Comments on: Jason Clay and measuring the environmental impact of agriculture http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2009/07/04/jason-clay-and-measuring-the-environmental-impact-of-agriculture/ EthanZ's musings on Africa, media and international development Wed, 08 Feb 2012 20:45:31 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Martha Roth http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2009/07/04/jason-clay-and-measuring-the-environmental-impact-of-agriculture/comment-page-1/#comment-2297463 Martha Roth Wed, 29 Dec 2010 14:46:56 +0000 http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/?p=3052#comment-2297463 Thanks for giving a straight-up talk on sustainability and thanks for mentioning the BS of carbon count or carbon credits or whatever it is they're trying to con people with these days. Thanks for giving a straight-up talk on sustainability and thanks for mentioning the BS of carbon count or carbon credits or whatever it is they’re trying to con people with these days.

]]> By: TED Global 2010: Jason Clay and a Sustainable Future through Corporate Collusion | test title http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2009/07/04/jason-clay-and-measuring-the-environmental-impact-of-agriculture/comment-page-1/#comment-2107834 TED Global 2010: Jason Clay and a Sustainable Future through Corporate Collusion | test title Mon, 19 Jul 2010 21:13:56 +0000 http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/?p=3052#comment-2107834 [...] more than an hour long and, obviously, was able to cover more territory than an 18 minute TED talk. Here are my notes on that longer talk, which Clay was kind enough to vet and [...] [...] more than an hour long and, obviously, was able to cover more territory than an 18 minute TED talk. Here are my notes on that longer talk, which Clay was kind enough to vet and [...]

]]> By: FutureEmergency.com http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2009/07/04/jason-clay-and-measuring-the-environmental-impact-of-agriculture/comment-page-1/#comment-2107813 FutureEmergency.com Mon, 19 Jul 2010 20:24:23 +0000 http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/?p=3052#comment-2107813 [...] more than an hour long and, obviously, was able to cover more territory than an 18 minute TED talk. Here are my notes on that longer talk, which Clay was kind enough to vet and [...] [...] more than an hour long and, obviously, was able to cover more territory than an 18 minute TED talk. Here are my notes on that longer talk, which Clay was kind enough to vet and [...]

]]> By: Green Design » Blog Archive » TED Global 2010: Jason Clay and a Sustainable Future through Corporate Collusion http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2009/07/04/jason-clay-and-measuring-the-environmental-impact-of-agriculture/comment-page-1/#comment-2107806 Green Design » Blog Archive » TED Global 2010: Jason Clay and a Sustainable Future through Corporate Collusion Mon, 19 Jul 2010 20:11:20 +0000 http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/?p=3052#comment-2107806 [...] more than an hour long and, obviously, was able to cover more territory than an 18 minute TED talk. Here are my notes on that longer talk, which Clay was kind enough to vet and [...] [...] more than an hour long and, obviously, was able to cover more territory than an 18 minute TED talk. Here are my notes on that longer talk, which Clay was kind enough to vet and [...]

]]> By: kat http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2009/07/04/jason-clay-and-measuring-the-environmental-impact-of-agriculture/comment-page-1/#comment-2034475 kat Tue, 11 May 2010 14:24:24 +0000 http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/?p=3052#comment-2034475 wpw. what a great article and a new way of looking at sustainability for the world's markets and how they are all connected. i like how he talked from the standpoint of water and how great an impact that really does have on our livelihoods. i also enjoyed how he emphasized that we need to solve this problem through markets, not rely on government. the market knows what they need. wpw. what a great article and a new way of looking at sustainability for the world’s markets and how they are all connected. i like how he talked from the standpoint of water and how great an impact that really does have on our livelihoods. i also enjoyed how he emphasized that we need to solve this problem through markets, not rely on government. the market knows what they need.

]]> By: Fewer feet, smaller footprint | Innovation Toronto http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2009/07/04/jason-clay-and-measuring-the-environmental-impact-of-agriculture/comment-page-1/#comment-1747463 Fewer feet, smaller footprint | Innovation Toronto Tue, 22 Sep 2009 13:42:51 +0000 http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/?p=3052#comment-1747463 [...] Jason Clay and measuring the environmental impact of agriculture (ethanzuckerman.com) [...] [...] Jason Clay and measuring the environmental impact of agriculture (ethanzuckerman.com) [...]

]]> By: Crude: The real price of oil and other enviralmentions « Enviralment http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2009/07/04/jason-clay-and-measuring-the-environmental-impact-of-agriculture/comment-page-1/#comment-1720937 Crude: The real price of oil and other enviralmentions « Enviralment Mon, 31 Aug 2009 20:35:15 +0000 http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/?p=3052#comment-1720937 [...] Jason Clay and measuring the environmental impact of agriculture. [EthanZuckerman] [...] [...] Jason Clay and measuring the environmental impact of agriculture. [EthanZuckerman] [...]

]]> By: Dawn Gifford http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2009/07/04/jason-clay-and-measuring-the-environmental-impact-of-agriculture/comment-page-1/#comment-1719609 Dawn Gifford Mon, 31 Aug 2009 01:46:11 +0000 http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/?p=3052#comment-1719609 I don't buy the idea that polycultural small holdings can't feed the world. China got themselves out of abject poverty by encouraging small holdings over large coop commodity farms. And anyone who thinks you can't get out of poverty on a polycultural small holding needs only look at how much productivity and money Polyface Farm's Joel Salatin is making on his land, while building topsoil and sequestering huge amounts of carbon. I don’t buy the idea that polycultural small holdings can’t feed the world. China got themselves out of abject poverty by encouraging small holdings over large coop commodity farms.

And anyone who thinks you can’t get out of poverty on a polycultural small holding needs only look at how much productivity and money Polyface Farm’s Joel Salatin is making on his land, while building topsoil and sequestering huge amounts of carbon.

]]> By: Jason Clay http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2009/07/04/jason-clay-and-measuring-the-environmental-impact-of-agriculture/comment-page-1/#comment-1642463 Jason Clay Tue, 07 Jul 2009 15:41:35 +0000 http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/?p=3052#comment-1642463 For the record, in response to Dallas: 1. WWF has a carry over policy from the late 1990s on GMOs. We are in the process of rewriting it but with such a large multi-national group (especially many in Europe) this is a very contentious issue--more based on ideology and assumptions than science. 2. I said in the talk that we need to be open to all genetic work, technology neutral and focus on results. Thus we have taken a position to be open with regard to different agricultural productions systems, e.g. conventional, organic, GM, IPM, no-till etc. or any combination of the above. The real issue is what is the result, the measurable performance. 3. That said, I am personally opposed to GM aquaculture species because the chance of them escaping is simply too high. If we were talking about closed containment then I might reconsider, but that is not the case now. There are always escapes. 4. I spent 18 months in the mid 1990s comparing wild caught vs aquaculture produced shrimp. I concluded at the time that while both had significant impacts, wild caught technology was not improving whereas aquaculture could. This review was widely distributed (1800 copies were commented on by a wide multi-stakeholder group) and it is why WWF has worked with shrimp aquaculture producers ever since. The FAO recently published a report on the impacts of wild caught shrimp trawls which used this report not only as the starting point, but also the outline for the report. In the late 1990s, I created a consortium with FAO, NACA and the World Bank, along with WWF to build consensus around shrimp aquaculture?s key impacts, what better producers were doing to reduce them, and what could be done globally to improve performance. Some 140 researchers were supported in 20-25 countries to produce 45 different case studies on issues that were both global and local. This work is still generally considered by all (including the industry) to be the most up to date and unbiased info on shrimp aquaculture. 5. I am the one person from a major environmental NGO who has worked with the shrimp aquaculture industry over the past 15 years?and the only NGO rep ever to have given the keynote address at the World Aquaculture Society?often to the chagrin of my NGO colleagues. 6. Both WWF and I see aquaculture as the future of seafood. According to most stats, humans consume directely more seafood produced from aquaculture than from wild caught fisheries. It's a good thing, because some 75% of wild caught fisheries are fished at or beyond capacity. It's also about time for this shift--we no longer hunt wild game or gather roots and tubers for food why should we still depend on fishing for seafood. But, that is precisely why it is so important that we get aquaculture right. Unlike agriculture, we don't have the luxury of 6,000 years to improve performance. 6. As I look forward, I think tilapia, catfish and pangaseus will produce the bulk of protein. It is true that shrimp can be produced in brackish water, but this can have unacceptable impacts in fragile coastal areas. While siting has improved tremendously, there are limits to growth in these coastal areas. Tilapia and other species can be produced in a wider range of areas (tilapia can now be produced in brackish water too) and are less dependent for fast growth on fish meal and fish oil inputs in their feed. They also can produce more MT/ha/year than shrimp because they can utilize more of the water column. In fact the value of these three finfish, in addition to the protein, is that they are each net producers of fish meal and oil which can be used to feed other species. However, to the extent that shrimp can be produced more sustainably, than this is not an either/or issue. There is room for both and that is why WWF is working with the different aquaculture industries to develop transparent, multi-stakeholder, performance based standards for 12 species produced from aquaculture. The standards will be finished by the end of 2010 when WWF and others will launch the Aquaculture Stewardship Council. Hope this clears up some issues. Jason For the record, in response to Dallas:
1. WWF has a carry over policy from the late 1990s on GMOs. We are in the process of rewriting it but with such a large multi-national group (especially many in Europe) this is a very contentious issue–more based on ideology and assumptions than science.
2. I said in the talk that we need to be open to all genetic work, technology neutral and focus on results. Thus we have taken a position to be open with regard to different agricultural productions systems, e.g. conventional, organic, GM, IPM, no-till etc. or any combination of the above. The real issue is what is the result, the measurable performance.
3. That said, I am personally opposed to GM aquaculture species because the chance of them escaping is simply too high. If we were talking about closed containment then I might reconsider, but that is not the case now. There are always escapes.
4. I spent 18 months in the mid 1990s comparing wild caught vs aquaculture produced shrimp. I concluded at the time that while both had significant impacts, wild caught technology was not improving whereas aquaculture could. This review was widely distributed (1800 copies were commented on by a wide multi-stakeholder group) and it is why WWF has worked with shrimp aquaculture producers ever since. The FAO recently published a report on the impacts of wild caught shrimp trawls which used this report not only as the starting point, but also the outline for the report. In the late 1990s, I created a consortium with FAO, NACA and the World Bank, along with WWF to build consensus around shrimp aquaculture?s key impacts, what better producers were doing to reduce them, and what could be done globally to improve performance. Some 140 researchers were supported in 20-25 countries to produce 45 different case studies on issues that were both global and local. This work is still generally considered by all (including the industry) to be the most up to date and unbiased info on shrimp aquaculture.
5. I am the one person from a major environmental NGO who has worked with the shrimp aquaculture industry over the past 15 years?and the only NGO rep ever to have given the keynote address at the World Aquaculture Society?often to the chagrin of my NGO colleagues.
6. Both WWF and I see aquaculture as the future of seafood. According to most stats, humans consume directely more seafood produced from aquaculture than from wild caught fisheries. It’s a good thing, because some 75% of wild caught fisheries are fished at or beyond capacity. It’s also about time for this shift–we no longer hunt wild game or gather roots and tubers for food why should we still depend on fishing for seafood. But, that is precisely why it is so important that we get aquaculture right. Unlike agriculture, we don’t have the luxury of 6,000 years to improve performance.
6. As I look forward, I think tilapia, catfish and pangaseus will produce the bulk of protein. It is true that shrimp can be produced in brackish water, but this can have unacceptable impacts in fragile coastal areas. While siting has improved tremendously, there are limits to growth in these coastal areas. Tilapia and other species can be produced in a wider range of areas (tilapia can now be produced in brackish water too) and are less dependent for fast growth on fish meal and fish oil inputs in their feed. They also can produce more MT/ha/year than shrimp because they can utilize more of the water column. In fact the value of these three finfish, in addition to the protein, is that they are each net producers of fish meal and oil which can be used to feed other species. However, to the extent that shrimp can be produced more sustainably, than this is not an either/or issue. There is room for both and that is why WWF is working with the different aquaculture industries to develop transparent, multi-stakeholder, performance based standards for 12 species produced from aquaculture. The standards will be finished by the end of 2010 when WWF and others will launch the Aquaculture Stewardship Council.

Hope this clears up some issues.

Jason

]]> By: Dallas http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2009/07/04/jason-clay-and-measuring-the-environmental-impact-of-agriculture/comment-page-1/#comment-1638903 Dallas Sun, 05 Jul 2009 17:47:23 +0000 http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/?p=3052#comment-1638903 Sounds like Jason Clay is making some sense at telling at least part of the story. The other parts that are not politically correct enough for an organization like WWF are the significance of increasing population along with future decreases in death rates from the biotechnology revolution that is just starting and the requirement of producing GMO plants and animals to obtain the required production efficiency increases. The WWF opposes GMO products including aquaculture product in the specification that the are working on for certification of tilapia and other product. It is strange that he apparently discussed tilapia production but not shrimp (an area where he spent considerable effort in attacking shrimp aquaculture while ignoring the more environmentally destructive bottom trawled wild shrimp). In the real world, shrimp have greater potential for converting waste into protein than tilapia and they use saltwater, not fresh water. Their ability to handle single cell protein sources in the form of bacteria grown on waste products is excellent. Sounds like Jason Clay is making some sense at telling at least part of the story. The other parts that are not politically correct enough for an organization like WWF are the significance of increasing population along with future decreases in death rates from the biotechnology revolution that is just starting and the requirement of producing GMO plants and animals to obtain the required production efficiency increases. The WWF opposes GMO products including aquaculture product in the specification that the are working on for certification of tilapia and other product.

It is strange that he apparently discussed tilapia production but not shrimp (an area where he spent considerable effort in attacking shrimp aquaculture while ignoring the more environmentally destructive bottom trawled wild shrimp). In the real world, shrimp have greater potential for converting waste into protein than tilapia and they use saltwater, not fresh water. Their ability to handle single cell protein sources in the form of bacteria grown on waste products is excellent.

]]>