IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0105982.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Critical Assessment of Marine Aquarist Biodiversity Data and Commercial Aquaculture: Identifying Gaps in Culture Initiatives to Inform Local Fisheries Managers

Author

Listed:
  • Joanna M Murray
  • Gordon J Watson

Abstract

It is widely accepted that if well managed, the marine aquarium trade could provide socio-economic stability to local communities while incentivising the maintenance of coral reefs. However, the trade has also been implicated as having potentially widespread environmental impacts that has in part driven developments in aquaculture to relieve wild collection pressures. This study investigates the biodiversity in hobbyist aquaria (using an online survey) and those species currently available from an aquaculture source (commercial data and hobbyist initiatives) in the context of a traffic light system to highlight gaps in aquaculture effort and identify groups that require fisheries assessments. Two hundred and sixty nine species including clown fish, damsels, dotty backs, angelfish, gobies, sea horses and blennies, have reported breeding successes by hobbyists, a pattern mirrored by the European and US commercial organisations. However, there is a mismatch (high demand and low/non-existent aquaculture) for a number of groups including tangs, starfish, anemones and hermit crabs, which we recommend are priority candidates for local stock assessments. Hobbyist perception towards the concept of a sustainable aquarium trade is also explored with results demonstrating that only 40% of respondents were in agreement with industry and scientists who believe the trade could be an exemplar of a sustainable use of coral reefs. We believe that a more transparent evidence base, including the publication of the species collected and cultured, will go some way to align the concept of a sustainable trade across industry stakeholders and better inform the hobbyist when purchasing their aquaria stock. We conclude by proposing that a certification scheme established with government support is the most effective way to move towards a self-regulating industry. It would prevent industry “greenwashing” from multiple certification schemes, alleviate conservation concerns, and, ultimately, support aquaculture initiatives alongside well managed ornamental fisheries.

Suggested Citation

  • Joanna M Murray & Gordon J Watson, 2014. "A Critical Assessment of Marine Aquarist Biodiversity Data and Commercial Aquaculture: Identifying Gaps in Culture Initiatives to Inform Local Fisheries Managers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(9), pages 1-11, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0105982
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0105982
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0105982
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0105982&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0105982?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tissot, Brian N. & Best, Barbara A. & Borneman, Eric H. & Bruckner, Andrew W. & Cooper, Cara H. & D'Agnes, Heather & Fitzgerald, Timothy P. & Leland, Amanda & Lieberman, Susan & Mathews Amos, Amy & Su, 2010. "How U.S. ocean policy and market power can reform the coral reef wildlife trade," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 1385-1388, November.
    2. Jaffry, Shabbar & Pickering, Helen & Ghulam, Yaseen & Whitmarsh, David & Wattage, Prem, 2004. "Consumer choices for quality and sustainability labelled seafood products in the UK," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 215-228, June.
    3. Schlapfer, Felix & Roschewitz, Anna & Hanley, Nick, 2004. "Validation of stated preferences for public goods: a comparison of contingent valuation survey response and voting behaviour," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(1-2), pages 1-16, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Giles Atkinson & Sian Morse-Jones & Susana Mourato & Allan Provins, 2012. "‘When to Take “No” for an Answer’? Using Entreaties to Reduce Protests in Contingent Valuation Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(4), pages 497-523, April.
    2. Hallstein, Eric & Villas-Boas, Sofia Berto, 2009. "Are Consumers Color Blind?: an empirical investigation of a traffic light advisory for sustainable seafood," CUDARE Working Papers 120535, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    3. Marcello Risitano & Rosaria Romano & Vincenzo Rusciano & Gennaro Civero & Debora Scarpato, 2022. "The impact of sustainability on marketing strategy and business performance: The case of Italian fisheries," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 1538-1551, May.
    4. Chen, Xianwen & Alfnes, Frode & Rickertsen, Kyrre, 2014. "Consumer Preferences, Ecolabels, and the Effects of Negative Environmental Information," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 168094, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Salladarré Frédéric & Guillotreau Patrice & Perraudeau Yves & Monfort Marie-Christine, 2010. "The Demand for Seafood Eco-Labels in France," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-26, December.
    6. Villas-Boas, Sofia B & Taylor, Rebecca & Krovetz, Hannah, 2016. "Willingness to Pay for Low Water Footprint Food Choices During Drought," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt9vh3x180, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    7. Yokessa, Maïmouna & Marette, Stéphan, 2019. "A Review of Eco-labels and their Economic Impact," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 13(1-2), pages 119-163, April.
    8. Jackson, Elizabeth, 2019. "Pr - Sustainability In Australian Seafood Supply Chains: Identifying The Gap Between Theory And Practice," 22nd Congress, Tasmania, Australia, March 3-8, 2019 345860, International Farm Management Association.
    9. Anastasija Novikova & Lucia Rocchi & Bernardas Vaznonis, 2019. "Valuing Agricultural Landscape: Lithuanian Case Study Using a Contingent Valuation Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-13, May.
    10. Koistinen, Laura & Pouta, Eija & Heikkila, Jaakko & Forsman-Hugg, Sari & Kotro, Jaana & Makela, Jarmo & Niva, M., 2011. "Impact of meat type, methods of production, fat content, price and carbon footprint information on meat choice," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114710, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Nicolas Jacquemet & Alexander James & Stéphane Luchini & Jason F. Shogren, 2017. "Referenda Under Oath," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 67(3), pages 479-504, July.
    12. Alexis Gutierrez & Thomas F. Thornton, 2014. "Can Consumers Understand Sustainability through Seafood Eco-Labels? A U.S. and UK Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(11), pages 1-23, November.
    13. Kyrre Rickertsen & Frode Alfnes & Pierre Combris & Géraldine Enderli & Sylvie Issanchou & Jason F. Shogren, 2017. "French Consumers' Attitudes and Preferences toward Wild and Farmed Fish," Marine Resource Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 32(1), pages 59-81.
    14. Villas-Boas, Sofia B & Copfer, Jackie & Campbell, Nica, 2021. "Preferences for Sustainability and Supply Chain Essential Worker Conditions: Survey Evidence during COVID-19," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt0nv2n39w, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    15. Fredrick Betuel Sawe & Anil Kumar & Jose Arturo Garza‐Reyes & Rohit Agrawal, 2021. "Assessing people‐driven factors for circular economy practices in small and medium‐sized enterprise supply chains: Business strategies and environmental perspectives," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(7), pages 2951-2965, November.
    16. Banterle, Alessandro & Ricci, Elena Claire, 2013. "Does the Sustainability of Food Products Influence Consumer Choices? The Case of Italy," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 4(2), pages 1-10, November.
    17. Czap, Natalia V. & Czap, Hans J., 2010. "An experimental investigation of revealed environmental concern," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 2033-2041, August.
    18. Pavel, Ciaian & Gomez y Paloma, Sergio, 2011. "The Value of EU Agricultural Landscape," 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 102727, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    19. Brécard, Dorothée & Hlaimi, Boubaker & Lucas, Sterenn & Perraudeau, Yves & Salladarré, Frédéric, 2009. "Determinants of demand for green products: An application to eco-label demand for fish in Europe," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 115-125, November.
    20. Aurora García-Gallego & Nikolaos Georgantzís & Daniel Navarro-Martínez & Gerardo Sabater-Grande, 2011. "The stochastic component in choice and regression to the mean," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 71(2), pages 251-267, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0105982. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.