At the invitation of the Government of Lesotho the Technical Consultation on Aquaculture and Human Nutrition was held at the Sun International Cabanas, Maseru, from 5 to 8 June 1989. Funding was provided by the FAO/Norway interregional project: Strengthening the Role of Fish and Fisheries in the Alleviation of Undernutrition (GCP/INT/467/NOR), and the organization was undertaken by the FAO/SIDA Regional Programme of Aquaculture for Local Community Development (ALCOM). The SADCC countries, participants in the ALCOM project, were invited to nominate an aquaculturist and a nutritionist to participate in the Consultation and almost all the countries were represented. A list of participants is attached as Annex 1.
Mr Mokholane, Chief Fish Production Officer, Dept. of Agriculture, Fisheries Section, took the Chair and invited Mr Ntokoane, Principal Secretary of the Ministry of Agriculture, to open the meeting. In his address of welcome to the mountain Kingdom of Lesotho, Mr Ntokoane observed that the country's fisheries sector had not yet been developed and that fish was not widely consumed. However, there was considerable potential for aquaculture in natural waters and erosion control dams, as well as in the projected highlands dam. Mr Ntokoane expressed the wish that the discussions during the Consultation would improve the nutritional and economic well-being of the people of the SADCC countries and wished all participants a fruitful exchange of ideas and a pleasant stay in Lesotho.
On behalf of the Dirctor General of FAO, Mr David James, Senior Fishery Industry Officer, Fisheries Department, thanked the Government and thanked the Principal Secretary for his welcoming address. In his opening remarks to the participants, Mr James observed that this was the first occasion that fisheries and nutrition experts had come together to discuss how the nutritional situation of the poor could be improved by joint action. In pointing out that the participants were from a very wide range of technical and geographic backgrounds, he noted that FAO and ALCOM were looking forward to learning from the contributions and discussions on how to strengthen the links between aquaculture and human nutrition. As funding was now available for action in this field he pointed out that it was important to formulate proposals for action and promised to follow-up on fruitful ideas.
Mr Arne Andreasson, ALCOM Programme Manager, in the role of Moderator informed the Consultation that the main purpose was to share experiences in the SADCC region in order to investigate and promote the role of aquaculture in alleviation of undernutrition and more specifically to:
increase awareness of the possibilities for aquaculture to improve human nutrition.
make recommendations on the design of projects, and selection of activities to stimulate the role of aquaculture in improving the food and nutrition situation.
consider what arrangements could be made at a national level to promote cooperative efforts between Government authorities working with aquaculture and human nutrition.
recommend a mechanism for future regional cooperation and exchange of experiences and information.
Mr James reviewed FAO's fisheries programme as it related to nutrition, as a follow-up to the 1984 FAO World Fisheries Conference. This Conference adopted a management and development strategy, implemented through five action programmes. Two of these, Aquaculture Development and Promotion of the Role of Fisheries in the Alleviation of Undernutrition, are of direct relevance to the Consultation. As a result of the 1984 World Conference, the Government of Norway has provided funds to FAO for an interregional project linking fisheries and nutrition to find answers to the question: How can fisheries be managed and developed to be more effective in alleviating undernutrition?
The FAO approach considers both the direct value of fish as food and the indirect value of the earnings from fisheries in improving the diet. Under the project priority attention will be given to poor women and children in fishing and rural communities who are often in danger of being further marginalized by a process of development. Activities in support of the project will not be restricted to fisheries and are expected to include issues relating to empowerment of the community, technology transfer, environmental health and sanitation measures and improvement in the processing, storage, distribution and marketing of fish. The range of disciplines involved in implementing the project will be wide, including the social and technical. Ideas generated by the Consultation can be taken up and executed within the framework of the project.
Mr Brian Thompson, Nutrition Officer, FAO Food Policy and Nutrition Division, introduced the topic of nutrition improvement as an explicit objective of aquaculture projects by reference to the FAO methodology for assisting planners to incorporate nutrition objectives in agricultural and rural development projects. Development planners are encouraged to take nutrition into account at every stage of the project cycle to ensure that projects are not detrimental to nutrition and, if possible, should provide opportunities for nutritional improvement.
In the planning of projects the following key questions must be answered:
What is the extent of malnutrition?
Who is malnourished, for which nutrients?
What is the cause of malnutrition and the trends in its incidence?
What action is being taken by Government or other interventions?
The possible nutritional impact of aquaculture on the community should be considered in the light of the answers to the above questions which would determine what strategies could be adopted to maximize the nutritional benefits of aquaculture for the poor and nutritionally at risk. It is unlikely that sustained improvement in the nutrition of the community would be an automatic outcome of an aquaculture project, but rather should be deliberately planned in at the design stage. There is always a danger of relying on averages of food availability as these often conceal inequalities resulting in nutritional problems for specific population groups. The ranking of needs and identification of groups for priority assistance could be decided after analysis of the food and nutrition information that would ideally be collected as part of an in-built monitoring and evaluation system. It is most important that this evaluation, including monitoring of the nutritional impact of development projects, together with the necessary institutional arrangements, be incorporated in the design of the project.
Mr Arne Andreasson provided the ALCOM perspective on aquaculture and human nutrition. ALCOM's objective is to develop, test and demonstrate methods and techniques by which rural people can improve their standard of living through aquaculture. Income and household food security are two of the basic elements of the standard of living. Thus, the concept of ALCOM includes consideration of the potential of aquaculture to achieve a nutritional objective. ALCOM is involved in investigations and testing. Investigations in Zambia have led to the framework for a snap-shot survey to determine the nutritional status of communities with a potential for involvement in aquaculture. From this information, which should show seasonal or geographic stress, it should be possible to determine where small-scale aquaculture could contribute most. As a result of this initiative a national committee to coordinate aquaculture and human nutrition activities has been set up in Zambia.
ALCOM looks for a gradually increased understanding of the ways in which small-scale rural aquaculture can contribute to human nutrition. In its next phase ALCOM will take nutrition into account in fish farmer surveys and investigate whether intermittent harvesting of fish ponds can make a more relevant contribution to household food security than total harvesting. The incorporation of nutritional objectives, where relevant, should be backed by means of monitoring the impact, but more work is needed on initial surveys and monitoring practices. Those suggested at present as being necessary to verify the nutritional impact of an aquaculture project may be too sophisticated. A question was raised as to whether an aquaculture project should adopt a monitoring system to verify nutritional impact or be restricted to monitoring production and distribution of the produce of aquaculture.
Participants combined country statements for each country, indicating the nutritional situation and the capacity for aquaculture development. They also covered fish consumption habits.
The country statements are summarized in Annex 2.
Mr Asbjorn Tandberg introduced for discussion a draft of a manual he had prepared under an FAO André Mayer Fellowship at the Institute of Nutrition Research, University of Oslo. The manual entitled “Household food security in development efforts focusing on fisheries” sets out to show how fishery projects can benefit as a result of including nutritional considerations. The manual emphasizes that introducing nutrition considerations into development projects focusing on fisheries does not mean a shift in the focus of the project from fisheries to nutrition. But malnutrition has negative consequences on people's health, activities, learning capacity and general well-being, hence affecting fisheries project activities as well as achievements. Besides, with the ultimate goal of all development efforts being human well-being and quality of life, it should be a responsibility for development efforts focusing on fisheries to make sure that they are contributing to the improvement, or at least not to the deterioration, of the nutrition situation of deprived population groups.
There are two obvious arguments why fisheries development can be instrumental in alleviating nutritional problems:
the value of fish as food;
the value of fish as a source of income to buy food.
It is fallacious to believe that increased fish production, improvements in fishing technology, development of fish processing techniques, etc., will automatically entail improvements in the nutrition situation among the disadvantaged. Research and experience show no such clearcut relationship. On the contrary, without special efforts to ensure equity, benefits have a tendency to accrue to groups or segments of the society that are more privileged (in relative terms).
Furthermore, a high consumption of fish is in itself no guarantee or indicator of nutritional well-being. Fish as food will therefore have to be considered within the context of a total diet.
In addition to the more obvious links between fisheries and nutrition, it should be kept in mind that any development effort, also within the fisheries sector, will potentially (either directly or indirectly) have an effect on the food and nutrition situation of the population involved. This effect can be positive, but it may well also be negative, and different groups of the population may be affected differently by the same project activities. And the only way to know what the effects may be is to include nutritional concerns in project planning, implementation and evaluation.
The purpose of the manual that has been prepared is to try and find answers by following a set of conceptual guidelines.
Ms Freda Luhila, Nutritionist, National Food and Nutrition Commission (NFNC), Zambia, briefed the Consultation on the experience in Zambia following the formation of a National Committee on Aquaculture and Human Nutrition. Following earlier FAO initiatives, two consultant nutritionists visited Zambia in 1988 under the ALCOM project. During their mission the NFNC invited relevant Government authorities for discussion. At the meeting it was decided to establish a National Committee on Aquaculture and Human Nutrition. The Committee has the following membership:
Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives
Department of Fisheries
Home Economics
Planning Division
Adaptive Research Planning Team (ARPT)
Ministry of Labour and Social Service
Ministry of Health
Village Industry Services
National Commission for Development Planning (NCDP)
National Food and Nutrition Commission (NFNC)
ALCOM.
To date terms of reference and a list of activities have been established and public awareness of the links between aquaculture and nutrition has been raised through radio programmes. It was decided to give further consideration to the terms of reference in a small working group.
Weaning and infant feeding are a main nutritional concern. The Consultation discussed both an increase in the use of fish for infant feeding and the provision of a diet with a higher nutrient density. It was recognized that fish can be a useful component of infant diets but its use is constrained by food habits. Subject to avoiding problems with bones, it was concluded that attempts should be made to increase fish consumption by the young. Fish consumption by young children in Africa had been documented in a review prepared for the Consultation by D.G. Dako: The use of fish and fish products as food for infants and young children in Africa. The consultation was of the opinion that this should be expanded. The use of germination and fermentation technologies to increase nutrient density are promising and further study of existing practices and research on new processes are required. In general, the search should be for safe labour-saving processing techniques suitable for use at the village level.
Following the presentations and general discussions of the Consultation, the participants divided into three working groups to allow concentrated discussion, based on experience, in order to recommend follow-up activities. The working groups presented their deliberations to a plenary session and edited reports are set out below.
The three topics selected for discussion in working groups were:
A model to analyse the potential and limitations of aquaculture in human nutrition.
Activities to further investigate and promote aquaculture as a contribution to human nutrition.
Means of coordination at national and regional levels.
(i) The working group prepared the outline of a model to analyse the potentials and limitations of aquaculture in contributing to household food security in disadvantaged communities.
(ii) The model is aimed at planners at all levels, who should take action when nutritional problems are brought to their attention as a result of an initiative taken locally, nationally or regionally.
(iii) The initial step is to select communities for priority attention based on nutritional, health, socio-economic and other relevant indicators. For example:
Much of the information needed would already be available through relevant institutions/services. Particular surveys are not anticipated.
After the initial step is complete the model is to be applied at the community level, since many of the decisions that determine aquaculture's potential contribution to household food security are made at this level. For one reason or another some communities are faced with greater nutritional problems than others, or are more vulnerable to nutritional problems by being more socio-economically disadvantaged.
(iv) Starting with one of the communities selected above, a process of collaboration based on awareness of the problem should be initiated. The first step is to identify and prioritize nutritionally related stresses and their probable causes. These will be at different levels of the food chain and may be related to particular groups or households within the community in question. This should be a participatory exercise where the more disadvantaged groups are also included in the dialogue.
Simplified example:
| Nutritional problem identified | Causes relating to specific types of households | |
| x% of children 6–18 months “wasted” (very thin) during ploughing season | Children do not get enough weaning food, or the food is of low “quality”: | |
| - | single mother, too busy to feed child properly; | |
| - | poor families, little cash during ploughing season; | |
| - | low educational level, families with poor knowledge of infant feeding. | |
(v) In search of possible solutions to identified problems a team representing relevant sectors such as aquaculture/fisheries, district development committee, agriculture, animal husbandry and/or others, should discuss possible solutions to priority problems with the community. In the case where this may be difficult (e.g. due to lack of funds/possibilities for further involvement from any sector, lack of collaboration/coordination of this task between sectors, etc.), the aquaculture/fisheries sector should at least have financial and other backing to pursue the task. If not, the model is not applicable at this time to aquaculture.
The potential for aquaculture activities (and other relevant innovations?) in the area should be assessed at this point (if not done before) through contacts with relevant expertise at the proper administrative level.
The assessment of aquaculture potential would include the following elements:
Demonstration of the feasibility of different aquaculture systems from a technical standpoint as well as in relation to the availability of backstopping and relevant inputs.
Viability (sustainability) in terms of regular inputs and a minimum extension service.
Political acceptability.
(vi) The next step is to compare the advantages and disadvantages, or the potentials and limitations, of various feasible solutions. This involves seeking the views of outside experts (nutrition/aquaculture) and insiders from the community (farmers, etc.). Some potential advantages of aquaculture from a nutritional point of view are:
Fish either as food or income can be made available when nutrition situation requires supplementation.
Fish can be fed with crop residues when available.
Can use poor soils not productive for other food growing purposes.
Possible alternative to animal husbandry where tsetse flies are a problem.
Manpower can be adjusted to periods when there are no other activities.
May use resources that otherwise would be wasted (fertilizer, crop residues, compost, etc.).
Possible synergistic effect of integrated fish-agriculture-animal husbandry system.
Flexible use of ponds, e.g. draining after some time - fish manure; pond as vegetable garden.
Not necessarily labour intensive.
(vii) If aquaculture is a relevant activity, judged and selected by some groups/households in the nutritionally or otherwise deprived community as an activity that could contribute to solving their priority quality of life problems, the potential contribution of the fish/income benefits of aquaculture to their food access or food consumption could be assessed through the following approaches:
Assess the present access to food/food consumption of the households and individuals involved. Results may show that some of them are deficient in energy, protein and/or other nutrients, at least at certain times of the year. If not, their food access/consumption could be monitored for possible negative effects related to adoption of aquaculture.
If relevant, identify the degree of deficiency of access/consumption for relevant households/individuals. Example: some infants may get only 60% of their required need for energy, 70% of the need for protein and 10% of the need for vitamin × covered.
Identify to what extent the deficient diet can be improved directly by fish and indirectly by purchasing other foods.
Identify the types of food, that put together, would satisfy the requirements of these households/individuals, based on existing habits and available food items. (If not possible with available foods, see to what extent the requirements could be met.)
(viii) Evaluation of effects of aquaculture that has been initiated and monitoring of the nutrition situation must be an ongoing process.
Since many households may not be included in the activities undertaken, monitoring of nutritional aspects should be carried out in order to see if the gap between aquaculture farmer's households and other households is increasing or decreasing.
(ix) The working group suggested follow-up action to test the model through existing or new mechanisms to coordinate nutrition and aquaculture. It also noted that the approach could be used to initiate collaboration between representatives of different ministries down to the provincial or district planning level.
The group defined its terms of reference as follows:
Identify nutritionally vulnerable groups that could benefit from aquaculture.
Outline aquaculture and nutrition inputs which would be relevant to the various groups.
Establish priorities for action.
Suggest interventions.
Identification
While nutritionists, in general, target the poorest and most vulnerable in the community, aquaculturists cannot at present fit action to this group and can therefore only respond by suggesting research and further investigations. Assuming that initially joint aquaculture and nutrition activities would concentrate on those with a minimum resource, the following groups were identified:
A community that has access to fish in natural waters, dams, etc., but probably does not own land and therefore has to earn cash income, or provide labour, to obtain staples.
Small holders with land and access to water but who do not produce sufficiently to feed their families. They therefore require off-farm inputs to survive but if encouraged into aquaculture could only use on-farm resources.
A range of small holders stretching from those engaged in subsistence agriculture to those who may produce considerable surpluses for sale. They can be referred to as emergent farmers who live from on-farm inputs but could purchase off-farm resources for aquaculture.
Large-scale commercial farms and estates producing for the commercial market.
A group of workers, presumably urban, who have entered the cash economy and have little access to natural resources.
Aquaculture and nutrition inputs
Group 1
Aquaculture
This group is likely to receive more benefit from enhancement of natural waters than from pond construction. They would therefore require seeding of these waters and the design and implementation of management systems that would maximize production. These could include leases, specific rights to pens or brush parks, etc. Improved technology for capture fisheries would also be required.
Nutrition
The group, which may or may not be familiar with fish as food, would require promotion of fish consumption and demonstration of ways of cooking and presentation. They would also require nutrition education. The process of enhancement of production should be accompanied by monitoring and evaluation of the impact on the community. Assuming that production increased beyond local demand assistance with preservation and marketing would be required.
Group 2
Aquaculture
This group should ultimately benefit the most by being involved in an integrated farming system involving agriculture and aquaculture. In order to engage in aquaculture they require the creation of a pond and provision of seed. Aquaculture information and assistance would be required - probably by training of agriculture extension workers.
At an early stage of development in any location an evaluation of aquaculture production against other potential food or income generating activities should be made jointly by aquaculturists and nutritionists. For this group, however, production would be limited to use of on-farm resources.
Nutrition
If unfamiliar with fish this group would require inputs for promotion of consumption and demonstation of preparation. Nutritional evaluation should indicate whether they should be encouraged to eat or to sell their production; monitoring and evaluation of the nutritional impact should be continuous.
Group 3
Aquaculture
A continuation of the activities for Group 2 but extending to provide access to credit and the use of off-farm inputs to increase fish production.
Nutrition
Nutrition education and monitoring of the impact of aquaculture, coupled with assistance for marketing.
Group 4
This group could make a substantial contribution to nutrition through fish production. With regard to aquaculture the group collectively has access to commercially available technology. Targetting the nutritional benefits of the production is an area worthy of study.
Group 5
As the group is without assets it cannot be assisted by the conventional aquaculture technology that would be applied to the other groups. Backyard aquaculture could conceivably assist in the long term.
Priority
Groups 1 to 3 are seen as having the highest priority. Within the spectrum it is most feasible to concentrate, at the outset, on these farmers on the borderline of Groups 2–3, i.e. those who produce enough to feed their families and have the initiative to take up new technology.
Activities
Nutritionists and aquaculturists should work hand in hand along the following lines:
Based on land capability studies to indicate areas of aquaculture potential the nutritionists should create an overlay by the use of available (or new) nutritional status studies on the various groups to determine:
Where is household food security threatened?
Where could aquaculture contribute?
If so, would this be:
as a source of protein?
as cash earnings to buy staples?
Determination of the pattern of fish consumption and distribution at a national and local. What is the role (and potential) of fish in the diet of various groups? With regard to fish distribution, does fish only move towards urban markets?
Based on the answers to the above questions, aquaculture and nutritionists should then in concert implement demonstration and pilot-level projects in selected areas and closely monitor the results.
In discussing national and regional coordination mechanisms to promote aquaculture for human nutrition, the group reviewed in detail the experience in Zambia and presented the recommendations set out below.
Member countries should, where possible, utilize existing nutrition institutions to act as coordinating bodies which will set up, when appropriate, specific sector sub-committees in order to incorporate food and nutrition concerns into development policies, programmes and projects. An example of such a sub-committee could be the Aquaculture and Human Nutrition Sub-Committee, which would then be responsible for formulating a national project on aquaculture and human nutrition.
National action programmes drawn up by the Sub-Committees on Aquaculture and Human Nutrition will be implemented to the maximum extent possible through existing sub-national development committees without creating new mechanisms.
The following terms of reference were suggested for the National Sub-Committee:
To identify areas and activities suitable for promoting the role of aquaculture and human nutrition, and plan specific action programmes for enhancing the role of aquaculture in alleviating malnutrition in those communities where high levels of malnutrition exist.
To mobilize and coordinate resources (both human and material) that are available in each of the collaborating institutions.
To establish a data base and organize meetings, seminars, workshops, etc., to disseminate relevant information on the role of aquaculture in human nutrition.
To implement, monitor and evaluate the aquaculture and nutrition programme approved by the Committee.
To encourage and promote coordinated research in agriculture and nutrition.
To increase the awareness of the role of aquaculture and human nutrition.
The following schedule should be carried out according to the terms of reference in the period from 1989 to 1992.
To hold regular meetings of relevant institutions to formulate strategies.
To arrange seminars and field trips to increase awareness among programme implementors and to disseminate information on the role of aquaculture and human nutrition in:
areas with potential for aquaculture (where people actually eat fish);
areas where fish consumption either contributes to household food security or where fish has a significant role as a protein source;
areas with a high prevalence of malnutrition;
areas where seasonal variation in household access to food leads to significantly low availability and consequently low consumption of the staple and relish from December to April.
In implementing the programmes, the Committee should take into account nutritionally vulnerable groups such as pregnant women, lactating mothers and children below the age of five years, especially with regard to the use of fish as a weaning food.
To secure information on prospects regarding the promotion of integrated aquaculture and human nutrition, e.g. school fish pond programmes.
To compile a list of available manpower for the execution of projects.
To strengthen institutional libraries at nutrition centres and fisheries departments through acquisition of relevant publications.
To identify target groups.
To monitor programmes through measurement of nutritional indicators and aquaculture development.
To contact responsible institutions and assist them in developing curricula for nutrition and aquaculture courses.
Assist in arranging fellowships for further training of selected individuals on attachment to the programme.
To identify relevant research facilities for funding.
To scout for funds for adaptive research activities.
To undertake coordinated research in fish utilization processing, preparation and marketing.
To undertake field visits and extension services.
To compile/acquire and make available to rural communities manuals and information leaflets on aquaculture and nutrition activities.
To disseminate information through the national media.
There is a need to solicit funding to support the programme and to arrange national planning conferences which would encourage fisheries to identify land and water bodies suitable for aquaculture, and nutritionists to provide situation analyses by household.
Within a regional framework there is a need for communication and after some time for a further regional conference to exchange experiences. The ALCOM programme should be encouraged to take a leading role in stimulating regional coordination and should examine ways of incorporating nutritional expertise into the Advisory Committee.
As a result of the deliberations, the Consultation prepared the list of recommendations below, concluding that the opportunity to meet had been a valuable first step in bringing the benefits of aquaculture to the undernourished. It was recognized that the way ahead was long, and perhaps full of difficulty. However, if the initiatives that had been taken were followed up it would not be without reward.
Contact and communication between aquaculturists and nutritionists at a national level should be encouraged. This should lead to the establishment of a coordinating mechanism for aquaculture and human nutrition, where possible utilizing existing nutrition institutions. The coordinating group should plan and hold a national conference on aquaculture and human nutrition, to review ongoing programmes and formulate new projects.
When results from national level conferences are available, a second regional meeting should be arranged.
FAO should provide external funding and stimulation for national and regional meetings, either through ALCOM or other sources.
The ALCOM Advisory Committee should consider the incorporation of nutrition expertise into its meetings.
Studies on the pattern of fish consumption as well as distribution and marketing should be undertaken.
In view of the extreme vulnerability of infants from six to 60 months to nutritional stress, it is recommended that investigations into village technologies for production of weaning food and the incorporation of fish in children's diets should be undertaken.
Land capability studies to indicate areas of aquaculture potential should be complemented by overlaying studies of nutritional status in order to indicate areas where household food security is threatened and aquaculture could contribute.
Aquaculturists and nutritionists should work in concert to design and implement pilot demonstration projects in selected areas and ot closely monitor the results.
The model prepared to analyse the potentials and limitations of aquaculture in contributing to household food security in disadvantaged communities should be further developed with assistance from FAO.
