp. 151–212.
De Silva, S.S., Nguyen, T.T.T., Turchini, G.M., Amarasinghe, U.S., Abery, N.W., 2009. Alien
species in aquaculture and biodiversity: a paradox in food production. Ambio 38,
24–28.
Dey, M.M., Paraguas, F.J., Kambewa, P., Pemsl, D.E., 2010. The impact of integrated
aquaculture-agriculture on small-scale farms in Southern Malawi. Agric. Econ. 41,
67–79.
Diana, J.S., 2009. Aquaculture production and biodiversity conservation. Bioscience 59,
27–38.
Diana, J.S., Egna, H.S., Chopin, T., Peterson, M.S., Cao, L., Pomeroy, R., Verdegem, M., Slack,
W.T., et al., 2013. Responsible aquaculture in 2050: valuing local conditions and
human innovations will be key to success. Bioscience 63, 255–262.
Donato, D.C., Kauffman, J.B., Murdiyarso, D., Kurnianto, S., Stidham, M., Kanninen, M.,
2011. Mangroves among the most carbon-rich forests in the tropics. Nat. Geosci. 4,
293–297.
Duarte, C.M., Holmer, M., Olsen, Y., Soto, D., Marbà, N., Guiu, J., Black, K., Karakassis, I.,
2009. Will the oceans help feed humanity? Bioscience 59, 967–976.
Duarte, C.M., Losada, I.J., Hendriks, I.E., Mazarrasa, I., Marbà, N., 2013. The role of coastal
plant communities for climate change mitigation and adaptation. Nat. Clim. Chang.
3, 961–968.
Duarte, C.M., Wu, J., Xiao, X., Bruhn, A., Krause-Jensen, D., 2017. Can seaweed farming play
a role in climate change mitigation and adaptation? Front. Mar. Sci. 4, 100.
Dugan, P., Dey, M.M., Sugunan, V.V., 2006. Fisheries and water productivity in tropical
river basins: enhancing food security and livelihoods by managing water for fish.
Agric. Water Manag. 80, 262–275.
Duke, N.C., Meynecke, J.-O., Dittmann, S., Ellison, A.M., Anger, K., Berger, U., Cannicci, S.,
Diele, K., et al., 2007. A world without mangroves? Science 317, 41–42.
Edwards, P., 2009. Traditional Asian aquaculture. In: Burnell, G., Allan, G. (Eds.), New
Technologies in Aquaculture – Improving Production Efficiency, Quantity and Envi-
ronmental Management. Woodhead Publishing Limited, Oxford, pp. 1029–1063.
Edwards, P., 2015. Aquaculture environment interactions: past, present and likely future
trends. Aquaculture 447, 2–14.
Emerenciano, M., Gaxiola, G., Cuzon, G., 2013. Biofloc technology (BFT): a review for
aquaculture application and animal food industry. In: Matovic, M.D. (Ed.), Biomass
Now – Cultivation and Utilization. InTech, Rijeka, Croatia, pp. 301–328.
Falkenmark, M., Rockström, J., 2006. The new blue and green water paradigm: breaking
new ground for water resources planning and management. J. Water Resour. Plan.
Manag. 132, 129–132.
FAO, 2007. The World's Mangroves 1980–2005. Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations, Rome.
FAO, 2018. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture: Meeting the Sustainable Devel-
opment Goals. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome.
Ford, J.S., Myers, R.A., 2008. A global assessment of salmon aquaculture impacts on wild
salmonids. PLoS Biol. 6 (2), e33.
Furuya, K., Glibert, P.M., Zhou, M., Raine, R. (Eds.), 2010. Global Ecology and Oceanogra-
phy of Harmful Algal Blooms in Asia: A Regional Comparative Programme. IOC and
SCOR, Paris and Newark, Delaware.
Hall, S.J., Delaporte, A., Phillips, M.J., Beveridge, M., O'Keefe, M., 2011. Blue Frontiers: Man-
aging the Environmental Costs of Aquaculture. The WorldFish Center, Penang.
Halwart, M., van Dam, A.A. (Eds.), 2006. Integrated Irrigation and Aquaculture in West
Africa: Concepts, Practices and Potential. Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations, Rome.
860 N. Ahmed, S. Thompson / Science of the Total Environment 652 (2019) 851–861
Hamilton, S., 2013. Assessing the role of commercial aquaculture in displacing mangrove
forest. Bull. Mar. Sci. 89, 585–601.
Hamilton, S.E., Casey, D., 2016. Creation of a high spatio-temporal resolution global data-
base of continuous mangrove forest cover for the 21st century (CGMFC-21). Glob.
Ecol. Biogeogr. 25, 729–738.
Hindar, K., Fleming, I.A., McGinnity, P., Diserud, O., 2006. Genetic and ecological effects of
salmon farming on wild salmon: modelling from experimental results. ICES J. Mar.
Sci. 63, 1234–1247.
Hoff, H., Falkenmark, M., Gerten, D., Gordon, L., Karlberg, L., Rockström, J., 2010. Greening
the global water system. J. Hydrol. 384, 177–186.
IPCC, 2014. Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report – Summary for Policymakers. Inter-
governmental Panel on Climate Change, Valencia.
Jackson, A., 2009. Fish in – fish out ratios explained. Aquacult. Eur. 34 (3), 5–10.
Jardine, S.L., Siikamäki, J.V., 2014. A global predictive model of carbon in mangrove soils.
Environ. Res. Lett. 9, 104013.
Johansson, E.L., Fader, M., Seaquist, J.W., Nicholas, K.A., 2016. Green and blue water de-
mand from large-scale land acquisitions in Africa. PNAS 113, 11471–11476.
Kapetsky, J.M., Aguilar-Manjarrez, J., Jenness, J., 2013. A Global Assessment of Offshore
Mariculture Potential From a Spatial Perspective. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture
Technical Paper No. 549, Rome.
Kauffman, J.B., Heider, C., Norfolk, J., Payton, F., 2014. Carbon stocks of intact mangroves
and carbon emissions arising from their conversion in the Dominican Republic.
Ecol. Appl. 24, 518–527.
Kauffman, J.B., Arifanti, V.B., Trejo, H.H., Garcia, M.C.J., Norfolk, J., Cifuentes, M.,
Hadriyanto, D., Murdiyarso, D., 2017. The jumbo carbon footprint of a shrimp: carbon
losses from mangrove deforestation. Front. Ecol. Environ. 15, 183–188.
Kauffman, J.B., Bernardino, A.F., Ferreira, T.O., Bolton, N.W., Gomes, L.E.O., Nobrega, G.N.,
2018. Shrimp ponds lead to massive loss of soil carbon and greenhouse gas emissions
in northeastern Brazilian mangroves. Ecol. Evol. 8, 5530–5540.
Kummu, M., de Moel, H., Salvucci, G., Viviroli, D., Ward, P.J., Varis, O., 2016. Over the hills
and further away from coast: global geospatial patterns of human and environment
over the 20th–21st centuries. Environ. Res. Lett. 11, 034010.
Lebel, L., Tri, N.H., Saengnoree, A., Pasong, S., Buatama, U., Thoa le, K., 2002. Industrial
transformation and shrimp aquaculture in Thailand and Vietnam: pathways to eco-
logical, social, and economic sustainability? Ambio 31, 311–323.
Liu, J., Savenije, H.H.G., 2008. Food consumption patterns and their effect on water re-
quirement in China. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 12, 887–898.
Martins, C.I.M., Eding, E.H., Verdegem, M.C.J., Heinsbroek, L.T.N., Schneider, O., Blancheton,
J.P., et al., 2010. New developments in recirculating aquaculture systems in Europe: a
perspective on environmental sustainability. Aquac. Eng. 43, 83–93.
McGinn, A.P., 1998. Blue revolution: the promises and pitfalls of fish farming. World
Watch 11 (2), 10–19.
Mcleod, E., Chmura, G.L., Bouillon, S., Salm, R., Björk, M., Duarte, C.M., Lovelock, C.E.,
Schlesinger, W.H., et al., 2011. A blueprint for blue carbon: toward an improved un-
derstanding of the role of vegetated coastal habitats in sequestering CO2. Front.
Ecol. Environ. 9, 552–560.
Menzel, L., Matovelle, A., 2010. Current state and future development of blue water
availability and blue water demand: a view at seven case studies. J. Hydrol.
384, 245–263.
Miao, W., Yuan, X., 2007. The carp farming industry in China – an overview. In: Leung, P.S.,
Lee, C.-S., O'Bryen, P.J. (Eds.), Species and System Selection for Sustainable Aquacul-
ture. Blackwell Publishing, pp. 373–388.
Mishra, A., James, B.K., Mohanty, R.K., Anand, P.S.B., 2014. Conservation and efficient uti-
lization of rainwater in the rainfed shallow lowland paddy fields of Eastern India.
Paddy Water Environ. 12, 25–34.
Molden, D., 2007. Water for Food, Water for Life: A Comprehensive Assessment of Water
Management in Agriculture. Earthscan, London, and International Water Manage-
ment Institute, Colombo.
Movik, S., Mehta, L., Mtisi, S., Nicol, A., 2005. A “blue revolution” for African agriculture?
Int. Dev. Stud. Bull. 36 (2), 41–45.
Mungkung, R., Phillips, M., Castine, S., Beveridge, M., Chaiyawannakarn, N., Nawapakpilai,
S., Waite, R., 2014. Exploratory Analysis of Resource Demand and the Environmental
Footprint of Future Aquaculture Development Using Life Cycle Assessment.
WorldFish, Penang.
Murdiyarso, D., Purbopuspito, J., Kauffman, J.B., Warren, M.W., Sasmito, S.D., Donato,
D.C., Manuri, S., Krisnawati, H., et al., 2015. The potential of Indonesian man-
grove forests for global climate change mitigation. Nat. Clim. Chang. 5,
1089–1092.
Murray, F., Bostock, J., Fletcher, D., 2014. Review of Recirculation Aquaculture System
Technologies and Their Commercial Application. Institute of Aquaculture, University
of Stirling, Scotland.
Nash, C.E., 2011. The History of Aquaculture. Wiley-Blackwell, Iowa.
Naylor, R.L., Goldburg, R.J., Mooney, H., Beveridge, M., Clay, J., Folke, C., Kautsky, N.,
Lubchenco, J., et al., 1998. Nature's subsidies to shrimp and salmon farming. Science
282, 883–884.
Naylor, R.L., Goldburg, R.J., Primavera, J.H., Kautsky, N., Beveridge, M.C.M., Clay, J., Folke, C.,
Lubchenco, J., et al., 2000. Effect of aquaculture on world fish supplies. Nature 405,
1017–1024.
Naylor, R.L., Williams, S.L., Strong, D.R., 2001. Aquaculture – a gateway for exotic species.
Science 294, 1655–1656.
Naylor, R., Hindar, K., Fleming, I.A., Goldburg, R., Williams, S., Volpe, J., Whoriskey, F.,
Eagle, J., et al., 2005. Fugitive salmon: assessing the risks of escaped fish from net-
pen aquaculture. Bioscience 55, 427–437.
Nellemann, C., Corcoran, E., Duarte, C.M., Valdés, L., De Young, C., Fonseca, L., Grimsditch,
G. (Eds.), 2009. Blue Carbon: The Role of Healthy Oceans in Binding Carbon. GRID-
Arendal, United Nations Environment Programme.
Neori, A., Troell, M., Chopin, T., Yarish, C., Critchley, A., Buschmann, A.H., 2007. The need
for a balanced ecosystem approach to blue revolution aquaculture. Environ. Sci. Pol.
Sustain. Dev. 49 (3), 36–43.
Nhan, D.K., Phong, L.T., Verdegem, M.J.C., Duong, L.T., Bosma, R.H., Little, D.C., 2007. Inte-
grated freshwater aquaculture, crop and livestock production in the Mekong delta,
Vietnam: determinants and the role of the pond. Agric. Syst. 94, 445–458.
Ottolenghi, F., Silvestri, C., Giordano, P., Lovatelli, A., New, M.B., 2004. Capture-based
Aquaculture: The Fattening of Eels, Groupers, Tunas and Yellowtails. Food and Agri-
culture Organization of the United Nations, Rome.
Pàez-Osuna, F., 2001. The environmental impact of shrimp aquaculture: causes, effects,
and mitigating alternatives. Environ. Manag. 28, 131–140.
Pauli, G., 2010. The Blue Economy: 10 Years, 100 Innovations, 100 Million Jobs. Paradigm
Publications, New Mexico.
Pendleton, L., Donato, D.C., Murray, B.C., Crooks, S., Jenkins, W.A., Sifleet, S., Craft, C.,
Fourqurean, J.W., et al., 2012. Estimating global “blue carbon” emissions from conver-
sion and degradation of vegetated coastal ecosystems. PLoS One 7 (9), e43542.
Phan, L.T., Bui, T.M., Nguyen, T.T.T., Gooley, G.J., Ingram, B.A., Nguyen, H.V., Nguyen, P.T.,
De Silva, S.S., 2009. Current status of farming practices of striped catfish,
Pangasianodon hypophthalmus in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam. Aquaculture 296,
227–236.
Prein, M., 2002. Integration of aquaculture into crop-animal systems in Asia. Agric. Syst.
71, 127–146.
Primavera, J.H., 1997. Socio-economic impacts of shrimp culture. Aquac. Res. 28, 815–827.
Primavera, J.H., 2006. Overcoming the impacts of aquaculture on the coastal zone. Ocean
Coast. Manag. 49, 531–545.
Rabanal, H.R., 1988. History of Aquaculture. ASEAN/UNDP/FAO Regional Small-Scale
Coastal Fisheries Development Project, Manila.
Richards, D.R., Friess, D.A., 2016. Rates and drivers of mangrove deforestation in Southeast
Asia, 2000–2012. PNAS 113, 344–349.
Rockström, J., Lannerstad, M., Falkenmark, M., 2007. Assessing the water challenge of a
new green revolution in developing countries. PNAS 104, 6253–6260.
Rockström, J., Falkenmark, M., Karlberg, L., Hoff, H., Rost, S., Gerten, D., 2009. Future water
availability for global food production: the potential of green water for increasing re-
silience to global change. Water Resour. Res. 45, W00A12.
Rose, J.M., Bricker, S.B., Ferreira, J.G., 2015. Comparative analysis of modeled nitrogen re-
moval by shellfish farms. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 91, 185–190.
Rost, S., Gerten, D., Bondeau, A., Lucht, W., Rohwer, J., Schaphoff, S., 2008. Agricultural
green and blue water consumption and its influence on the global water system.
Water Resour. Res. 44, W09450.
Ryan, J., 2004. Farming the Deep Blue. A Report Prepared by Bord Iascaigh Mhara-Irish Sea
Fisheries Board and Irish Marine Institute, Limerick, Ireland.
Siikamäki, J., Sanchirico, J.N., Jardine, S., McLaughlin, D., Morris, D.F., 2012. Blue Carbon:
Global Options for Reducing Emissions from the Degradation and Development of
Coastal Ecosystems. Resources for the Future, Washington DC.
Simpson, S., 2011. The blue food revolution: making aquaculture a sustainable food
source. Scientific American February, pp. 54–61.
Sims, N.A., 2013. Kona Blue Water Farms case study: permiting, operations, marketing,
environmental impacts, and impediments to expansion of global open ocean mari-
culture. In: Lovatelli, A., Aguilar-Manjarrez, J., Soto, D. (Eds.), Expanding Mariculture
Further Offshore: Technical, Environmental, Spatial and Governance Challenges.
FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Proceedings No. 24, Rome, pp. 263–296.
Smith, T., 2012. Greening the Blue Revolution: How History Can Inform a Sustainable
Aquaculture Movement. Harvard Law School, University of Harvard, Boston.
Sood, A., Prathapar, S.A., Smakhtin, V., 2014. Green and blue water. In: Lautze, J. (Ed.), Key
Concepts in Water Resource Management: A Review and Critical Evaluation.
Routledge – Earthscan, UK, pp. 91–102.
Spalding, M., Kainuma, M., Collins, L., 2010. World Atlas of Mangroves. Earthscan, London.
Stokstad, E., 2010. Down on the shrimp farm: can shrimp become the new chicken of the
sea without damaging the ocean? Science 328, 1504–1505.
Sugama, K., Radiarta, N., 2014. Application of IMTA to Support Blue Economy Program in
Indonesia. Paper Presented at the 2nd International Symposium on Innovation and
Cooperation for Blue Growth, 12–16 October 2014, Brest, France.
Sulser, T.B., Ringler, C., Zhu, T., Msangi, S., Bryan, E., Rosegrant, M.W., 2010. Green and blue
water accounting in the Ganges and Nile basins: implications for food and agricul-
tural policy. J. Hydrol. 384, 276–291.
Tacon, A.G.J., Halwart, M., 2007. Cage aquaculture: a global review. In: Halwart, M., Soto,
D., Arthur, J.R. (Eds.), Cage Aquaculture – Regional Reviews and Global Overview. FAO
Fisheries Technical Paper No. 498, Rome, pp. 1–6.
Tacon, A.G.J., Metian, M., 2008. Global overview on the use of fish meal and fish oil in in-
dustrially compounded aquafeeds: trends and future prospects. Aquaculture 285,
146–158.
Taranger, G.L., Karlsen, Ø., Bannister, R.J., Glover, K.A., Husa, V., Karlsbakk, E., Kvamme,
B.O., Boxaspen, K.K., et al., 2015. Risk assessment of the environmental impact of Nor-
wegian Atlantic salmon farming. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 72, 997–1021.
Thia-Eng, C., 1997. Sustainable aquaculture and integrated coastal management. In:
Bardach, J.E. (Ed.), Sustainable Aquaculture. John Wiley and Sons, New York,
pp. 177–200.
Thomas, N., Lucas, R., Bunting, P., Hardy, A., Rosenqvist, A., Simard, M., 2017. Distribution
and drivers of global mangrove forest change, 1996–2010. PLoS One 12 (6),
e0179302.
Torrissen, O., Jones, S., Asche, F., Guttormsen, A., Skilbrei, O.T., Nilsen, F., Horsberg, T.E.,
Jackson, D., 2013. Salmon lice – impact on wild salmonids and salmon aquaculture.
J. Fish Dis. 36, 171–194.
Troell, M., Joyce, A., Chopin, T., Neori, A., Buschmann, A.H., Fang, J.-G., 2009. Ecological en-
gineering in aquaculture – potential for integrated multi-trophic aquaculture (IMTA)
in marine offshore systems. Aquaculture 297, 1–9.
 N. Ahmed, S. Thompson / Science of the Total Environment 652 (2019) 851–861
Troell, M., Naylor, R.L., Metian, M., Beveridge, M., Tyedmers, P.H., Folke, C., Arrow, K.J.,
Barrett, S., et al., 2014. Does aquaculture add resilience to the global food system?
PNAS 111, 13257–13263.
UNDESA, 2014. Blue Economy Concept Paper. United Nations Department of Economic
and Social Affairs, New York.
UNEP, 2014. The Importance of Mangroves to People: A Call to Action. UNEP World Con-
servation Monitoring Centre, Cambridge.
United Nations, 2017. World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision, Key Findings and
Advance Tables. Population Division, United Nations, New York.
Valiela, I., Bowen, J.L., York, J.K., 2001. Mangrove forests: one of the World's threatened
major tropical environments. Bioscience 51, 807–815.
Waite, R., Beveridge, M., Brummett, R., Castine, S., Chaiyawannakarn, N., Kaushik, S.,
Mungkung, R., Nawapakpilai, S., et al., 2014. Improving Productivity and Environ-
mental Performance of Aquaculture. World Resources Institute, Washington DC.
White, K., O'Neill, B., Tzankova, Z., 2004. At a Crossroads: Will Aquaculture Fulfil the
Promise of the Blue Revolution? A SeaWeb Aquaculture Clearinghouse Report, USA.
861
World Bank and UNDESA, 2017. The Potential of the Blue Economy: Increasing Long-term
Benefits of the Sustainable Use of Marine Resources for Small Island Developing
States and Coastal Least Developed Countries. United Nations Department of Eco-
nomic and Social Affairs, and World Bank, Washington DC.
Woynarovich, A., Moth-Poulsen, T., Péteri, A., 2010. Carp Polyculture in Central and East-
ern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia: A Manual. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture
Technical Paper No. 554. FAO, Rome.
WWF, 2015. Principles for a Sustainable Blue Economy. World Wide Fund for Nature,
Gland.
Xiao, X., Agusti, S., Lin, F., Li, K., Pan, Y., Yu, Y., Zheng, Y., Wu, J., et al., 2017. Nutrient re-
moval from Chinese coastal waters by large-scale seaweed aquaculture. Sci. Rep. 7,
46613.
Ytrestøyl, T., Aas, T.S., Åsgård, T., 2015. Utilisation of feed resources in production of Atlan-
tic salmon (Salmo salar) in Norway. Aquaculture 448, 365–374.