Search

Edvard Pedersen | The Brønnøysund Register Centre : OPS Seafood As a first example, a bimodal concept for Public-Private Sector Development and digital transformation was explained. It is based on a generic cooperation model applied to the Norwegian seafood sector. The public sector contributes with public data, data gathering and transfer, and common standards. The sector takes the responsibility for sector-specific standards, data ownership management and common sector solutions. A code of conduct was developed and the data sharing was standardised. The model itself can be regarded as a best practice, as well as the products resulting from it. ----- Giovanna Marino | ISPRA : The PerformFish benchmarking system The system was developed for the Mediterranean area, based on Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) identified by the industry and that can be collected at the farms. These cover technical, environmental, welfare and economic indicator categories. It resulted in a benchmarking system that was adopted by aquaculture stakeholders and associations and in a unique data set across different Mediterranean zones on the performance of aquaculture farms. The system enables a visualisation of a set of KPIs and the optimisation of different aspects across the production cycle. With this information the sector has a tool that can document the sustainability of aquaculture, e.g. related to welfare issues or the carbon footprint of aquaculture. ----- Houssam Hamza & Linda Fourdain | GFCM of FAO : Best practices at the Global Mediterranean Council The FAO GFCM is the general Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean and the Black Sea. It produces recommendations and resolutions for aquaculture in the region and provides assistance, demonstration centres, training courses driving good practices across the GFCM member countries and coastal communities. A methodology and guidance for knowledge and good practice sharing has been developed for aquaculture in marine spatial planning, such as the guide for Allocated Zones for Aquaculture (AZA). ----- Saioa Ramos | AZTI : AQUAPEF: an aquaculture Product Environmental Footprint pilot The EU funded project Life AQUAPEF developed a specific, easy-to-use tool to calculate the Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) across the aquaculture value chain, from feed, hatchery and grow out to processing, packaging and distribution. The pilot tool has been demonstrated at different sites in the Mediterranean and is ready to be used by all sea bream and seabass farms in the region. The goal is to have the tool commercialised and to transfer the methodology to other aquaculture systems and species, such as salmon, trout and sole. Published Current 14.a Method

This publication is based on the findings of the project Developing site selection and carrying capacity guidelines for Mediterranean aquaculture within aquaculture appropriate areas (SHoCMed), implemented by the Scientific Advisory Committee on Aquaculture (CAQ) of the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM) of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) with the support of the European Union (Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries of the European Commission). Concluded in 2016, SHoCMed aimed at developing criteria, standards and guidelines for GFCM contracting parties and cooperating non-contracting parties to improve site selection criteria and set capacity benchmarks and references for aquaculture activities in the Mediterranean., peer-reviewed

The European project Sustainable extensive and semi-intensive coastal aquaculture in Southern Europe (SEACASE) included the proposal of 6 Codes of Conduct for the aquaculture systems studied during the project work. These case studies are typical of the countries involved, namely semi-intensive polyculture (Portugal and Spain), extensive polyculture in esteros (Spain), integrated systems (France), valliculture (Italy), nursery ponds (Greece, Portugal, France and Italy) and eel ponds (France). This article was written having as objective the providing of a concise summary of the characteristics that SEACASE collaborators found to be central to build a complete and trustable Certification system for products of sustainable non-intensive aquaculture (for “certification of sustainability”, see Ojeda, 2008). The 6 Codes of Conduct are the basic information to build such a system in the future., This study has been carried out with the financial support from the Commission of the European Communities, specific RTD programme “Specific Support to Policies”, SSP-2005-44483 “SEACASE - Sustainable extensive and semi-intensive coastal aquaculture in Southern Europe”, and does not necessarily reflect the European Commission views and in no way anticipates the Commission’s future policy in this area.

In less than 30 years, intensive fish farming has become the main provider of marine farmed products. Yet, extensive and semi-intensive systems1 still represent significant amounts of production and use large places along the southern Europe coastal zones. These include confined areas of coastal lagoons, natural and managed deltas, and semi closed bays and estuaries, encompassing polders with earthen ponds. The farming systems studied are aquaculture stricto sensu and capture fisheries of cultivated species., This study has been carried out with the financial support from the Commission of the European Communities, specific RTD programme “Specific Support to Policies”, SSP-2005-44483 “SEACASE - Sustainable extensive and semi-intensive coastal aquaculture in Southern Europe”, and does not necessarily reflect the European Commission views and in no way anticipates the Commission’s future policy in this area.

2 páginas. International Workshop on Sustainable Extensive and Semi-intensie Coastal Aquaculture in Southern Europe (SEACASE), Tavira, Portugal, january 20-21, 2010., In less then 30 years intensive fish farming has quickly become the first provider of marine farmed products. Yet, extensive and semi-intensive systems still represent significant amounts of production and use large places along the southern Europe coastal zones (artificial lagoons, natural and managed deltas, and semi closed bays and estuaries, encompassing polders with earthponds).

This deliverable (DL) provides an introduction to fish welfare in aquaculture and results from the systematization of knowledge for sea bass and sea bream, evaluating risk factors and welfare indicators. A comparison of the main certification schemes and standards production and good practices used in SBB and SBG companies is further assessed with respect to health and welfare principles and indicators applied. The DL reports on the process of selection and validation of OWIs by the PerformFISH Consortium. The methodology to assess and score fish welfare at different life stage and farming system is provided. A first benchmarking of welfare status of farmed bass and bream for MMFF is given based on OWIs data collection on farm and from PerformFISH Gateway D4Science(W-KPIs from WP7). Most part of the work is completed and the list of OWIs is consolidated (task 3.5.1, 3.5.2). However, due to the Covid-19 pandemic, activities related to OWIs implementation on farm and elaboration of welfare scoring (task 3.5.3) have been suspended on February 15th. The present DL is thus submitted as a draft version. It is estimated that the DL3.6 will be finalized within 6 months after pandemic restrictions are lifted.

As many other farming activities, aquatic animals and particularly finfish can be affected by several infectious and non-infectious diseases. The specific diseases and pathogens or other causes triggering the development of these diseases, since there are usually multifactorial, can be related to a number of different factors: characteristics of the infectious agents, affected fish species or genetic susceptibility, environment and environmental conditions, geographical parameters, and farming systems amongst others.

As many other farming activities, aquatic animals and particularly finfish can be affected by several infectious and non-infectious diseases. The specific diseases and pathogens or other causes triggering the development of these diseases, since there are usually multifactorial, can be related to a number of different factors: characteristics of the infectious agents, affected fish species or genetic susceptibility, environment and environmental conditions, geographical parameters, and farming systems amongst others.

Management of aquaculture farms needs to constantly monitor production parameters with the aim of optimizing technical efficiency of production cycles, to reduce production costs and to enhance competitiveness and sustainability. A benchmarking tool, based on Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), was built to benchmark biological capacity, cost-efficiency, fish health and welfare and environmental performance of marine Mediterranean fish farming industry. The KPI tool was developed in close collaboration with the five fish farming Producer Associations (APROMAR, FGM, API, CCE-CAA, SFAMN), aggregating the major European aquaculture companies, RD&I aquaculture managers and scientific partners. It was specifically designed for sea bass and sea bream aquaculture and for being applied to the whole production cycle, from hatchery to grow-out till harvest, excluding the processing phase. The tool includes 55 Key Performance Indicators: 35 KPIs Technical-KPIs (T-KPI) to measure the technical performances, as growth, feed efficiency, deformities, losses, diseases and use of antibiotics and antiparasitic compounds 9 Welfare KPIs (WE-KPI) to assess welfare during fish farming husbandry practices 14 Environmental KPIs (E-KPIs) to measure the use of land, water and energy required for fish production and to estimate the impact of farming practices on marine habitat and biodiversity 2 Key Economic Performance Indicators (EC-KPIs) to measure the productivity and efficiency of aquaculture farms.

Thisdeliverable (DL) provides an introduction to fish welfare in aquaculture and results from the systematization of knowledge for sea bass and sea bream, evaluating risk factors and welfare indicators. A comparison of the main certification schemes and standards production and good practices used in SBB and SBG companies is further assessed with respect to health and welfare principles and indicators applied. The DL reports on the process of selection and validation of OWIs by the PerformFISH Consortium. The methodology to assess and score fish welfare at different life stage and farming system is provided. A first benchmarking of welfare status of farmed bass and bream for MMFF is given based on OWIs data collection on farm and from PerformFISH Gateway D4Science(W-KPIs from WP7). Most part of the work is completed and the list of OWIs is consolidated (task 3.5.1, 3.5.2). However, due to the Covid-19 pandemic, activities related to OWIs implementation on farm and elaboration of welfare scoring (task 3.5.3) have been suspended on February 15th. The present DL is thus submitted as a draft version. It is estimated that the DL3.6 will be finalized within 6 months after pandemic restrictions are lifted.

Management of aquaculture farms needs to constantly monitor production parameters with the aim of optimizing technical efficiency of production cycles, to reduce production costs and to enhance competitiveness and sustainability. A benchmarking tool, based on Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), was built to benchmark biological capacity, cost-efficiency, fish health and welfare and environmental performance of marine Mediterranean fish farming industry. The KPI tool was developed in close collaboration with the five fish farming Producer Associations (APROMAR, FGM, API, CCE-CAA, SFAMN), aggregating the major European aquaculture companies, RD&I aquaculture managers and scientific partners. It was specifically designed for sea bass and sea bream aquaculture and for being applied to the whole production cycle, from hatchery to grow-out till harvest, excluding the processing phase. The tool includes 55 Key Performance Indicators: 35 KPIs Technical-KPIs (T-KPI) to measure the technical performances, as growth, feed efficiency, deformities, losses, diseases and use of antibiotics and antiparasitic compounds 9 Welfare KPIs (WE-KPI) to assess welfare during fish farming husbandry practices 14 Environmental KPIs (E-KPIs) to measure the use of land, water and energy required for fish production and to estimate the impact of farming practices on marine habitat and biodiversity 2 Key Economic Performance Indicators (EC-KPIs) to measure the productivity and efficiency of aquaculture farms.

The EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive 2008/56/EC (MSFD) defines a framework for Community actions in the field of marine environmental policy in order to achieve and/or maintain the Good Environmental Status (GES) of the European seas by 2020. Microbial assemblages (from viruses to microbial-sized metazoa) provide a major contribution to global biodiversity and play a crucial role in the functioning of marine ecosystems, but are largely ignored by the MSFD. Prokaryotes are only seen as "microbial pathogens", without defining their role in GES indicators. However, structural or functional prokaryotic variables (abundance, biodiversity and metabolism) can be easily incorporated into several MSFD Descriptors (i.e. D1. Biodiversity, D4. Food webs, D5. Eutrophication, D8. Contaminants and D9. Contaminants in seafood) with beneficial effects. The present review provides a critical analysis of the current MSFD descriptors and illustrates the reliability and advantages of the potential incorporation of some prokaryotic variables within the set of indicators of marine environmental quality. Following a cost/benefit analysis against scientific and economic criteria, we conclude that marine microbial components, and particularly prokaryotes, are highly effective for detecting the effects of anthropogenic pressures on marine environments and for assessing changes in the environmental health status. We thus recommend the inclusion of these components in future implementations of the MSFD.

All'interno di una discussione sull'esistenza di una autonoma politica imperiale in campo economico e sociale, si esaminano gli interventi imperiali in caso di calamità naturali (terremoti, inondazioni, incendi) da Augusto fino a tutto il principato adottivo, esaminando partitamente i casi noti dalle diverse fonti, mettendo in rilievo la consapevolezza del governo centrale - a partire già dal principato di Augusto, ma in modo più strutturato da quello di Tiberio - di dover intervenire in casi di gravi calamità naturali in tutto l'impero. Si verificano, attraverso tutte le evidenze possibili, letterarie, epigrafiche, etc., le diverse tipologie di interventi nei diversi contesti cronologici, geografici, e di governo, prendendo in esame analiticamente le diverse soluzioni, sottolineandone le differenze ma specialmente una sostanziale continuità; evidente appare una collaborazione in qualche modo orientata dall'alto di vari livelli di intervento evergetico, locali, regionali, a più ampio raggio. Si discutono tra l'altro le continuitò e le differenze con l'età repubblicana (in particolare analizzando la tipologia del significato di presagio della calamità naturale) e con il mondo ellenistico (per altro assai rilevante); si esamina infine l'aspetto ideologico e di propaganda, che coinvolge l'imperatore ma anche tutti quelli che a vario titolo contribuiscono con il loro evergetismo a risolvere il problema..