Achieving policy objectives to increase the value of the seafood industry in the United States: The technical feasibility and associated constraints

Food Policy

Volumn 29, Issue 6, 2004, Pages 621-641

  Nash, Colin E ^a  

^a NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE   (United States)

Author keywords

Aquaculture; Capital investment; Constraints; National policy; Offshore development; Offshore technology; Public attitudes; Seafood production; Spatial dimensions

Indexed keywords

AQUACULTURE INDUSTRY; INDUSTRIAL PERFORMANCE; POLICY MAKING; SEAFOOD;

NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES; WESTERN HEMISPHERE; WORLD;

EID: 11044238369     PISSN: 03069192     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2004.10.001     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Anon. Danes go for cod Fish Farming International 30 9 2003
2. J. Chatterton Framing the fish farmers 2004 Atlantic Institute for Market Studies Halifax, Canada NS
3. COP (US Commission on Ocean Policy), 2004. An Ocean Blueprint for the 21st Century. Final Report of the US Commission on Ocean Policy, Washington, DC
4. Dicks M.R. McHigh R. Webb B. 1996. Economy-wide impacts of US aquaculture. Oklahoma Agricultural Experimental Station P-946, Oklahoma State University
5. DOC (US Department of Commerce), 1999. Aquaculture policy. US Department of Commerce, Washington, DC
6. DOC (US Department of Commerce), 2003. Fisheries of the United States, 2002. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC
7. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations), 2003a. Fishstat plus databases. Aquaculture production: Quantities, and Aquaculture production: Values. FAO, Rome
8. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations), 2003b. Food balance sheets, 2001. FAO, Rome
9. Fedler A.J. 2000. Participation in boating and fishing: A literature review. Prepared for the Recreational Boating and Fishing Foundation, Alexandria, VA
10. Harvey D.J. 2003a. Aquaculture outlook. Economic Research Service LDP-AQS-17. US Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC
11. Harvey D.J. 2003b. Aquaculture outlook. Economic Research Service LDP-AQS-18. US Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC
12. Hemre G-I. 2002. Effect of replacing fish oil and meal in aquaculture diets on growth, feed utilisation and product quality. In: Proceedings of the ASEM Workshop, Aquachallenge, Beijing, April 27-30. ACP-EU Fish. Res. Rep. 14, 185p
13. J.V. Huner Benefits of warmwater-pond aquaculture World Aquaculture 34 2 2003 28-31
14. Jia J. Chen J. 2001. Sea farming and sea ranching in China. FAO Fish. Tech. Pap., p. 418
15. Marsh T.D. Beck M.W. Reisewitz S.E. 2002. Leasing and restoration of submerged lands. The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA
16. Majur N. 2004. Community perceptions of aquaculture; related social research. Un-numbered, Bureau of Rural Sciences, Australian Government, Canberra
17. Nautilus, 2003. Seafeeds. In: Proceedings of the European Workshop on Sustainable Environmental Aquaculture Feeds, April 8-9, 2003, Stirling Management Center. Available from Nautilus Consultants, 30/6 Elbe Street, Edinburgh EH6 7HW
18. NASS (National Agriculture Statistical Service), 2000. 1997 Census of agriculture. US Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC
19. G.R. Nelson M.R. DeVoe G.L. Jensen Status, experiences, and impacts of states aquaculture plans and coastal zone management plans on aquaculture in the United States J. Appl. Aquac. 9 1 1999 1-21
20. NRC (National Research Council), 1992. Aquaculture in the United States: constraints and opportunities. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC
21. Perry M.J. Mackun P.J., 2001. Census 2000 brief; population change and distribution 1990-2000. US Census Bureau, Washington, DC
22. PSWQAT (Puget Sound Water Quality Action Team), 2002. Puget Sound's health. PSWQAT, Olympia, WA
23. Southard L. 2003. Livestock, dairy, and poultry outlook. Economic Research Service LDP-M-105. US Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC
24. World Bank, 2003. 2002 World development indicators. World Bank, Washington, DC