The role of FAO is governed by its mandate as specified in its constitution. Briefly, it falls within the areas summarized by Seilert (2001) as follows:
a) to collect, analyse, interpret and disseminate information;Among the programmes already identified in the FAO Strategic Framework 2000-2015 and FAO Medium Term Plan for 2002-2007, none supports the role of promoting research and education. This area is specified in the first two items of the Bangkok declaration and should be proposed for inclusion in the Medium Term Plan for the subsequent years.
b) to promote research and education;
c) to promote conservation of natural resources;
d) to promote improved methods of production, processing, marketing and distribution;
e) to promote the adoption of policy, national and international frameworks; and
f) to furnish technical assistance including support for the implementation of the purposes of the organization.
In the area of improving information and the flow of communication as stated in Item 3 of the declaration, FAO has had many programmes, e.g. development of the Fishery Global Information System, Provision of Fishery Information and Statistics, Marine Fishery Resources Identification and Biodata, Global Monitoring and Strategic Analysis of Inland Fishery and Aquaculture, Resources Assessment and Management of Fishery Resources, and Global Analysis of Economic and Social Trends in Fishery and Aquaculture (Seilert, 2001).
Improvement of food security and alleviation of poverty, improvement of environmental sustainability and integration of aquaculture into rural development (Items 4-6 of the declaration) have been the main thrusts of FAO, although in departments outside Fishery. As a development organization of the United Nations, FAO has been advocating the multi-disciplinary approach to development. This is an area where the Department of Fishery could draw on the expertise from other FAO departments as may be required to implement the programmes suggested by the declaration.
Items 7-13 of the declaration are strictly about aquaculture and fishery, already addressed by the FAO Department of Fishery. The department has also been active in the improvement of food security and safety (Item 14), and the market development and trade in connection with the World Trade Organization. Under the Medium Term Plan, FAO has programmes that provide technical support to fishing technology, fish use and trade.
Through its regional office in Bangkok, FAO could support programmes that bring together the strengths of all regional organizations to support aquaculture as a key option in the use of limited natural resources for food production. Considering the commitments of all states to the Rio Declaration of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in June 1992, particularly its Agenda 21, and to the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fishery, which emerged from the May 1992 Declaration of Cancun, the Bangkok Declaration should offer them a useful tool to implement their formal commitments. In this light, the regional office could be assisted by FAO headquarters in following up the commitments as addressed at the various high-level assemblies and in coordinating with the regional office to obtain feedback on such matters from the relevant national agencies.
These international instruments (Agenda 21, FAO code of conduct and Bangkok declaration) should provide all states with a formal reference to the political commitments in order that policies and programmes could be evolved in time to fulfil the promise. As these instruments cut across various specialized sectors, fishery or aquaculture alone would not be in a position to act in isolation. The promotion of unified decision-making by Agenda 21 could guide the effective coordination at national level so that the planning and implementation of programmes addressed by these instruments could be carried out.
Fishery as a subsector of agriculture in most countries depends on water and other finite natural resources for its advancement. The sharing of natural resources makes it improper to plan fishery or aquaculture in isolation. However, the history and specific mandate of national fishery agencies should not be conducive to inter-sectoral intervention. This should be taken as a challenge for FAO.
In the promotion of commercial aquaculture, the following measures to safeguard the industry from the onslaught of other sectors in increasing competition for the common resources should be put in place.
a) The continued promotion of the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fishery through NACA and the aquaculture department of SEAFDEC should result in appropriate national policies that guide commercial aquaculture to a sustainable development path.To promote systematic human resource development, particularly to support low-input aquaculture, national public universities in member states should be encouraged to concentrate their graduate or postgraduate research on-farm. The Asian Institute of Technology in Thailand has implemented an outreach programme in Thailand, and subsequently in Cambodia and Vietnam. The programme has been successful in establishing contact between researchers and farmers in view of their mutual learning experience. In carrying out a similar programme, national public universities should use their leading edge, in terms of familiarity with the local situation of their students (some of AIT students come from overseas). This type of programme can help strengthen the extension services by creating a farmers’ network. To implement such a network, NACA could be supported by FAO. As a global agency, FAO is promoting aquaculture as a sector and as a component of rural development.b) Research in the area of cutting-edge technology should be brought under greater collaboration between the public research agencies and the private sector. This is for the reasons of cost-sharing and effective use of the new technology. Many aspects of research in commercial aquaculture are of interest to research institutions in developed countries; hence the possible collaboration. FAO could contribute to the exchange of research needs that may result in collaboration among these research institutions, perhaps through NACA.
c) The vast experience FAO has acquired through its various programmes in different parts of the world should be put to use wherever possible. The application of participatory research, community-based natural resource management and people participatory programmes requires appropriate politico-social milieus. The IDRC-assisted programme in Vietnam could be carefully studied, and its lessons drawn for replication somewhere else, in China or in Thailand for instance.
FAO should continue to play its important role in aquaculture development at the global and regional levels; however, its aquaculture development policies should be bifurcated. Commercial aquaculture is best supported by the FAO sectoral approach through its Department of Fisheries, whereas the FAO Rural Development arm would be more appropriate for the promotion of low-input aquaculture as a means of poverty alleviation.
