Final Technical Report 1.3... · Final Technical Report ANALYTICAL REVIEW OF PRIVATE SECTOR INVOLVEMENT IN AQUACULTURE IN EAC PARTNER STATES, WITH RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE AREAS

"Strengthening Fisheries Management in ACP

Countries"

Project Funded by the European Union.

“This publication has been produced with the assistance of the European Union. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of COFREPECHE and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union.”

“The content of this document does not necessarily reflect the views of the concerned governments.”

Final Technical Report

ANALYTICAL REVIEW OF PRIVATE SECTOR INVOLVEMENT IN

AQUACULTURE IN EAC PARTNER STATES, WITH RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE AREAS OF GROWTH AND SUPPORT

Project ref. N° EA-1.3-B5

Region: Eastern Africa Country: Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Uganda

November 2013

Assignment by: COFREPECHE

Analytical review of private sector involvement in aquaculture in EAC Partner States, with recommendations for future areas of growth and support – EA-1.3-B5

Draft Final Technical Report (AFE145R02B)

Project Funded by the European Union pg. 2 A project implemented by COFREPECHE

Table of contents

LIST OF FIGURES AND PHOTOGRAPHS ............................................................................................................... 4

LIST OF PICTURES................................................................................................................................................... 4

EXCHANGE RATES .................................................................................................................................................. 4

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................................................................... 5

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................................ 6

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................. 8

2 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................................ 8

3 APPROACH TO THE ASSIGNMENT .............................................................................................................. 9

3.1 DESK WORK ............................................................................................................................................. 10 3.2 FIELDWORK ............................................................................................................................................. 10 3.3 NATIONAL CONSULTATION MEETINGS AND VALIDATION WORKSHOP .............................................................. 10

4 COMMENTS ON TERMS OF REFERENCE .................................................................................................. 10

5 ORGANISATION AND METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................... 11

5.1 DELIVERY OF TERMS OF REFERENCE ......................................................................................................... 11 5.2 CONDUCT AND DETAILS OF THE ASSIGNMENT INCLUDING VISIBILITY ACTIVITIES ............................................. 11

5.2.1 Expert team ............................................................................................................................ 11 5.2.2 Timeframe .............................................................................................................................. 12

6 RESULTS OF DOCUMENTATION REVIEW, FIELD MISSIONS AND NATIONAL CONSULTATION MEETINGS ..................................................................................................................................................... 12

6.1 TANZANIA ................................................................................................................................................ 12 6.1.1 Generalities ............................................................................................................................ 12 6.1.2 Field visits .............................................................................................................................. 13 6.1.3 National consultation meeting ................................................................................................ 15 6.1.4 Aquaculture documents for Tanzania .................................................................................... 15 6.1.5 Conclusions and Perspectives ............................................................................................... 16

6.2 KENYA ..................................................................................................................................................... 16 6.2.1 Generalities ............................................................................................................................ 16 6.2.2 Mission findings ...................................................................................................................... 17 6.2.3 Field visits .............................................................................................................................. 17 6.2.4 National consultation meeting ................................................................................................ 18 6.2.5 Aquaculture instruments in Kenya ......................................................................................... 20 6.2.6 Efforts by Kenya Government towards aquaculture development ......................................... 21 6.2.7 Conclusions and Perspectives ............................................................................................... 21

6.3 UGANDA .................................................................................................................................................. 21 6.3.1 Generalities ............................................................................................................................ 21 6.3.2 Mission findings ...................................................................................................................... 22 6.3.3 Documents of reference for Uganda ...................................................................................... 23 6.3.4 National consultation meeting ................................................................................................ 24 6.3.5 Conclusions and perspectives ............................................................................................... 26

6.4 BURUNDI ................................................................................................................................................. 26 6.4.1 Generalities ............................................................................................................................ 26 6.4.2 Mission findings ...................................................................................................................... 27 6.4.3 National consultation meeting ................................................................................................ 29 6.4.4 Conclusions en perspectives ................................................................................................. 30

6.5 RWANDA.................................................................................................................................................. 30 6.5.1 Generalities ............................................................................................................................ 30 6.5.2 Overview of fisheries and aquaculture in Rwanda ................................................................. 31




6.5.3 National consultation meeting ................................................................................................ 34 6.5.4 Rwanda aquaculture instruments ........................................................................................... 34 6.5.5 Perspectives ........................................................................................................................... 34

6.6 GENERAL CONCLUSIONS ON THE EAC REGION ........................................................................................... 35

7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................. 35

7.1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 35 7.1.1 Suitable sites .......................................................................................................................... 36 7.1.2 Quality seeds (fry and fingerlings) .......................................................................................... 36 7.1.3 Quality feed ............................................................................................................................ 37 7.1.4 Expertise and technical know-how ......................................................................................... 37 7.1.5 Financial resources ................................................................................................................ 37 7.1.6 Equipment .............................................................................................................................. 37 7.1.7 Markets .................................................................................................................................. 37 7.1.8 Monitoring and evaluation ...................................................................................................... 38 7.1.9 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 38

7.2 CURRENT CONTEXT .................................................................................................................................. 38 7.3 AQUACULTURE POLICY ............................................................................................................................. 38

7.3.1 Definition and goals of an aquaculture policy ......................................................................... 38 7.3.2 Definition and goals of aquaculture policy brief ...................................................................... 38

8 ANNEXES ....................................................................................................................................................... 40

8.1 ANNEX 1 - TERMS OF REFERENCE ............................................................................................................. 40 8.2 ANNEX 2 - ITINERARY, INSTITUTIONS AND INDIVIDUALS CONSULTED ............................................................. 52

8.2.1 Itinerary .................................................................................................................................. 52 8.2.2 List of stakeholders met ......................................................................................................... 53

8.3 ANNEX 3 - INCEPTION REPORT .................................................................................................................. 56 8.4 ANNEX 4 - LIST OF REPORTS AND DOCUMENTS CONSULTED ........................................................................ 57

8.4.1 General documentation .......................................................................................................... 57 8.4.2 Tanzania documentation ........................................................................................................ 57 8.4.3 Kenya Documentation ............................................................................................................ 57 8.4.4 Uganda Documentation ......................................................................................................... 57 8.4.5 Burundi Documentation .......................................................................................................... 58 8.4.6 Rwanda Documentation ......................................................................................................... 58

8.5 ANNEX 5 - PHOTOGRAPHS OF PROJECT, KEY ACTIVITIES AND EVENTS .......................................................... 59 8.6 ANNEX 6 – POLICY FRAMEWORK ............................................................................................................... 61

8.6.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 61 8.6.2 Current context ....................................................................................................................... 62 8.6.3 Aquaculture Policy Framework .............................................................................................. 62

8.7 ANNEX 7 – POLICY BRIEF .......................................................................................................................... 67 8.7.1 Executive summary ................................................................................................................ 67 8.7.2 Context ................................................................................................................................... 67 8.7.3 Mission findings ...................................................................................................................... 68 8.7.4 Policy implications and recommendations ............................................................................. 69 8.7.5 Source consulted or recommended ....................................................................................... 70

8.8 ANNEX 8 - PRESENTATIONS OF THE WORKSHOP ......................................................................................... 72 8.9 ANNEX 9 - WORKSHOP REPORT ................................................................................................................ 77 8.10 ANNEX 10 - PARTICIPANTS TO THE WORKSHOP .......................................................................................... 83




List of figures Figure 1 – Tanzania Fisheries Production 1950 - 2010 ......................................................................................... 12 Figure 2 - Tanzania, Aquaculture Production ........................................................................................................ 13 Figure 3 - Fisheries production in Kenya (FAO – 1950-2010) ............................................................................... 16 Figure 4 - Aquaculture production Kenya (FAO – 1950-2010) .............................................................................. 17 Figure 5 – Ugandan capture production ................................................................................................................ 21 Figure 6 - Reported aquaculture production in Uganda (from 1950) ..................................................................... 22 Figure 7 - Burundi Fisheries Statistics ................................................................................................................... 26 Figure 8 - Rwanda: captures production ................................................................................................................ 31 Figure 9 - Rwanda Production de l’aquaculture ..................................................................................................... 31

List of pictures Picture 1 – Cage farming at NaFFIRI, Uganda ...................................................................................................... 59 Picture 2 – CNPADA, aquaculture station of Mubone ........................................................................................... 59 Picture 3 – Eden fish farm, Pugu, Tanzania .......................................................................................................... 59 Picture 4 – Integrated aquaculture, Kigembe, Rwanda ......................................................................................... 59 Picture 5 - Jewlet Hatchery Homa Bay, Kenya ...................................................................................................... 59 Picture 6 - Samaki Nzuri Tilapia Farm, Burundi ..................................................................................................... 59 Picture 7 – Sokapi project, Lake Kivu .................................................................................................................... 60 Picture 8 – Sokoine University, Tanzania .............................................................................................................. 60 Picture 9 – National Consultation Meeting in Uganda ........................................................................................... 60

Exchange rates INFOR-EURO rates for September 2013 EUR 1 is equal to BIF 2051.330000 EUR 1 is equal to KES 117.035000 EUR 1 is equal to USD 1.326600




Acknowledgements This assignment has involved several stakeholders of various backgrounds. ACP Fish II and its Focal Points in every country and in specific institutions, the local Fisheries and Aquaculture Authorities, the local other Experts and the private operators have offered their time and knowledge to facilitate the collection of information and data. The assignment has also involved a lot of travel for the stakeholders, sometimes in difficult conditions. The inputs of the stakeholders are the bases of this report. COFREPECHE wishes to thank all of them for their valuable contribution. The Experts and COFREPECHE would like to thank Mr Koane Mindjimba, ACP Fish II Programme RFU-East Africa Office for his support throughout the assignment. We would also like to thank the EAC Secretariat and Mr Timothy Wesonga for their continuous support. We would also like to thank the Governments of the Republic of Burundi, the Republic of Kenya, the Republic of Rwanda, the United Republic of Tanzania and the Republic of Uganda for allowing and facilitating the field missions and the National Consultation Meetings. Sincere gratitude is due to LVFO and its representatives for their assistance in the National Consultation Meeting in Uganda and their inputs in at the Validation Workshop. Appreciation also goes to ACP Fish II Focal Points for their assistance in liaising with Ministries responsible for Aquaculture/Fisheries in Burundi, Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda and Uganda. Appreciation also goes to Directors in Ministries responsible for Aquaculture/Fisheries in each of the beneficiary countries. We would also like to thank all the fish farmers we visited for their kindness and willingness to share their aquaculture experiences. Last but not least we are also grateful to the other experts who have facilitated this assignment by organising the field visits and the National Consultation Meetings in their respective countries.




List of acronyms and abbreviations ACP Africa, Caribbean, and Pacific (Group of States) AfDB African Development Bank AFD Agence Française de Développement API Agence de Promotion à l’Investissement BEI Banque Européenne d’Investissement BIF BNDB

Burundi franc Banque National de Développement du Burundi

CNDAPA Centre National de Développement de l’Aquaculture et de la Pêche Artisanale (Burundi) COMESA CSR

Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa Corporate Social Responsibility

COSTECH Commission for Sciences and Technologies CSR Corporate Social Responsibility CTB Coopération Technique Belge DFR Department of Fisheries Resources (Uganda) DRC Democratic Republic of Congo EAC East African Community EIA Environmental Impact Assessment ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment ESP Economic Stimulus Programme (Kenya) EU European Union EUR Euro EVD Agency for International Business and Cooperation (The Netherlands) FAO Food and Agriculture Organisation FCR Food Conversion Ration GAP Good Aquaculture Practices GDP Gross domestic product GMO Genetically Modified Organism GOK Government Of Kenya KCDP Kenya Coastal Development Project KE Key Expert KES Kenyan schilling KMFRI Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute LBDA Lake Basin Development Authorities LTA Lake Tanganyika Authority LVBC Lake Victoria Basin Commission LVFO Lake Victoria Fisheries Organization MASHAV Israel’s Agency for International Cooperation Development MESPT Micro Enterprises Support Program Trust MINAGRI Ministry of Agriculture (Rwanda) MINAGRIE Ministère de l’Agriculture et de l’Elevage (Burundi) MINIRENA NaFIRRI

Ministry of Natural Resources (Rwanda) National Fisheries Resources Research Institute (Uganda)

NEMA National Environment Management Authority NGO Non-Governmental Organisation PAIGELAC Projet d’Appui à l’Aménagement Intégré et la Gestion des Lacs Intérieurs (Rwanda) PPP Public Private Partnership PSDS Private Sector Development Strategy RAB Rwanda Agriculture Board RAS Recirculation Aquaculture System RDB Rwanda Development Board RIAT Ramogi Institute of Advanced Technology




TAFIFA Tanzania Fish Farmers Association TAFIRI TAnzania FIsheries Research Institute ToRs Terms of Reference SME Small and Medium Enterprise SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats UDB Uganda Development Bank USD United States Dollar WAFICOS Walimi Fish Cooperative Society




1 Executive summary While the aquaculture subsector is blossoming in Sub-Saharan Africa and particularly in some Partner States of the East African Community (EAC), the aquaculture production in the region only represents a fraction of a percent of the world production. However, the EAC in particular offers a huge potential for aquaculture development. In order to meet the increasing demand for quality proteins, aquaculture represents one of the 21st century challenges. The population in the EAC is around 140 million people according to the World Bank statistics, but it is also the region of the world where the population increase is the highest. In the meantime, fisheries resources are fully exploited and over exploited in some cases. The development of the aquaculture subsector is therefore a necessity; failing to meet the future aquaculture products demand would endanger the region food security and therefore the social and political stability. The Governments have understood the challenge and are looking for the way forwards to address this situation. An aquaculture policy is a first step that will engage the private sector to invest in the subsector, but the policy needs to be followed rapidly by a strategy, a budget to implement it and a regulation that will ensure a sustainable development. The objective of this assignment is to analyse the situation in each of the EAC Partner States and understand where it stands in terms of aquaculture development, especially at Policy level that are the foundations of a development strategy. After visiting and consulting a number of stakeholders along the value chain, both from the public and private sector, the assignment comes with recommendations that should assist the EAC to develop its own Aquaculture Policy. These recommendations are expressed through a Policy Brief.

2 Background As a continent, Africa has remained behind every other region on the globe in terms of aquaculture. The reasons of this under-development of the subsector are numerous and are largely linked to the overall lack of development on the continent. This has encouraged Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) and other organisations to promote subsistence fish farming that have been rather ineffective so far. It is felt that commercial / industrial initiatives will help to fill the gaps and that is the focus of this assignment. After consulting the various stakeholders of the aquaculture value chain in the five concerned countries (Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda) and based on the consultant experience of setting up aquaculture businesses in Africa, recommendations for the on-going process of drafting new policies will be provided. According to the FAO, the aquaculture production in Sub-Saharan Africa has increased from 55 000 tonnes in 2000 to 360 000 t in 2010 and only represents a contribution of 0.6 % of the total aquaculture production in the world1. As a continent, Africa contributes to 2.2 % of the world aquaculture production, mainly produced in Egypt (920 000 t in 2010) which is the second tilapia producing country in the world after China. Countries like Nigeria, Ghana, Uganda, Kenya and Zambia are showing good signs of aquaculture development and Zimbabwe houses the biggest tilapia project in Africa with 8 000 t of tilapia produced in 2012. An interesting case study is Ghana where one farm (Tropo Farm) has developed over the last 10 years through a sometimes hard learning curve. However, its actual success (over 4 000 t production per annum) is leading to not only its own expansion, but has also an emulation effect with many projects of various scales varying from a few tonnes to hundreds of tonnes taking off. The profile of the stakeholders is also diversified; some large (sometimes international) companies are investing alongside smallholders operating as individuals or part of a group. Aquaculture is clearly under-developed in Africa, including the EAC region. It is not due to a lack of good sites or good climate conditions, but rather due to the general under-development of the economies. Nonetheless, aquaculture can flourish where the infrastructure has reached only a modest level, but it requires often vertically integrated solutions. The overall development of the EAC region should also coincide with the development of aquaculture and the timing for concrete actions could be right. Indeed there is a need for the aquaculture entrepreneurs to have a clear legal framework and support from the authorities that will enable develop their projects.

1 FAO (2012). The state of world fisheries and aquaculture 2012, 230p.




The population in the five countries targeted by this project exceeded 135 million in 2011 and some countries such as Rwanda and Burundi account for the most populated in Africa with a population exceeding 400 inhabitants per km² in Rwanda2. The development of aquaculture through the use of suitable water bodies under sustainable conditions can certainly contribute to the food security of the countries with a resource of high quality white proteins. As such, aquaculture will be a factor to the stability in the region as it can compensate the declining fisheries resources. Indeed, the pressure on wild fish stocks (both for inland and marine fisheries) has become extreme and unsustainable for many of the fish species in most of the water bodies. If a right business environment is offered to the private sector - being small or larger stakeholders - there will be a tremendous opportunity for the EAC to become a major player in fish and seafood production. In the overall African context, the EAC presents some advantages supporting its selection as a priority region for aquaculture development:

The climate is favourable to the culture of the two main species reared in freshwater aquaculture (catfish and tilapia);

There are many water bodies, including the second biggest natural lake in the world - Lake Victoria3 - and many others;

The infrastructure is being developed;

There is a market preference for fish as protein source;

There is an established market acceptance for tilapia in the whole EAC region and for catfish in some areas;

Some of the areas within the EAC region are highly populated which increases the demand for fish;

The EAC region has access to the Indian Ocean with nearly 2 000 km of shoreline, some of it being suitable for aquaculture (prawns, shellfish - including for pearl culture -, milkfish, seaweed, mud crab, etc.);

Oreochromis niloticus, the most cultured tilapia species in the world, is present in main water bodies and other suitable Oreochromis species are found in most of the lakes and rivers. Clarias spp. are also well distributed amongst the whole region;

There is a willingness from both the private sector and the authorities to develop fish farming. The EAC, with its numerous water bodies and its climate conditions offers therefore one of the best potential for the development of freshwater aquaculture activities and could potentially become the “fish basket” of the continent. Moreover, Kenya and Tanzania with their tropical shoreline also offer potential for marine aquaculture and already produce seaweed. It is certainly time to merge and reinforce the efforts of the public and the private sector in some projects across the region. This assignment seeks the contribution of various stakeholders from different backgrounds. It aims to come up with concrete recommendations to the EAC Secretariat that will give an impulse to the aquaculture development in the region.

3 Approach to the assignment The methodology used for this assignment was a value chain analysis approach; however, the aquaculture subsector is still in its infancy in many respects thus the value chain can still be qualified as informal, except for seaweed production which is well established. The different elements of the analysis were:

Subsector review (description);

Review of the aquaculture status in the 5 countries in general terms (total production and trends);

Review of the main private and public initiatives;

Review of the different country’s policies;

Review of the main tools and programmes targeting aquaculture development;

2 East African Community Facts and Figures – 2012, EAC Secretariat, September 2012, 68pp. 3 Wikipedia on Lake Victoria.




Review of the different markets for aquaculture products;

Review of the main necessary inputs for aquaculture development (feed, skills, seeds, raw materials, etc.);

Analysis of the above items;

Based on the review and analysis, identification of the main bottlenecks and obstacles for the development of the aquaculture subsector;

Analysis of aquaculture sustainability along the value chain;

SWOT (Strength, Weakness, Opportunities and Threat) analysis for both countries and for the region as a whole;

Recommendations, through a Policy Brief, for Aquaculture Policy drafting at EAC level.

3.1 Desk work

The desk work activities covered:

Compilation of information from previous reports, competent authorities and networking;

Contacting and coordinating work with other local experts recruited for this assignment;

Organisation of National Consultation Meetings.

3.2 Fieldwork

The fieldwork included:

Field visits and face-to-face interviews with stakeholders to have a better understanding of their actual situation, the challenges that they are facing as well as to assess the management level and professionalism of the operators;

Matching the official information with what is really happening on the ground. A list of people met can be found in Annex 8.2.2.

3.3 National consultation meetings and validation workshop

One National Consultation Meeting was organised in each country to be able to debate over the challenges that the private sector faces and present them to public sector representatives for debates. The National Consultation Meetings will serve to develop recommendations for future policy drafting at country and region level. National Consultation Meetings have been conducted as follows:

Tanzania: 28th of May 2013, Landmark Hotel, Dar Es Salaam;

Kenya: 31st of May 2013, Kisumu Hotel, Kisumu;

Uganda: 7th of June 2013 in Lake Victoria Fisheries Organisation (LVFO) Head Offices, Jinja;

Burundi: 21st of June 2013, City Hill Hotel, Bujumbura;

Rwanda: 27th of June 2013, Landstar Hotel, Kigali. The validation workshop was held in Arusha at the Naura Springs Hotel on the 22nd and 23rd of August 2013. Twenty-height participants attended the workshop, including the ACP Fish II Regional Manager and the Key Expert (KE). The Hon. Jesca Eryio, Deputy Secretary General of the EAC Secretariat attended and made opening remarks.

4 Comments on Terms of Reference The terms of reference contained a valuable amount of information and the objectives were well defined. The main challenge to be underlined in the implementation of the project was the time and logistic constrains to be able to collect and examine the existing documentation and other related programmes already implemented, performing field visits (existing projects being spread in a vast region) and mobilising the various stakeholders for a National Consultation Meeting. An average of 4.4 days (not including travels) were available per country to perform the above. The goodwill and assistance of the respective competent Authorities, stakeholders, ACP




Fish II Focal Points as well as other experts – aquaculture specialists recruited after the award of the contract - in each country have been of great help.

5 Organisation and methodology

5.1 Delivery of terms of reference

The activities were implemented according to the Terms of Reference (ToRs) as explained in the table below.

No. Terms of Reference specific activities How delivered through the assignment

1 Briefing by the ACP Fish II and EAC and review of the purpose of the consultancy and the proposed structure of the study and methodology;

Briefing with ACP Fish II Programme RFU was undertaken on 3rd of May 2013 through Skype;

2 Collect all relevant background documentation and materials;

List of documents consulted is detailed in Annex 4;

3 Devise a work plan for the assignment, to be presented to, and approved by, the EAC Secretariat and ACP Fish II Programme;

Done, approved and implemented from 20/05/13 to 28/08/13;

4 Undertake a review and analysis of the relevant documentation;

Included in this Report;

5 In collaboration with the EAC Secretariat and contracted experts, organise and conduct national field visits and working sessions/consultations with key stakeholders (at least 1 meeting in each participating country, with estimated 20 participants) and conduct informal face-to-face meetings as required;

All EAC Partner States have been visited, private and public sector stakeholders have been consulted during the field missions and a National Consultation Meeting has been held in each EAC country;

6 Prepare a first draft of the study on analytical review of private sector involvement in aquaculture in the EAC region;

Presented under the aquaculture review report. Summarised and presented at the Regional Validation Workshop;

7 Revise first draft to incorporate inputs from EAC, LVFO and ACP Fish II;

Draft Policy Brief has been revised at the Validation Workshop;

8 Prepare “Information Note” containing the key findings of the study to be distributed widely ahead of the Regional Validation Workshop;

Draft Information Note was first sent to ACP Fish II and EAC on the 12th of August 2013, and finalised on the 21st of August 2013 following comments;

9 In collaboration with the EAC Secretariat, convene and conduct a Regional Validation Workshop in Arusha to present and validate main findings of the final study;

The Regional Validation Workshop was held on 22nd and 23rd of August 2013;

10 Prepare a Policy Briefing Note with main agreed recommendations of the study.

Policy Brief revised with comment from Regional Validation Workshop and included in Annex 6.

5.2 Conduct and details of the assignment including visibility activities

5.2.1 Expert team

In addition to the KE presented in the technical offer, five Other Experts (aquaculture specialists), were recruited once the project was awarded to COFREPECHE. Their CV was validated by ACP Fish II prior to start working in the field.

Other Expert for Tanzania: Joseph Luomba – Tanzania Fisheries Research Institute (TAFIRI);

Other Expert for Kenya: Ernest Yongo – Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute (KMFRI);

Other Expert for Uganda: Réginald Philippe Borel de Bitche – Managing Director of a private company (fish farming and fish processing);

Other Expert for Burundi: Prosper Kiyuku, Burundi Fisheries and Aquaculture Federation.




Other Expert for Rwanda: Jean Bosco Kabagambe, independent consultant. The other experts played a key role in organising the field visits, setting appointments with various stakeholders and preparing the National Consultation Meetings, using their local networks.

5.2.2 Timeframe

The KE conducted three missions in EAC region: two missions during the first phase and one final mission for the Regional Validation Workshop. It has been necessary to fragment the field mission of the first phase in two parts to ensure an early start of the field activities. The Rwandan embassy requires 21 days for visa delivery and the visa could not be obtained in time for the first mission. First mission The first mission started as soon as possible after contract signature.

Tanzania - 22nd to 29th of May 2013;

Kenya – 29th of May to 2nd of June 2013;

Uganda – 2nd to 8th of June 2013. Second mission

Burundi – 16th to 22nd of June 2013;

Rwanda – 22nd to 27th of June 2013. Third Mission The Regional Validation Workshop was held in Arusha on the 22nd and 23rd of August 2013. Details on the itinerary can be found in Annex 8.2.1.

6 Results of documentation review, field missions and national consultation meetings

6.1 Tanzania

6.1.1 Generalities

Tanzania has a population of 47.78 million according to the 2012 World Bank estimations and, according to the FAO statistics (2011), an aquaculture production of 7 250 t per annum; this translates to an average of 0.15 kg/capita/year of aquaculture production. The fisheries sector, with a large contribution from inland waters, remains at around 350 000 t per annum (7.32 kg/capita/year).

Figure 1 – Tanzania Fisheries Production 1950 - 2010

Source: FAO Fishery Statistics




Figure 2 - Tanzania, Aquaculture Production

Source: FAO Fishery Statistics The Fisheries Policy was formally endorsed in December 1997. This document establishes the development priorities of the aquaculture subsector and was followed in 2003 by the amendment of the Fisheries Act No. 6 of 1970. Subsequently the Fisheries Regulations were also amended in 2004 (FAO). The report refers to the Republic of Tanzania and Zanzibar. It was indicated during the Regional Validation Workshop that there was aquaculture production in Tanzania well before 1985, but this was not reflected in the FAO statistics. The aquaculture subsector is under-developed despite very good potential in both fresh and marine waters. The aquaculture subsector is principally represented by the production of seaweed (Eucheuma spinosum). A personal communication suggests a seaweed production of about 12 000 t/year (dry weight), the majority of which from Zanzibar, and some prawn farming on Mafia Island (250 t/year of Peneus monodon) at Alphakurst. Pearl farming is a new activity. Some milkfish and mullet production is also reported at low production level. Freshwater aquaculture is dominated by tilapia (Oreochromis spp) and catfish (Clarias gariepinus) on a production approach that can be qualified still as artisanal or at subsistence level.

6.1.2 Field visits

EAC Secretariat The mission started in Arusha by a visit to the main beneficiary, the EAC Secretariat. Mr Timothy Wesonga, Senior Livestock and Fishery Officer and ACP Fish II Focal Point for EAC and a colleague, Dr William Olaho Mukani, Regional Project Coordinator PANSPO4. The meeting was held on 21th of May 2013 at the EAC Secretariat Offices. The importance of the EAC as an intergovernmental organisation was underlined. It was pointed out that if an agreement is reached between the Partner States, this agreement will prevail on national legislations. In the case of an Aquaculture Policy, if a consensus is reached, the EAC Aquaculture Policy would prevail in the region. There is an action plan at EAC level aiming to increase food safety. It concerns livestock, fisheries, agriculture and forestry. The development of aquaculture activities is therefore within the priorities of the EAC. Anti-dumping measures were discussed at EAC level to avoid Asian tilapia being dumped on the EAC market. It is understood that protein is needed while production is still low, but a nascent industry needs to be protected. Ministry of Livestock Development and Fisheries A meeting was held on 23rd of May 2013 at the Ministry of Livestock Development and Fisheries with Mr K Osewe and Mrs Ritha Maly, Assistant Directors. It was reported that an aquaculture policy document has been drafted and submitted in June 2013 to the Ministry Cabinet. This document was not available at the time of writing, but it is meant to replace the 1997 Policy that is vague and now obsolete, considering the evolution of the country’s context as well as the aquaculture industry.

4 http://www.au-ibar.org/pan-spso

http://www.au-ibar.org/pan-spso




The meeting also served to prepare the National Consultation Meeting to be held in Dar es Salaam, prepare invitations and set up an agenda. Morogoro A field visit was organised on 24th of May 2013 to Morogoro to visit the SOKOINE University. A meeting with Mr Nazael Madalla, Head of the aquaculture section was held, followed by a tour of the aquaculture research facilities. Mr Madala is a specialist in fish nutrition and aquaculture systems. Several research programs are carried out in the university facilities. Fish nutrition, breeding of catfish, growth and rearing parameters are being studied, but the facilities are still under developed and the whole set up gives an impression of operating on very low budget, but plenty of ideas are implemented to compensate the lack of financial support. The facilities are made of concrete circular and square tanks, some small (10 x 15 m) earth ponds and a “home-made” hatchery. Mr Madalla indicated that 1 % of GDP5 is allocated to COSTECH (Commission for Sciences and Technologies) from which the KILIMOKWANZA programme (“Agriculture first”) benefits. Students can benefit from COSTECH through scholarship. From discussion, it appears that students are not sufficiently trained to become operational on commercial fish farming, so there is a need for more practical training. The fry and fingerlings production from the centre are offered free of charge most of the time, to local fish farmers. Eight people are actually employed in the aquaculture section (3 ecologists, 4 aquaculturists and 2 professors) for a total of 140 students. The University has produced 130 aquaculture graduates so far and they are mostly employed in the public sector (TAFIRI, etc.). Kingolwira Aquaculture Centre Fred Francis is the person in charge of the Kingolwira Aquaculture Centre. The Centre is owned by the Government and has the following activities:

Fingerlings production (tilapia and catfish);

Training;

Research with other institutions. The Centre was originally built by the Government of Tanzania with the financial support of the FAO in 1980. The water supply is from an 8 km 3 inches pipe coming from a nearby hill. This is not ideal as water is not warm, and has quality problems sometimes due to other users upstream. The site was originally selected due to the proximity of 2 rivers that provide too little water and of not good quality (pollution). Fingerlings are distributed to private farms but also schools, prisons, etc. The production should be 800 000 tilapia and 200 000 juveniles Clarias per year, but the objectives are not always met. The price of a 5 g fingerling is TZS 50. Training is provided free of charge and about 200 people are trained every year. The feed used is a mix of available ingredients on the market such as maize brand, cotton seed cake, sunflower cake and some fish meal if it is available at affordable prices. Indicative price of tilapia for consumption (250/350 g): TZS 6 000/kg. Clarias sells at TZS 4 000/kg. The Centre employs 11 staffs but 7 of them are under training at the time of writing. There are 6 centres of this kind in the country, but Kingolwira is said to be the best. It appears clearly that there is a lack of finance to run the Centre, but also that the site is not ideal in terms of water supply. However; there is a plan to drill a borehole on site. Private sector On 25th of May 2013, the Eden Fish Farm in Pugu was visited. Eden is a private initiative of Mr Willy William and has just started at the beginning of 2013. They are advised by the Fisheries Department. Ponds have been built on a piece of land where the water table is high which eases the pumping. The downside of this situation is the risk of flood.

5 Expressed as such by the interviewee. It could however mean “national budget”.




A hatchery is being built and the existing facilities, which are currently used for fish on-growing, will become a breeding operation. The production of table fish will be developed on another site and in some lakes. The overall impression is that there is a lot of goodwill and enthusiasm, but not enough professionalism in the project as yet. Technical and management bases are weak and the project needs some support and assistance. The project is self-funded, using funds generated by the owner’s other business of catering. The expansion is envisaged by developing another site nearby and using small lakes in a second phase. The overall impression is that the project is at risk due to lack of know-how and experience, but however, will benefit from a good market in the nearby town of Dar es Salaam.

6.1.3 National consultation meeting

The National Consultation Meeting was held on 27th of May 2013 in Dar es Salaam (Landmark Hotel). The number of attendees was 20, including the KE and Other Expert. A good panel of private and public sector was represented, including aquaculturists from both freshwater and seawater. Seaweed producers and a pearl producer attended the meeting. The main issues raised during the consultation meeting were:

O. niloticus, the main cultured species in the world, is no longer considered as an exotic fish and is present in many water bodies in Tanzania.

There is a need to have a common policy, especially on shared water systems such as the big lakes and rivers. A team of experts is working on a common policy on Lake Tanganyika.

Competent Authorities’ position on cage farming seems to be that this technique should be applied on deep lakes (Lake Tanganyika) and not on shallow lakes (Lake Victoria). However, trials are being made on Lake Victoria to assess the sedimentation impacts.

At the moment, O. niloticus is not allowed for cage farming on Lake Tanganyika, although its presence in the lake is no longer disputed.

The most common tilapia species known in Lake Tanganyika is O. tanganicae on which very little is known about its rearing performances, fecundity, etc., hence a need to conduct researches on that particular species.

The development of aquaculture has been boosted 4 years ago by establishing the Division of Aquaculture Development.

There is inadequate funding for data collection and statistics.

A problem of institutions set up was raised. The Central Government is responsible for policy and legislation writing, but the local authorities do not have enough qualified officers to implement them.

People in financial institutions are also not qualified to understand aquaculture business.

It is reported that the Government will make funds available through banks for financing agriculture and livestock investments; that includes aquaculture.

It is recognised that research and fry production stations do not have enough financing to operate well. Comparison was made with Kenya where the Government made an investment in aquaculture only that is equivalent to the investment of Tanzania for the whole of livestock and fisheries.

There is a proposal for the creation of the Tanzania Fish Farmers Association (TAFIFA).

Pearl culture has a marketing problem. Buyers are few for the raw material (pearls on shell). There is a need for assistance in marketing and value addition.

Seaweed faces a similar marketing problem where the monopoly of buyer induces low selling prices. There is a proposal to form an association of seaweed producers to challenge that monopoly. Diversification projects are also being developed (production of soap, shampoo, etc.).

It was confirmed that a new aquaculture policy is being reviewed at Cabinet level.

6.1.4 Aquaculture documents for Tanzania

The following documents were collected and consulted to establish the aquaculture profile for Tanzania:

National Aquaculture Development Strategy Plan (2009);

Residual Monitoring Plan (2005);




Investment Guide Fisheries Subsector (2012);

Mariculture Guidelines (2000);

Seaweed Strategic Plan (2005).

6.1.5 Conclusions and Perspectives

Tanzania has a high potential for aquaculture, both on its marine coastline and its freshwater rivers and lakes. The climate is adequate to tropical species that are in demand regionally and internationally (prawns, seaweed, tilapia, clarias, etc.); The aquaculture industry in Tanzania still needs some concrete actions at Government level to incite the private sector to invest. Amongst the actions to be taken is to have a strong aquaculture development policy that is being revised at the moment. These will have to be followed by an adequate strategy. Creating favourable conditions for the private investor is indeed essential and in a global agriculture strategy as aquaculture projects have to be developed alongside other agribusinesses. Tanzania has the biggest population in the EAC and it will continue to grow while the fisheries are declining in both fresh and marine water environments. It is therefore a challenge for the Authorities to create the conditions for aquaculture to blossom and contribute to the proteins supply to the population.

6.2 Kenya

6.2.1 Generalities

Kenya’s population is 41.61 million according to the World Bank (2012). Its aquaculture subsector has received a strong support from the Government with the Economic Stimulus Programme (ESP) and the initial investment of USD 50 million has been followed up with further funding support that is said to bring the overall investment up to USD 90 million, although this Is not from official sources. According to statistics, the aquaculture production has increased from 4 000 t at the beginning of the programme in 2008 to 19 000 t in 2012. Although there are always polemics around such programmes and their implementation, there is however a positive impact on the industry even if there is always room for optimization of the funds spent. Within the 5 EAC countries, Kenya has shown the highest commitment to the aquaculture industry. Marine aquaculture is still a small industry. Different projects such as prawn farming (FAO – 1978-1998) and oyster farming (Kenya – Belgium 1985-1990) have collapsed. At present, seaweed, mud crab, mullet and milkfish are farmed at low level and there is an artemia public-private project undertaken with the University of Ghent (Belgium).

Figure 3 - Fisheries production in Kenya (FAO – 1950-2010)





Figure 4 - Aquaculture production Kenya (FAO – 1950-2010)


6.2.2 Mission findings

Only 4 days were devoted to the mission in Kenya (field visit and National Consultation Meeting). This considered as few considering the interest of field visits in a country that has deployed a lot of efforts in developing aquaculture across all its districts. As a result, the mission focused Kisumu and its surroundings; the National Consultation Meeting was also held in Kisumu. A visit to the Sagana Research Station and a few more private projects would have been necessary to appraise the impact of the ESP. The ESP has promoted the construction or the rehabilitation of 80 000 ponds across the country and has allowed a production estimated at 19 000 metric tonnes of fish (2012), mostly tilapia and catfish. The marketing of aquaculture products seems to be problematic; small stakeholders have difficulties to market their crops due to their location sometimes or due to the lack of synchronisation between the supply and demand. Some producers are therefore not achieving good sales price although it seems that tilapia sells for about USD 3/kg which is within a usual price range for the region and should provide a margin. The Kenyan Aquaculture Policy however covers all the aquaculture related activities such as marketing. Feed producers exist in Kenya such as Sigma Feed of Crop King. The cost and quality of feed remains an issue according to farmers.

6.2.3 Field visits

Jewlet Hatchery – Homa Bay Jewlet Hatchery is dedicated to the production of tilapia and catfish fingerlings. The actual production is about 100 000 tilapia fingerlings per month and 20 000 catfish per month. The facilities are mainly earth ponds from 120 to 600 m². They use hapas as well for fry grow out, but prefer to use small natural ponds. The tilapia fry are sex reversed, but the feed is a mix of non-processed ingredients. The ingredients for the feed formulation were not revealed to the experts, but wheat bran and Caradina niloticus (small freshwater shrimp that is harvested in Lake Victoria) are used as animal proteins. They also feed the breeders with a mix of raw material such as dagaa (Rastrineobola agentea) dust, wheat bran, sunflower cake and Caradina. Mr Enos Were, the owner of Jewlet Hatchery, also provides aquaculture training and he could not be met at the time as he was performing a training session. Dominion Fish Farm Dominion Farm6 is a large venture that has been taken over by an American company. The core business is rice production on a large estate in the Yala River delta (North West of Kisumu).

6 http://www.dominion-farms.com/

http://www.dominion-farms.com/




6.3 The diversification of Dominion includes a tilapia farming operation in natural ponds fed by gravity into the lake. There are also some concrete circular tanks of about 20 m of growing purposes (see picture in Annex 7 – Policy brief

ANALYTICAL REVIEW OF PRIVATE SECTOR INVOLVEMENT IN AQUACULTURE IN EAC PARTNER

STATES, WITH RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE AREAS OF GROWTH AND SUPPORT

6.3.1 Executive summary

The EAC Secretariat has identified the need to develop an Aquaculture Policy at regional level and has requested the ACP Fish II Programme to assist with an “analytical review of private sector involvement in aquaculture in the EAC Partner States, with recommendations for future areas of growth and support”. The EAC recognises that aquaculture production has to be generated by the private sector. In turn, the Governments have to create a favourable context for the aquaculture industry to blossom, especially through Public-Private Partnership (PPP) programmes. The EAC offers a huge potential for aquaculture development. In order to meet the increasing demand for quality proteins, aquaculture represents one of the 21st century challenges. The population in the EAC is around 140 million people according to the World Bank statistics, but it is also the region of the world where the population growth is the highest. In the meantime, fisheries resources are fully exploited and over exploited in some cases. The development of the aquaculture subsector is therefore a necessity; failing to meet the future aquaculture products demand would endanger the region food security and could therefore jeopardize the social and political stability. The Governments have understood the challenge and are looking for the way forwards to address this situation. An aquaculture policy is a first step that will engage the private sector to invest in the subsector, but the policy needs to be followed rapidly by a strategy, a budget to implement it and a regulation that will ensure a sustainable development.

6.3.2 Context

Aquaculture is one of the world’s fastest growing food production sectors. Today half the fish being consumed in the world comes from fish farming and it continues to grow rapidly – the average annual growth rate since 1970 is 8.4 %. The aquaculture food production system has clear advantages over other types of animal protein production. It contributes less to global emissions of nitrogen and phosphorus. Less water and energy is needed to cultivate fish, resulting in lower environmental demands per unit produced compared with protein derived from cattle, pigs and poultry. These efficiencies are essential as natural resources become more constrained. With its high population growth, the EAC has the challenge to increase its white proteins production to meet its actual demand and create the conditions to face the future demand. According to the FAO, the aquaculture production in Sub-Saharan Africa has increased from 55 000 tonnes in 2000 to 360 000 t in 2010 and only represents a contribution of 0.6 % of the total aquaculture production in the world. As a continent, Africa contributes to 2.2 % of the world aquaculture production, mainly produced in Egypt (920 000 t in 2010) which is the second tilapia producing country in the world after China.

The “aquaculture challenge” has been clearly identified by the EAC Partner States. As it is indicated in the ToRs of this assignment: “At the regional level, the LVFO, with support from FAO, has developed a Regional Aquaculture Strategy and Investment Plan in 2009 to guide development of the sector; it also stressed the regional commitment through the Joint Communiqué of the Council of Ministers (CoM) of the LVFO issued on 28 May 2010 in which Partner States were urged “to promote aquaculture development in the EAC”. The EAC Food Security Action (2011–2015), as approved by the EAC Summit in April 2011, identifies aquaculture as one of the areas that contribute to food security in the EAC region. Similarly, the EAC has




identified aquaculture as one of the sources of fish which is repeatedly identified as a candidate for investment and export growth. Moreover, it has, in the last 6 years, firmly put collaboration with the private sector as one of the cornerstones for the region’s development. This approach was set out in the EAC Private Sector Development Strategy (PSDS) adopted in Arusha in June 2006 and has been further promoted through investment policies, investment conferences and projects in support of the Small and Medium Enterprise (SME) sector. These various policy statements and activities have noted the potential contribution and the opportunity for investment in the broad fisheries sector.


In terms of natural resources, the EAC region offers a variety of opportunities to develop aquaculture. The hydrographical network, beside the semi-arid and arid areas in Kenya and Tanzania, is dense and feeds both the Congo and the Nile basins. The Great Lakes also offer huge aquaculture potential in a region that is in need of additional proteins resources. Kenya and Tanzania, including Zanzibar and other islands, on their 3 440 km of shoreline, have also the opportunity to develop mariculture at a much higher level than the current one. The actual aquaculture production levels are low as compared to the potential and the demand. The statistics are not always reliable, but at least they give some indications. The whole EAC region might produce between 30 000 and 35 000 tonnes of aquaculture products in 2013 (excluding seaweed). These figures are based on official statistics, personal communications and the experts experience in the region. With the current aquaculture production, there are only 250 g of fish per capita per year available for local consumption. It means that the challenge is not less than increasing the production by 20 times the actual levels. Such an ambition requires a serious planning, support and legal frame. The high agriculture potential of many areas of the EAC region can also generate the raw materials needed in aquaculture, mainly soya and maize. The access to these crops is a considerable advantage to the development of aquaculture and that is why an aquaculture policy needs to be linked to agriculture policy. There is a transition in the stakeholders’ mentality and the idea of moving from subsistence to commercial aquaculture is now widely shared. It is also recognised that the aquaculture industry must be driven by the private sector with the support of the public sector. The mission has identified that, despite remarkable progresses compared to the situation prevailing before 2007, there remains a lack of professionalism amongst many stakeholders. This is the task of the Governments to allocate more means to training and research, but also to facilitate Public-Private Sector initiatives. Aquaculture Excellence Centres are also to be developed further. Farms management must become more professional. Missing links along the value chain are also observed at both inputs and outputs levels, leading to inefficiencies and loss of value. For example that is observed in quality / volume of fish feed available or insufficient post-harvest skill or poor marketing of fish. Each EAC Partner State has made progresses on its approach of the aquaculture development policy and strategy over the last 4 or 5 year. Kenya has taken the lead in adopting and implementing various measures to promote aquaculture, especially through its Economic Stimulus Programme and its National Aquaculture Development Strategy and National Development Plan 2010-2015. Kenya has also a National Aquaculture Policy and various development instruments. The other EAC Partner States are also working on strategies, master plans and policies. Uganda has various documents such as Aquaculture Rules, Aquaculture Strategy, Standard Operating Rules for Aquaculture Inspection, Code of Practice for Aquaculture, National Aquaculture Policy for Aquaculture Parks. Tanzania has a National Aquaculture Development Strategy Plan and the Aquaculture Policy is being reviewed. Rwanda has a Fisheries and Fish Farming Master Plan (2011 -2020) and has also an Aquaculture and Fisheries Policy, but it needs to be reviewed as it was produced in 1994. Burundi has a National Strategy for the Development of Aquaculture. These actions should be accelerated and followed by




implementation in order to achieve the production increases that are needed to assure food security in the region. There is still a considerable amount of work to be done before seeing the region producing the hundreds of thousands tonnes of aquaculture products needed by the populations. The first step is certainly the adoption of an ambitious policy. The Aquaculture Policy brief is being drafted to give guidelines to the policy maker and draw their attention on essential topics to be addressed. These recommendations are inspired by the various meeting with both the public and the private sector in the five Partner States through individual meetings and National Consultations with good panels of stakeholders. It is hoped that the EAC Aquaculture Policy will be developed in the near future and that a strategic plan and related legislation will path the way to the development of a flourishing aquaculture industry that will provide fish to the region and beyond.

6.3.4 Policy implications and recommendations

The EAC Policy should recognise that:

Aquaculture is under-developed in the region while fisheries are declining, hence creating a potential food security problem, especially regarding the population increasing rate that is one of the highest in the world (up to 3,1 % annual increase rate in Uganda, Worldwatch Institute).

As production of white proteins, fish is a premium candidate as it is a better feed converter compared to any other animal.

EAC Policy should take the following, not exhaustive, resolutions:

1. The EAC should set production targets for the region with milestones that can be periodically verified. Each Partner State will set its own targets that should be compiled at regional level.

2. The EAC should organise a development Partners’ conference to sensitise and mobilise funds for the subsector in the region.

3. The Policy must encourage projects that are economically sound i.e. production costs and market price driven.

4. The EAC should encourage a Regional Aquaculture Network capitalising on LVFO’s Aquaculture Working Group which should itself integrate and involve private sector network groups in decisions making processes.

5. The EAC should organise an interface between research and end-users within the region and beyond. 6. The EAC aquaculture policy should express a global vision and goals. 7. The EAC should put in place a legislation and regulations that derive from the Aquaculture Policy. Good

governance should be included in the EAC Aquaculture Policy. 8. A communication platform at EAC level should be created where individual Partner States could see

what is happening in other countries on various aquaculture topics (import of strains, hormone use, etc.). 9. The EAC Aquaculture Policy must put in place an information and mobilisation strategy of stakeholders. 10. The decision to increase LVFO’s involvement in aquaculture development in the region is to be

implemented so that its mandate is extended to Rwanda and Burundi and to all water bodies within the region.

11. The EAC Aquaculture Policy should be revised every 5 years in order to fit with:

actual needs of the population;

new and appropriate technologies;

environmental changes;

social evolution of the countries or the region. 12. Climate change considerations must be integrated at policy level, insisting on the sustainable

characteristic that the projects must meet for approval. 13. The Aquaculture Policy will elaborate a development plan of a financing framework. 14. Definitions of specific terms employed in the policy and the regulation should be included. 15. Monitoring tools must be developed to control the aquaculture activities within the EAC and evaluate the

milestones achieved.




16. Penalties for non-compliance to the law have to be indicated. 17. The EAC Aquaculture Policy must inspire the Partner States that have not yet put in place their own

policy. 18. All commercial aquaculture projects will be subject to an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) that

complies with the EAC standards that will have to be elaborated. 19. Small scale aquaculture projects not exceeding certain volumes (to be defined) could benefit from a

simplified EIA. 20. Good Aquaculture Practices should be developed and implemented at EAC level. 21. The EAC Aquaculture Policy should encourage Aquaculture Parks creation in order to ease access to

the aquaculture activities to small and medium stakeholders. 22. Mapping of aquaculture favourable zones should be undertaken region wise. 23. Maximum carrying capacity of all major water systems should be carried out in order to preserve the

water resources. 24. Areas of particular biological interest (breeding areas, mangroves, etc.) must be identified and protected

by the EAC Aquaculture Policy. 25. The EAC Aquaculture Policy will adopt a clear position on the introduction of exotic species or strains

of fish. 26. The introduction of GMO fish should be examined in the Aquaculture Policy. 27. The EAC Aquaculture Policy should encourage the development of programmes for genetic

improvement of species (broodstock production) and gene banks. 28. Certification of fish seed should be put in place. 29. The use of drugs and chemicals has to be regulated, including the use of antibiotics, hormones,

fungicides and pesticides. 30. The EAC Aquaculture Policy should also put in place a certification process for fish feed to ensure

quality and food safety as well as profitability of fish farms. 31. An animal welfare component should be part of the EAC Aquaculture Policy. 32. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) plans should be encouraged. 33. Aquaculture policy should define and document the social requirements of the aquaculture subsector. 34. Gender issues have to be addressed so that the employment of women and youths are encouraged. 35. At EAC level, information on tax incentives on aquaculture inputs should be more widely advertised. 36. The EAC Aquaculture Policy should lift barriers to trade on fish products and aquaculture inputs within

EAC and engage discussion to extend it to COMESA. 37. The EAC Aquaculture Policy should address SPS according to the existing EAC protocol and measures. 38. The EAC Aquaculture Policy should also envisage the protection of its aquaculture nascent industry

from cheap fish, especially tilapia from Asia. 39. The EAC should lift exports levies on aquaculture products within the region. 40. The EAC Aquaculture Policy should aim to ease fingerlings movements in the region. 41. At EAC level, a database of trained people and graduates should be put on line with frequent updating. 42. The EAC should find funding and mechanisms for practical training that should be offered in centres of

excellence to labour, technicians and managers. 43. EAC should facilitate the collaboration of education and research centres from EAC and overseas.

6.3.5 Source consulted or recommended

General documents Aquaculture Policy, Managing Environmental costs of Aquaculture. Blue Frontiers, 2011.

Agriculture and rural development strategy for the East African Community (2005 – 2030). EAC Secretariat, 2006.

Situation Mondiale des Pêches et de l’Aquaculture. FAO, 2012)

EAC Regional Strategy and Implementation Plan for Sustainable Aquaculture Plan. IOC/FAO, 2012

Mariculture in the WIO Region “Challenges and Prospects”. Sida, MISTRA, IFS, NIOMSA, 2009

Fisheries and Aquaculture in a Changing Climate. FAO, 2011.




Regional Aquaculture Strategy and Investment Plan. LVFO, 2009.

Burundi Stratégie Nationale pour le Developpement de l’Aquaculture au Burundi. MINAGRIE, 2013.

Kenya Assessment of National Aquaculture Policies and Programmes in Kenya. SARNISSA, 2009.

National Aquaculture Policy. Ministry of Fisheries Development, Republic of Kenya, 2011.

Fisheries Development Flagship Project 2012 – 2030. Ministry of Fisheries Development, Republic of Kenya. 2012.

Support to Legislative Development in Tanzania and Preparation of a Draft Aquaculture Policy in Kenya. ACP Fish II, June 2011.

Business Opportunities for Aquaculture Development in Kenya. IMARES / LEI, 2011.

Rwanda Master Plan for Fisheries and Fish Farming in Rwanda. Rutaisire, 2011.

Quick Scan to indentify and discuss options for improved fish production in Rwanda. Petra Splielthoff, 2013.

Tanzania Investment Opportunities in the Fishery Industry. Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development, 2011.

Fisheries Sector Development Programme. Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development, 2010.

The Fisheries Sector Policy and Strategic Statement. Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development, 1997.

Aquaculture in Tanzania, World Aquaculture. M. Rice, 2006.

The Status of Aquaculture Development in Tanzania. Soko, Lamtane, Wetengere, Kajitanus, Msuya, Mmochi and Mgaya. 2007.

A Strategic Guide to expanding aquaculture production and promoting its development in Zanzibar. FAO, 2011.

Uganda National Investment Policy for Aquaculture Parks in Uganda. Republic of Uganda, 2012.

Feasibility study for model commercial aquaculture parks in Uganda. Delegation of the European Union in Uganda. 2013.

Aquaculture Rules, The Fish Act. Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries, 2003.




Annex 8 - Presentations of the workshop). The fry production is said to be around 400 000 per month while the harvest of table fish is around 8 t/month. The production cycle is about 9 months to produce 450/500 g fish which is not a bad achievement considering that the water temperature is reported to be 22/24°C all year round. As it is the case for most of the rivers flowing into Lake Victoria, the water temperature is below optimal (27/29°C) for tilapia production, but however feasible. Dominion has also a feed plant (not visited) equipped with an extruder. The production is only about 4 t/day, but has a higher capacity. The selling price of the feed is about USD 800/t equivalent which seems reasonable although it was not possible to establish if the Feed Conversion Ratios (FCRs) were acceptable. Maseno Fish Farm The farm owner is Mr Okello Otieno, a banker who developed a passion for aquaculture. He farms both catfish and tilapia in a Recirculation Aquaculture System (RAS) that is covered by a plastic greenhouse to keep better temperatures. Maseno has an altitude of over 1 500 m (Google Earth) which would not offer ideal temperatures for tilapia or clarias farming in flow through system. The business initially targeted the live bait market (Clarias fingerlings being used for catching Nile perch). But then, with the industry decline, the market for live bait has collapsed, inducing a diversification of the project into table fish production (catfish and tilapia). As the owner is not always on site, management is a problem and the viability of the project is compromised. At present, the plan is to produce 4 t of table fish per month and the more frequent presence of the owner and the appointment of a farm manager should get the business back into a profitability situation. Bidii Fish Farmers Bidii Fish Farmers is a cooperative, the members of which are fish producers, but also have a feed production plant. At the time of the visit, the feed mill in operation was still a basic mixer followed by a pelletiser. This equipment is suitable for the production of “semi-floating” pellets of about 28% crude proteins. The raw materials used are rice and wheat bran, Caradona and a vitamin pre-mix. Fermented cassava is used as a binder and assures a bit of floatability to the pellets. It seems that the fermentation of cassava induces the tilapia appetite. The FRCs with Bidii’s semi-floating pellets is said to be between 2 to 2.3 with a selling price of USD 920/t equivalent, it makes the feed very expensive as the feed cost per kg of fish produced will be close to USD 2/kg. The actual feed production is very low at 1 500 kg per month. The ASARECA program (Association for Strengthening Agriculture Research in Eastern and Central Africa7) is assisting Bidii Fish Farmers through a feed trial project where various feed formulations are tested in the farms. At the time of the visit, Bidii was installing a complete production line for floating pellets. This involves the installation of a grinder, a mixer, an extruder, a cooler and a drier. A spray pump was also available to incorporate oil and vitamins. The total investment for this equipment is KES 2.6 million or USD 30 000 and is financed by the Micro Enterprises Support Program Trust (MESPT).


The national consultation meeting in Kenya was held in Kisumu Hotel on the 31st May 2013. Many participants came with presentations which have been very useful to the consultant and therefore welcomed. The following summarises the main presentations that were the basis for discussions between the participants and the consultants.

6.3.6.1 Current status of the trilateral tilapia VC programme

This programme is a project developed by the Ministry of Fisheries in partnership with the German Cooperation and the Israel’s Agency for International Cooperation Development (MASHAV).

7 http://www.asareca.org/

http://www.asareca.org/




The programme has been launched in 2012. It aims at the improvement of livelihood of communities and reduction of the fishing pressure on Lake Victoria. The actions include capacity building (feed, fry, training, marketing, etc.). The activities performed are:

• A total of 132 Extension Officers have been trained in fish farm management; • A total of 27 fish farmers have been trained and a further 30 are currently following a training at Jewlet

farm; • The program has constructed a hatchery at RIAT (Ramogi Institute of Advanced Technology) for training

purposes; • It has also built a bore hole for RIAT; • The programme bought several furniture and equipment for Ministry of Fisheries development, RIAT,

LBDA (Lake Basin Development Authorities) and Jewlet Hatchery; • The progamme also bought some vehicles to the Ministry of Fisheries and RIAT.

6.3.6.2 Feed and seed developmental programme - the way forward

This theme was presented by Safina Musa. Some key figures presented:

• Area under aquaculture 10 000 ha; • Farmers 2012- Over 50 000; • Commercial feed millers 2012 – 12; • Cottage feed industries – 5; • Fish production in Aquaculture; 2012 – 22 000 t; • Available commercial feeds have FCR 2.5 on average; • Translates to over 50 000 t demand for feeds.

Challenges discussed:

Feed quality • Nutrient uniformity; pellet quality issues, low Feed Conversion Ratio (FCR); • Over reliance on fishmeal Omena (Rastrineobola argentea) creates direct competition with human food; • Few of trained aquatic feed experts (researchers, technicians, millers); • Frequent price fluctuations of raw material for the feed industry; • High cost of fish feeds- Commercial fish feeds are expensive in region in Kenya USD 1, Uganda

USD 0.9, Tanzania USD 1.3 and Rwanda USD 1.5; • Lack of starter diets- for larval and fry stages, creating a major constrain (milkfish, grey mullets, catfish)

Seed quality • Poor quality fish seed; a result of weak genetic improvement programs & poor hatchery management; • Lack of a seed, feed certification & quality assurance systems; • Weak culture systems; so far pond culture dominates; • Stunted growth of fish e.g. tilapia; • Longer growth period: 8-12 months; Development potential • domestication of fish & shellfish of commercial importance (i.e. conduct culture trials on new fish &

aquatic plants for food, medicine and ornamental trade); • conduct breed improvement through selection, hybridization, polyploidization, genetic engineering &

other technologically advanced methods for corresponding systems & zones; • development of standards for seed certification; availing genetically superior broodstock to seed

multiplication centres & hatcheries countrywide e.g. conducting of trials on suitable culture systems for different zones including cages, raceways and tanks in rural & urban settings; research;

• Modelling for site selection of seed/feed farms to rural/coastal/urban planning: this could ensure minimization of risks of environmental load, make use of farming/coastal/urban space that is under high demand, ensure potentiality of farms and determine indicators/stressors affecting site selection (see schematic diagram in next slide: could be done by computer software e.g. GIS);

• Spatio-temporal relations between seeds and feeds;




• Research on alternative feed resources- plant based, non-conventional; • Improvement of feed conversion ratio; • Feed development for starter diets for different culture species (C. mugils, C. chanos, C. gariepinus); • Development of Ornamental feeds (Koi carp): high potential; • Microbes effect on better feed degradation e.g. enzymes; • Research on nutrition related conditions, deformities, diseases and the quality of the flesh; • Research on anti-nutritional factors, toxins in fish feed ingredients and safe removal mechanisms; • Nutrient loading from fish feeds in culture systems, effects on water quality, treatment and safe disposal; • Develop certification system for accrediting for feed manufacturers; • Agricultural wastes utilisation for feeds efficiency.

6.3.6.3 Status of mariculture at the Kenyan coast

The presentation gave an overview of the status of mariculture in Kenya, from the past, to present and future potential: Past

Mariculture is underdeveloped despite the high potential; Ngomeni shrimp farm started by FAO/ Government Of Kenya (GO in 1978 collapsed in 1998 – poor

management, land grabbing and conflict with the environmental and forestry policies; Oyster culture of Crassostrea cuculata undertaken by KMFRI at Gazi under the Kenya Belgian Project

between 1985 -1990; Collapsed due to slow growth and failure to meet the market quality demands.

Present The following mariculture activities are ongoing as trial projects and small scale community practices:

Seaweed culture;

Mud crab culture;

Finfish (milkfish and mullet);

Shrimp farming (North and South Coast);

Artemia culture; There is funding available for 4 pilot community projects in South & North Coast worth KES 10 million (KES 1 million from ReCoMaP and KES 9 million from Kenya Coastal Development Project (KCDP)). KMFRI has initiated Private-public partnership in the field of artemia research and production. Future activities recommended

Fish hatcheries for quality seed; Fish demonstration farms; Capacity building on fish culture and feed formulation; Aquaculture policy addressing establishment and expansion of mariculture along the Kenyan coast.

6.3.7 Aquaculture instruments in Kenya

The following documents have been produced by the Government of Kenya to give guidelines to the development of the aquaculture subsector:

1. Fish Quality Assurance Regulation (2007); 2. National Oceans and Fisheries Policy (2008); 3. Strategic Plan for Fisheries Development 2008-2012 (2008); 4. National Aquaculture Development Strategy and National Development Plan 2010-2015 (2010); 5. Draft National Aquaculture Policy (2010); 6. National Aquaculture Policy (Nov. 2011); 7. National Fish Feed Strategy (2010); 8. Aquaculture Communication Strategy; 9. Fisheries Act Cap 378.




6.3.8 Efforts by Kenya Government towards aquaculture development

The following actions have been undertaken by the Government of Kenya to facilitate the development of the aquaculture subsector: 1. Aquaculture suitability mapping; 2. Support to hatcheries - from 20 in 2009 to 150 in 2012 all authenticated; 3. Support to cottage feed producers- 50 cottage feed production equipment (pelletizers and related) distributed

to farmers across the country since 2010; 4. Aquashops – over 10 aquashops in western Kenya; 5. Support to aquaculture extension service provision – from 2010 until now, contractual hiring of 243 extension

officers and equipping them each with a motorbike; 6. Development of fish farming manual.

6.3.9 Conclusions and Perspectives

Like Tanzania, Kenya has high potential for both marine and freshwater aquaculture. Despite a lot of efforts made and the many actions taken by the Government, the industry is not yet sufficiently developed. The expression of interest is obvious from both the public and the private sector during the interviews. The jump in production of 16 000 t in about five years is to be recognized. A continuous effort will have to be maintained and close monitoring of achievement of objectives has to be performed so that the goals of the Policy are met, even if they take more time than expected. There is also a need to inject some more practical skills and additional stakeholders training to ensure a sustainable development of the industry. The country still has insufficient and unreliable fry and feed supplies; this issue will need to be addressed. Kenya remains however a good example of a country that has committed strongly to the development of its aquaculture industry and can inspire other Partner States and the EAC.

6.4 Uganda

6.4.1 Generalities

The World Bank reports a population estimation of about 36.35 million in 2012. The FAO graph below illustrates the official fishing records in Uganda. It stabilizes for the last 5 years at around 400 000 t per annum. Illegal fishing is obviously not recorded here.

Figure 5 – Ugandan capture production Source: FAO Fishery Statistics The FAO graph below illustrates the aquaculture production in Uganda, but all aquaculture specialists having an experience of Uganda will agree to say that there is a huge overestimation; the aquaculture production is certainly less than 7 000 t/annum.




Figure 6 - Reported aquaculture production in Uganda (from 1950)

Source: FAO Fishery Statistics However, there is a dynamic move in the aquaculture industry in Uganda. Source of the Nile (SON) Fish Farm’s production is LV/HD (Low Volume / High Density) cages exceeds 400 t per annum and some other projects are taking off such as the NaFIRRI (National Fisheries Resources Research Institute)/Chinese project in Kajjansi and Jinja and the WAFICOS (Walimi Fish Cooperative Society). Uganda benefits from several water bodies such as big lakes (Victoria, Kiyoga, Albert, Edward, etc.) and a network of rivers, including a section of the Nile. Its climate conditions are also favourable for the culture of tilapia and catfish and it has potential for other species such as Bagrus docmac.


As the expert is familiar with the country, the visits of farms have been limited to the NaFIRRI project in Jinja. The time available has rather been used to visit institutions. A meeting was held (4/06/2013) with the ACP Fish II Programme Regional Manager for East Africa, Mr Koane Mindjimba, to debrief him on the development of the mission at the time and to prepare the mission in Uganda. Department of Fisheries Resources Meeting with Mr Andrew Alio, Principal Fisheries Officer, responsible for aquaculture (4/06/2013) There is a need for a harmonisation of aquaculture policies in the region that provides a conducing environment as well as rules and regulations. These regulations have to be investor friendly while being protective for the environment and the local communities. Laws need clarification on water use, especially. Mr Alio underlines the need for a country-wide mapping of aquaculture sites so that investors can be guided and save time on site selection. There is also a need for laws and regulations to be more widely promoted in the country to avoid mistakes. The example of an investor who had imported cage farming equipment and was stopped by Customs Authorities and duty was going to be charged by the authority simply because the investor did not communicate with the authorities on his intentions prior to importing the equipment. The production of an investment guide would help. It will tackle all aspects of aquaculture including feed, services and all related matters. Mr Alio indicates that the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries should have a coordination role in aquaculture investment. 35 districts of Uganda have identified aquaculture as a priority. 40 hatcheries have been identified for development. A budget has been submitted by the Ministry of Fisheries to the Government for the creation of 2 Aquaculture Excellence Centres focusing on genetic and fry production.




The monopoly of Ugachick8 for fish feed is not well perceived and it seems that the Government wants to invest in feed mills. European Union Delegation in Kampala The EU Delegation has financed studies on aquaculture development in Uganda. The objective would be to implement a project that would promote aquaculture widely in the country, probably under an aquapark concept. The EU Delegation has been successful with a program called “The Sawlog Production Grant Scheme”9 and has the idea of a similar formula for aquaculture. The funds for aquaculture development should be available in 2014. Uganda Development Bank (UDB) Meeting with Mr Johnson W. Pande (5/06/2013) UDB has recently been completely restructured. They have identified priority areas such as agriculture, processing, health, education, oil& gas, exports, finance, etc. Aquaculture is of interest under the Agriculture and Agri-processing priority and UDB is financing about 5 aquaculture projects. UDB finances machinery, research and training, working capital etc. UDB has apparently invested about USD 1 million in an aquaculture project and USD 1.2 million in another. No details on the projects could be collected. UDB has also funded WAFICOS stakeholders (USD 25 000 to individual farmers). The UDB’s interest rate is 10-12 % in local currency and at 8-10 % in USD. UDB maximum investment on a single project is USD 10 million. UDB provides a mix of equity (60 %) and debt (40 %). It was clear during the meeting that the UDB does not understand aquaculture well and that their investment might be at risk. There is no internal knowledge and UDB calls external expertise when the request is too technical; apparently aquaculture does not require external appraisal prior to funding according to UDB. NaFIRRI A visit was organised on the NaFIRRI cage culture site in Jinja, in front of the Institute itself. The project is managed in collaboration with the Chinese Government that has delegated 3 specialists on site. The project consists in the demonstration of Medium Volume / Medium Density potential on Lake Victoria (5 x 5 m cages). The infrastructures have been constructed on low budget but seem to serve their intended purposes. Apparently good growth rates are observed and the final results of the experiments will be of high interest. The fry and feed used are from Kajjansi Research Center. The feed is pelletised (no extrusion) and the fry are O. niloticus.

6.4.3 Documents of reference for Uganda

The following documents were made available by Mr Alio:

S/N Title Year Focus/purpose Internet link

1. National Fisheries Policy 2004 Guide management and development of fisheries in Uganda

http://www.p15166578.pureserver.info/ilm/docs/policy/National%20Fisheries%20Policy.pdf

2. Aquaculture Rules 2003 Guide aquaculture management and development

No link

3. National Aquaculture Development Strategy

2012 Building a healthy and dynamic aquaculture subsector

No link

8 Ugachick is a private poultry meal factory in Kampala. A few years ago, they were granted a feed extruder by USAID to be able to produce floating fish feed. 9 http://www.ecoprofiles.org/ad_details.php?co=252

http://www.ecoprofiles.org/ad_details.php?co=252




S/N Title Year Focus/purpose Internet link

4. National Aquaculture Development Plan

2012 Stimulate economic growth in aquaculture

No link

5. Standard operating procedures for Aquaculture inspection

2011 Compliance with responsible aquaculture

No link

6. Codes of practice for aquaculture

2011 Compliance with responsible aquaculture

No link

7. National Investment Policy for Aquaculture Parks

2012 Create a conducive investment environment through Aquaculture Parks for increased fish production

No Link

8. Draft Review of Aquaculture Rules

2012 Review to guide aquaculture management and development

No Link


The meeting was held at LVFO premises on 7/06/2013. The contribution of the participants has been consigned on different slides that are reflected in the minutes below: Aquaculture Policy (general) The participants suggested that there is a need to improve business environment for aquaculture investments by the private sector by addressing the following:

Developing general and precise, stand-alone guidelines; Developing regulations that must derive from policy; Having a policy that must be reviewed regularly; Aquaculture Rules 2003 is a difficult process; it has to be revised and simplified; Policy should ease the project implementation of the private investors; One Stop Centre (approval process) should be created.

Regulatory Framework

Rules and regulations: Aquaculture Rules exist (2003) and a review has been submitted a brochure for the information and diffusion should be prepared

The participants suggested to develop standards and certifications; especially in regard to feed and seeds, services providers, processing and fish products.

Land and water rights in a different Ministry (applications for land and application for water use have to be submitted respectively to Ministry of Land and to Ministry of Water & Environment) does not ease the task of private investors. Lake Victoria is being reviewed for identification of suitable areas for aquaculture. There is need for land or water access (tenure) security.

Need for a brochure on procedure Environmental and Social Issues

Aquaculture projects must aim towards sustainability: Good Aquaculture Practices (GAP) – Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) has to be presented for all. The ESIA must be done by private auditors.

Participants suggested that more information and processes on Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for investors be made available.

Climate change issues need to be addressed. National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) monitors and enforces. National Fisheries

Resources Research Institute (NaFIRRI) monitors. The District Fisheries Officer is responsible for monitoring residues and seeds transfers from one water body to another.

Feed and seeds producers should comply with standards and certifications.




Need to document the social requirements for projects. Risk management to include pollution, escapees, and epidemics and social conflict. Carrying capacity studies in main water bodies must be identified for aquaculture. Introduction of new species and strains should follow the code of conduct FAO. See Regional

Aquaculture Strategy and Investment Plan. Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) to be observed and discussed before any decisions are made

on their use. Gender issues have to be captured in aquaculture policy. Addressing communities issues has to be done when a project is presented. Zoning environmental preservation of the areas most suited for aquaculture has to be effected.

Private Investment Drive

Investments promotion / incentives have to be published and promoted.

Government must promote the opportunities of investment in the full value chain.

Government must facilitate demonstration centres through public/ private initiatives, starting with one and develop further.

Government should acquire land for aquapark creation.

Entrepreneurship training of fish farmers has to be developed to ensure good business management.

As part of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), recommend to train staff.

Tax incentives exist on feed and equipment, but information has to be widely distributed.

Access to finance must be facilitated by the Government.

Finance guide for investors must be published.

The full value chain has to be concerned, for example, while there are tax incentives on imported aquaculture equipment, there are duties on refrigerated trucks.

Trade and Market Issues

In Uganda there is a need for market sensitisation to promote aquaculture. Commodities for fish distribution should be built.

Promotion of aquaculture products; catfish in particular needs marketing efforts in Uganda. There is a need to remove all tariff barriers; although there is no import duty within the EAC, there is a

levy on export in Uganda. EAC should submit demand to Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) for

extension of tax exemption of fish and aquaculture inputs. Protection of the nascent industry. The imports of low priced tilapia from Asian, particularly China, can

negatively impact the new aquaculture industry and that needs to be addressed (whole frozen tilapia are offered at USD 1/kg C&F African ports). In comparison, the production cost of tilapia in Africa can vary from USD 1.50 to over USD 2.00/kg according to the systems used.

There is a need to look at new products (life bait for example). Technical Expertise and Research

Education

Database of trained people has to be created and maintained.

Incentive to trained people to come back to work in country. Too many skilled Africans prefer to stay abroad.

Skilling Ugandan by integration of aquaculture in programme would be beneficial to the industry.

Training at all levels, including technicians must be organised to increase staff skills.

The academic world should create partnership with private sector.

Platform to fill the gap of offer and demand for employment should be created.

Government must continue to invest in centres of excellence. Services

Recommendation to create a forum to address the setting of standards to access the aquaculture services sector.




Collaborative arrangements between Ugandan (or EAC) institutions with overseas institutions (i.e. in Asia and EU).

Research

Identifying both land based and cage sites.

Genetics issues must be studied in view of genetic improvements on local species.

Live feed (artemia, rotiphers, and others) to be explored for commercial development.

Research on fish pathologies is necessary to prevent major disease outbreaks.

6.4.5 Conclusions and perspectives

There is a perceptible dynamism in the aquaculture value chain in Uganda. The country has no access to the sea, but it is blessed with its freshwater availability in almost every part of the country. Some areas are below optimal temperatures for aquaculture species, but others are optimal (i.e. Lake Albert and lower Nile). The production potential of Uganda is probably the largest in the EAC, but it still lacks implemented policies and strategies. LVFO has a very good document on Aquaculture Strategy and Investment Plan, but it needs to be adopted and implemented. Although the statistics on aquaculture production are over-estimated (and that needs correction) the trend is certainly on the growth. The market for aquaculture produced fish in Uganda is still under lower prices pressure from fisheries products, but the overfishing and the population growth will require much higher aquaculture production over the next few years. Moreover, the demand in the neighbouring countries is already high.

6.5 Burundi

6.5.1 Generalities

Burundi’s population is 9.85 million people (World Bank – 2012) and the aquaculture production is around 200 t per annum according to the FAO, which makes it the lowest production within the EAC Partner States. There is indication that the production will reach nearly 400 t in 2013 (communicated at the validation workshop). The country has water resources with lakes and rivers, including Lake Tanganyika, but has only subsistence aquaculture so far with the exception of a recent RAS project near Bujumbura where tilapia is produced by Samaki Nzuri Tilapia farm. The project is still at its first rearing cycle and forecasts to develop with pond farming nearby. There is also a project in the Northern Lakes which could not be visited during the mission due to time constraints. The project consisted initially in the re-stocking of the lakes that had been fished out, but now is developing into aquaculture in ponds and cages. It is still in an early stage for both these two initiatives.

Figure 7 - Burundi Fisheries Statistics

Source: FAO 2010 Statistics The climate in Burundi offers a bit more possibilities than Rwanda as it is slightly warmer and has water closest to optimal level. This is mainly due its lowest elevation and therefore higher temperatures.




The CNDAPA (Centre National de Développement de l’Aquaculture et de la Pêche Artisanale), which is under the MINAGRIE (Ministère de l’Agriculture et de l’Elevage), is active in fry production for distribution to small-scale fish farmers. It also carries on aquaculture research such as sex reversal, feed trials, etc.


CNDAPA Mr Leopold Sinzinkado – 17/06/2013 The Government of Burundi is committed to transforming aquaculture into reality within the next five years. There are currently 2 607 functional ponds in Burundi. All are subsistence aquaculture per se and produce 15 tonnes per annum only over a total surface area of 10 537 ares10 (105 ha) which is less than 142 kg/ha. There are 2 859 ponds covering 124 ha that are not used. There are 3 pilot stations in function at present (Isale, Karonga and Kavogero). Trials of induced spawning of clarias seem to be successful as well as production of tilapia fry in hapas. There are also some cage farming trials in lake Cohoha and Rweru (North) as well as in lake Dogodogo (North-West). The problems are, as always, the lack of good feed and fry, but also qualified staff in sufficient number and good research on aquaculture. The Government supports integrated aquaculture and the FAO wants to support research on genetic and feed production. There is an evolution from subsistence aquaculture towards integrated aquaculture. The Government has set a target to increase production from the actual estimation of 200 t to 3 000 t per annum, which is a reasonable target. The EU supports a Post-Conflict Rural Development Programme in the North with some groups of “demobilised” ex-soldiers or fighters. The programme is called “Peace Building Fund”. The water temperatures of the different water systems in the North are however below optimal at 21/23°C. The FAO has conducted a study to identify suitable sites on Lake Tanganyika for cage farming. Fish feed remains an issue in Burundi both in terms of quality and prices which are said to fetch the equivalence of USD 1 500 per tonne. In comparison, producers in Ghana would pay about USD 900/tonne. On the other hand, fish (tilapia / clarias) in rural area are sold at about USD 1.50 to 2.00/kg equivalent while they can reach USD 3.00 to 3.50/kg in town. This indicates that fish farming based on formulated feed only would not be viable on the rural markets and barely breaking even if the fish are sold in town. There is somehow a paradox between the abovementioned selling prices for farmed fish and the price of fish on the fresh market in Bujumbura:

Oreochromis tanganicae: BIF 11 000/kg or USD 7.15/kg

Kue (Boulangerochromis microlepsis): BIF 15 000/kg or USD 9.75/kg

Mukeke (Lates strappersii): BIF 10 000/kg or USD 6.50/kg

Ndagala (Limnotrissa miodon): BIF 3 000/kg or USD 1.95/kg In a fish shop visited in Bujumbura, frozen fish was sold at the following prices:

Sangala: BIF 5 500/kg or USD 3.58/kg

Sangala fillets BIF9 500kg or USD 6.18/kg

Filet de Capitaine (Lates niloticus): BIF 9 500/kg or USD 6.18/kg

Mukeke: BIF 9 500/kg or USD 6.18/kg

Ndagala (Limnotrissa miodon) dried: BIF 18 000/kg or USD 11.71/kg

Ndagala fresh: BIF 6 500/kg or USD 4.23/kg The prices for fresh, frozen or dried fish are higher in Bujumbura and around while they seem to be lower upcountry. There is however ground to develop the aquaculture industry, especially for the urban markets. The Government target of 3 000 t per annum, if reached, should not have a negative impact on prices, but should the production increase above that level, it could affect the farmed fish prices. The neighbouring markets also offer a potential outlet for aquaculture projects in Burundi. Banque Nationale de Développement du Burundi (BNDB)

10 1 “are” is equal to 100 m2




This institution finances the private sector in various areas. However, by lack of own funds, the bank needs to borrow on the market and cannot therefore offer favourable rates. Following the 2008 crisis, the lenders have become careful and many of the previous creditors have stopped their credit to the BNDB. The bank has a small credit line with the Belgian CTB (Coopération Technique Belge). It used to have credit with the Banque Européenne d’Investissement (BEI), African Development Bank (AfDB), Agency for International Business and Cooperation (EVD) and Agence Française de Développement (AFD) which could come back. The general impression was that the BNDB was rather short of cash and found difficult to play its role. There is a lack of political will and means that transpires from the meeting. CNDAPA – Antoine Kiyuku Mr Kiyuku indicates that illegal fishing and overfishing are a major problem in Lake Tanganyika and other water bodies in the country. Having a geographical position between the 2 major basins of Congo and Nile rivers has a big advantage as the hydrographical network is important. The trials on O. tanganicae are too few to have any value at the moment and researches should be made on this local species that could be used for cage farming in Lake Tanganyika. Mr Kiyuku also underlines the institutional and juridical problem on Lake Tanganyika (see also below LTA). The FAO has conducted a mission to identify possible cage sites on Lake Tanganyika and there seems to be at least 4 good sites for cage farming already identified. The lake being very deep (over 1 000 m in some places) and quite a large water body, a lot of its surface areas are exposed to storms and therefore not so appropriate to cage culture, unless offshore type of cages. Lake Tanganyika Authority (LTA) Mr Martin Van der Knaap is delegated by the FAO to the LTA as adviser. Although the LTA is a common institution to all the riparian countries, there seems to be a lack of communication between the different national Competent Authorities and the LTA. For example, LTA was not informed about some aquaculture projects on the Zambian side of the lake despite that some permits had been delivered to the promoters. An important topic on Lake Tanganyika is the use of O. niloticus in cages. The opinion of the different stakeholders diverges on the use of this species that is now however recognised as present in the lake. The possible danger would be the acceleration of colonisation of O. niloticus if massive escapes would occur from cages. The territoriality of this species of tilapia is known and every male will defend an area around its nest, which will reduce other fish’s biotope, hence reducing territories to other cichlids and other fish. As promoters have started the breeding and rearing of O. tanganicae in Zambia, it would be interesting to give them support to promote their project and develop researches. The lakes in the Northern part of the country have also been heavily overfished, hence the idea to promote aquaculture for both consumption and re-stocking. Some trials of cage farming are reported in these lakes. Meeting with the Department of Environment, Ms Bernadette Akisimana – Director. A “Code of Environment” dating from June 2000 exists in Burundi. It mentions aquaculture without being specific to it. In 2010, a procedure of Environmental Impact Assessment was introduced after an examination of all activities having an impact on the environment. The study is normally done by private companies on behalf of the applicant. It is submitted to the different competent authorities and a response should be obtained within 2 weeks, if the file is well done and complete to avoid back and forwards situations. The “Code de l’Eau” also imposes to get a permit for water use. An association of experts in EIA exists in Burundi. Related programme PRODAP (Programme d’aménagement du lac Tanganyika) financed by the AfDB is a social and environmental planning. The programme monitors the fisheries, control the illegal fishing and fishing gears etc.




Agence de Promotion à l’Investissement (API) API is the Burundi Investment Promotion Authority11, which is a one stop shop for the creation of private companies. They assist with the creation of the company, but also with some other tasks to be made later (i.e. EIA). It takes only one day to create a company in Burundi.


The following notes were taken during the National Consultation Meeting. They reflects the inputs of the participants on a list of themes proposed by the KE. Main constrains on aquaculture development

There are a lot of small ponds all around the country;

Subsistence farming mainly and nearly no commercial aquaculture is observed;

There is a lack or insufficient ponds fertilisation;

Available fry and fingerlings are of poor quality and quantity;

Feed cost is too high;

Feed is of poor quality (nutritional value, digestibility, etc.);

There is a lack of adequate equipment;

There is a lack of technical assistance;

Low support of financing institutions;

Lack of research;

Low productivity;

Overall lack of development despite a dense hydrology network and favourable temperatures. Bullet points on Antoine Kiyuku’s presentation of the aquaculture situation in Burundi

The problem of aquaculture inputs (feed, fry, equipment, etc.);

Lack of rigor in the subsector is a problem and a major reason for failure;

Aquaculture needs more research in Burundi;

Need studies on local species;

Aquaculture needs to become a private sector driven industry;

Financing strategies are required;

Convention on Lake Tanganyika must be enforced;

EIA are too long and difficult;

Need of demonstration centres (private/public);

Research and development are not well implemented and there is nothing to present to the private investors;

Encourage public/private sector cooperation;

The Government has to commit to the development of the aquaculture subsector. Policy for aquaculture development

There is a need for a common platform to the various countries sharing water systems with Burundi in order to keep all members aware of project developments in each country (i.e. introduction or imports of fish, use of hormones, etc.).

The creation of Centre of Excellence is recommended.

There is a need for brochures informing on financing and business plan models.

The “2010 Strategy” needs to be implemented. MINAGRIE must apply to FAO and other donors for fund to implement the programme.

A better communication between the Authorities must take place, hence the need to create and maintain a database.

11 http://www.investburundi.com/

http://www.investburundi.com/




Legal Framework

Need for a review of the current legal framework and how to improve it.

Need for simplification of procedures to develop a fish farm.

API helps for company creation and after. The EIA process should not exceed 1 month.

There is a guide for IEA in process to be approved.

There is a need for MINAGRIE to reinforce the legal framework for aquaculture, including the resolution of possible conflicts with other users.

Social and Environmental Aspects

There is a lack of coordination between riparian countries and Lake Tanganyika Authorities on hormone utilisation. Need to refer to Lake Tanganyika Convention. Same on species or fish strains introduction.

At the moment, the import permit for fish must be submitted to MINAGRIE.

It is recommended to have an impact study on O. niloticus farming in Lake Tanganyika.

A study on best aquaculture site in Burundi is recommended (mapping) (already done, at least partially, for Lake Tanganyika).

Private Investment Drive There is a necessity to put in place a Government guarantee fund for aquaculture projects. There is such fund for rural microcredits, but it needs to be applied for aquaculture projects. Need for micro-finance. Need for more fiscal incentives. Market Aspects It was recommended that the “Bureau de Normalisation et de Contrôle” carries out inspections on imported products.

6.5.4 Conclusions en perspectives

There is good aquaculture potential in Burundi, mainly due to its dense hydrology network and water temperature in low elevation areas. However, the Government needs to commit seriously to its development by creating incentives and providing support, including through research and development. There is also no finance available at soft rates and conditions in Burundi. The fisheries products benefit from relatively high selling prices due to the fish scarcity, but the prices for aquaculture produced fish vary considerably from Bujumbura to the rural areas. The national production, starting from very low volumes, can be increased significantly before facing market saturation. The neighbouring Congolese and eventually Rwandese markets also constitute an opportunity for Burundi’s aquaculture. As for most of the other countries in Africa, aquaculture inputs are not available in Burundi. The document available in Burundi is the “Stratégie Nationale de Développement de l’Aquaculture au Burundi”. A strong stance from the Government through ambitious aquaculture policy, followed by an implemented strategy, should give a boost to the subsector.

6.6 Rwanda

6.6.1 Generalities

The Rwanda population is about 11.46 million people in 2012, according to the World Bank. The aquaculture production is reported at slightly over 600 t per annum by the FAO while according to PAIGELAC (Projet d’Appui à l’Aménagement Intégré et la Gestion des Lacs Intérieurs) reports 440 t of production per annum. The fisheries production seems to stabilise at about 9 000 per annum (FAO), while the imports of fish are about 10 000 t on a yearly basis (PAIGELAC).




Figure 8 - Rwanda: captures production

Source: FAO Statistics

Figure 9 - Rwanda Production de l’aquaculture

Source: FAO Statistics

6.6.2 Overview of fisheries and aquaculture in Rwanda

The following presentation gives a broad overview on the aquaculture history and present situation in Rwanda. It was presented by Mr Gregoire Dusabemungu, PAIGELAC, during the National Consultation Meeting.

Historical aspects

1. Historical aspects, before 1994

Rwanda has an area of 26 338 km², out of which 150 000 ha of water surface. Fish farming started in the 1950s and grew considerably in the 1980s. It has focussed on a single species, tilapia, which has the favour of the consumers. In 1992, the reported production was 5 500 t, but in 1993, the production felt down to 1 500– 2 000 t. The destruction of infrastructure and the long stagnation of the subsector are at the origin of this collapse of production, combined with the lack of skill. The aquaculture subsector was exclusively a subsistence type, with low inputs / low outputs system.

2. Present situation Fish consumption in Rwanda is estimated at 2.5 kg per person per year is one of the lowest in Africa. Other countries of the Great Lakes Region have higher fish consumption such as Burundi, 3.6 kg/p/year; Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), 6.9 kg/p/year; Uganda 10 kg/p/year, Tanzania 11.9 kg/p/year. Sub-Saharan average is 6.6 kg/p/year; Low contribution of fisheries to GDP <1 %; The country’s fish importation valued at over USD 10 million annually; Undefined trade between Rwanda and DRC.




What has been done / being done Transformation of Aquaculture into a productive, high value, market oriented sector; Development of an efficient private sector spearheaded by competitiveness and entrepreneurship; Comprehensive human resources development; Laws in place (organic law and decrees); Master plan on fisheries and aquaculture in place as a guide; Obtained the brood stock directly from Lake Albert and multiplied at Kigembe F.F. Station; Lakes have been restocked twice with tilapia fingerlings; Lakes surveillance stepped up by the purchase of 25 motorized boats to curb illegal fishing (managed by

police and cooperatives); Fishing licenses are being issued; Trying to introduce concessionary fishing; Intensification of research activities; 251 cooperatives were formed (186 for aquaculture, and 65 for capture fisheries); 5 032 fishers trained on cooperatives and fisheries management, fishery products hygiene; 1 634 fish farmers trained on modern fish farming; 31 Technicians (Rwanda Agriculture Board (RAB), Districts) trained on ponds construction and

management, massive tilapia seed production, feed formulation, cage culture; Most of our aquaculture is still integrated (fish, poultry, rabbits, piggery, etc.); 218 ha of ponds and 650 cages established to enhance production; A modern Tilapia hatchery has also been established at Kigembe fish farm; 27 landing sites equipped with isothermal containers; 2 regional fishery products promotion centres (Musanze & Rwamagana equipped with ice plants); An ice making machine also set up in the southern province; Urban fishery products promotion centre located in the Kigali Economic Zone.

Total production increased:

2006: 7 000 tonnes 2008: 11 587 tonnes 2009: 11 552 tonnes 2010: 13 000 tonnes 2011: 17 159 tonnes 2012: 19 400 tonnes

Projected production by 2020: 221 500 t

Implementation master plan: 2013/14: 27 000 t 2017/18: 115 000 t

Practicing responsible and sustainable capture fisheries;

Transformation of aquaculture into a productive, high value, market oriented sector;

Development of an efficient private sector;

Human resources development.

Opportunities

Unsatisfied demand (Internal and External);

Free water to put in cages, no competition with crops;

Favourable conditions in Lake Kivu (temp 24- 250C and dissolved oxygen 8-10ppm);

Investment in feeds;

Investment in other inputs (nets of all types, aerators, etc.);

The wish of the investors to enter in the subsector;

The positive attitude of the authorities;




Regional and international cooperation.

Constraints Funding;

Technicians to support farmers and investors (not enough in number, some of them are not well skilled).

PAIGELAC – Mr Wilson Rutaganira (Project Coordinator) The PAIGELAC Programme (Projet d’Appui à l’Aménagement Intégré et la Gestion des Lacs Intérieurs) has been funded by the AfDB. The main objectives are:

To develop sustainable fisheries in the lakes;

To move from the actual subsistence aquaculture to a commercial and sustainable aquaculture. In order to achieve these objectives, PAIGELAC is working with about 150 cooperatives. In terms of aquaculture, both cage and pond culture projects are supported. There are about 200 ha of ponds and about 600 small volume cages (8 m²) in function. There are groups as cooperatives and only few bigger companies. The master plan has the objective to install 80 000 cages over the next 5 years for about 135 000 t of tilapia production (100 000 t in Lake Kivu alone). The feed in Rwanda is imported mainly from Israel and Uganda at high cost. The transport from Israel via Dar es Salaam, costs about USD 11 500 for a 40’ container. That brings the feed cost to USD 1 300 per tonne. However, ZAMURA FEED CO should be developed next year; it will produce chicken and fish feed (under a Public/Private Partnership (PPP) formula). The import of tilapia strains is allowed from anywhere with an import permit from MINAGRI. The establishment of a fish farm is subject to an EIA that is submitted to the Rwanda Development Board (RDB). Imports of aquaculture inputs are tax free. There are 2 guarantee funds available in Rwanda:

Rural Investment Facility which guarantees up to 25 % of investment;

Agriculture Guarantee Fund which guarantees up to 50 % of investment. The interest rates are about 17/18 % in Rwanda while the inflation turns around 8 % per annum. SOPEKAKI Mr Vincent Nzamwita is the owner of SOPEKAKI based on the shore of Lake Kivu in Gisenyi. He farms tilapia in SV/HD (Small Volume/High Density) cages in a sheltered bay. The project is still at its beginnings and is not yet run very professionally as no proper records are taken and they just hope for the best. They had problem with post transport traumatisms that induced saprolegnia (fungus that grows on fish skin injuries). The feeding is rather done on an empirical manner with a feed bought from Ugachick – Uganda. The planned selling price is RWF 1 800/kg for tilapia of about 500 g at farm gate. The temperatures on Lake Kivu are said to remain between 23 and 25°C, below optimal for tilapia, but however acceptable. The shore is very steep which allows setting cages quite close to the shore, hence to reduce transport of feed and fish. The downside is the lack of suitable sites to build a hatchery and breeding ponds, especially with the 50 m zone that is not constructible all around the lake. Fry production station of Kigembe (Butare) The aquaculture station of Kigembe was built in the fifties near the city of Butare. The farm is fed by gravity from a river. The water temperature in the river is quite cold (around 20°C), but the afternoon sun can warm the ponds up to 24/25°C. The rearing cycles are longer and the breeding less productive under these conditions. The hatchery and nursing tanks, newly built, can however be warned up through a solar heating system. There are about 10 ha of water available for breeding and on-growing. The hapa system in ponds is used for breeding. The strain of fish used has been imported from Lake Albert and seems to give good results and the fish present good body shape. At the moment, the fry have been distributed free of charge, but RAB thinks of selling them to cover operating costs or at least part of them.




The site is well maintained and well-constructed. Experiments on integrated farming are still on-going with pigs, chicken and ducks. The overall impression of a visitor is positive after a visit as the site is well looked after. The impression of under-utilisation is present and the low temperatures are the reserves that someone might have.


For the understanding of the participants, the Key Expert presented the PowerPoint in English for the written part while the verbal presentation was done in French. The National Consultation Meeting in Rwanda was rather difficult to follow for the Key Expert as the debates derived most of the time in Kinyarwanda (the national language), beside French and English. However, the recommendations made by the plenary can be summarised as follows: Recommendations:

Increase the collaboration and coordination between MANAGRI (Ministry of Agriculture) and MINIRENA (Ministry of Natural Resources). Example was given on the issue of building ponds within on the shores of Lake Kivu that cannot be done unless at a distance of 50 m from shoreline minimum.

MINAGRI/RAB is said to be very responsive to any issues raised by the private sector while MINIRENA is slow to address issues.

There is a need for a closer collaboration between these 2 ministries and to adopt common policies on aquaculture issues.

There is a lack of skill and knowledge of private stakeholders, hence suggestion to finance study tours for them.

A centre of excellence should be built on the existing infrastructures (ex. Kigembe) to facilitate practical training of fish farmers. This should involve external skill in the various aspects of aquaculture (production, feed, value addition, marketing, etc.).

The law that attributes aquaculture concessions exists but the implementation does create social conflicts with other users like fishermen. There is a need to re-define ownership of these concessions and enforce the law.

There is a problem of fingerlings mortalities after transport, so the participants suggest that more hatcheries, closer to the farms, be built. The Key Expert indicated that techniques exist to transport fish for several hours from hatcheries, with good management and husbandry.

A suggestion was made to start some researches on cold tolerant (19-21°C) strains or other species as Rwanda does not benefit from warm water in some places.

There is a need on fish feed quality control (i.e. proteins level).

Private / public investment in feed should be encouraged.

Market is unsatisfied, but there is a need for more linkage between production and markets.

An association of aquaculture producers needs to be created.

It was recommended that the industry should be boosted with a subsidy of 30/40 % of investment for the private sector. But this generates the problem of temporary assistance and funding.

6.6.4 Rwanda aquaculture instruments

The following documents were collected and consulted to establish the aquaculture profile for Rwanda:

Fisheries and Fish Farming Master Plan (2011 – 2020);

Agriculture and Fisheries Law (2008);

Aquaculture and Fisheries Policy (1994 – needs to be updated).

6.6.5 Perspectives

Despite its low temperatures for tilapia and catfish production, Rwanda has demonstrated its support to the development of its aquaculture industry; this sentiment was persistent during the short mission in the country. The ambitious target that the Government has set might not be achievable within the determined timeframe, but there is no doubt that the determination will pay off in due time.




The fish feed and fry production plans will give a boost to the industry, but there needs to be a few success stories to encourage the private sector to invest in fish farming, as well as reassuring the banking and finance sector. The selling price of tilapia, which is clearly the target species, at about USD 2.75-2.80/kg should be viable for a fish farm which purchases its feed at reasonable prices (less than USD 900-1 000/t). The feed prices should obviously come down if the feed is locally produced with some Government incentives. In terms of policy, Rwanda has a Master Plan and facilities already in place. It is felt that a private / public partnership on a vertically integrated project providing all necessary inputs for fish farmers accompanied by a financing system for out-growers and private promoters would be timely and efficient in Rwanda.

6.7 General conclusions on the EAC region

In terms of natural resources, the EAC region offers a variety of opportunities to develop aquaculture. The hydrographical network, beside the semi-arid and arid areas in Kenya and Tanzania, is dense and feed both the Congo and the Nile basins. The Great Lakes also offer huge aquaculture potential in a region that is in need of additional proteins resources. Kenya and Tanzania, including Zanzibar and other islands, also have the opportunity to develop mariculture in a much higher level than the current one. There is a transition in the stakeholders mentalities and the idea of moving from subsistence to commercial aquaculture is widely shared. It is also recognised that the aquaculture industry must be driven by the private sector with the support of the public sector. Each EAC Partner State has made progress on its approach of the aquaculture development strategies to develop. Kenya has taken the lead by adopting and implementing various measures to promote aquaculture. The other countries are also working on strategies, master plans and policies. These should be accelerated and followed by implementation in order to achieve the production increases that are needed to assure food security in the region. The Aquaculture Policy Brief that is attached to the report has been proposed after consultations in each Partner State and a validation workshop where representatives from both the private and public sectors of each Partner State were represented. The EAC Secretariat’s officers and the Deputy Secretary General, Mrs Jesca Eryo have also contributed to the validation workshop. It is hoped that the EAC Aquaculture Policy will be developed soon and that a strategic plan and a legislation will path the way to the development of a flourishing aquaculture industry that will provide fish to the region and beyond.

7 Conclusions and recommendations The conclusions and recommendation are presented under the Policy Brief destined to the EAC Secretariat as follows:

7.1 Introduction

This document presents a Policy Brief that should inspire the EAC and the Partner States in the drafting of aquaculture policy at regional level. It should also help to define an aquaculture development strategy and to build a legal framework and support to the investment of the private sector in commercial aquaculture. The adoption of subsector development policies is the first step and the foundation of a development strategy in agribusinesses. As far as aquaculture is concerned, being still a nascent industry in the EAC, an Aquaculture Development Policy will constitute a positive signal to the private sector. It will also avoid uncontrolled, incoherent, unsustainable or environmentally unfriendly attempts to develop aquaculture. The Policy Brief presented below results from the conclusions of the field mission, documentation collection and stakeholders inputs during the National Consultation Meetings held individually in each of the five Partner States. It also incorporates the inputs of the delegates of the five Partners States at the Regional Validation Workshop




held in Arusha on 22nd and 23rd 2013. The policy briefs take into account the existing aquaculture policy being developed by the authorities in the Partner States. Several conditions need to be fulfilled to lead to success of any commercial aquaculture project:

1. Suitable sites; 2. Quality seeds; 3. Quality feed; 4. Expertise and technical know-how; 5. Financial resources; 6. Equipment; 7. Market.

All items will be covered in the following sections.

7.1.1 Suitable sites

Too many examples of poor locations for fish farms are found in the EAC where there are many excellent sites available. There is a need to carry out studies and research on the most adequate zones and sites for aquaculture development. The mapping of these sites will help the private sector for their projects location and will prevent them to target areas that should be protected or which would not offer long term viability. There are important water resources in the EAC that are not adequate to the culture of the preferred freshwater species (tilapia spp and Clarias spp); research and marketing efforts should be made in order to allow the use of such water resources. Carps are good candidates for these sites that are in higher altitude and have a wide water temperature tolerance. Carps are not traditionally eaten in Africa, but no marketing efforts have been made to promote this fish that, besides being cold tolerant, has also very low demand in proteins and can be grown on entirely vegetal diet. To meet the region’s demand for fish in the next decade, it might be necessary to farm these species and others to be researched and developed. The introduction of new species has however to be examined with care and this has to be analysed with care.

7.1.2 Quality seeds (fry and fingerlings)

The seed issue is always raised by stakeholders in the EAC. Good quality seeds are a key of success to a project. Hatchery management is a specialised task that needs a lot of attention and husbandry. Tilapia (Oreochromis spp) will be preferably from a good and known genetic strain and will be all male to assure good growth and optimal conversion ratios. Clarias spp genetics needs also some research to ensure better rearing performances. In Africa, the private sector usually needs to invest in every aspect of production, including hatcheries, as fingerlings are not readily available on the market. The development of the aquaculture subsector in Africa, and in the EAC in particular, will probably witness the specialisation of tasks (fingerlings production, table fish production, feed, value addition, etc.). Several issues have to be addressed to ensure a sustainable aquaculture development in terms of seed production:

o Quality: Good genetic is essential and, as for other animals, the notion of certified sources or “pedigree”

needs to be developed.

o Affordability: The seeds need to be produced economically so that they can benefit to a large number of

stakeholders.

o Accessibility: Given the geographical characteristics of the EAC region, the number of hatcheries must

be sufficient and the methods of live fish transport need to be improved.

o Quantity: The current production is far from being sufficient and reliable to sustain the needs and the

production objectives of the region.

The introduction of new species always generates tense debates between stakeholders. This document has no pretention to enter into these considerations. The use of “improved strains” such as the GIFT tilapia (WorldFish Centre – developed in Asia) or other tilapia such as the “Chitralada” strain is also subject to debates in Africa, including within the EAC. The tilapia used around the world all originate from Africa and it is true that Africa has a variety of cichlids, including the most cultivated one: O. niloticus. Therefore, the EAC region will have to make




decision on the use of these improved strains or even the use of East African O. niloticus in certain water bodies within the region where it is not endemic.

7.1.3 Quality feed

Also now well understood by the stakeholders, a quality feed is important in semi-intensive systems and essential in intensive systems. Production of fish feed is a skilled, much more complex than chicken or other animal feed. Quality feed can cut production costs dramatically as it lowers significantly Food Conversion Ratios (FCRs), increase survival rates and speed up fish growth. No feed or low quality feed means no access to some aquaculture systems such as cages, RAS or (semi)-intensive farming. The only option with no quality formulated feed is extensive fish farming in fertilised ponds (green water). Fish feed should be formulated with locally available raw materials in order to control costs. Ingredients such as soya are essential in fish feed formulation as it is a good substitute to animal proteins and is well converted by fish. This underlines the necessity to link the aquaculture development to other agriculture activities strategies. Feed quality is determined by many factors such as quality of raw materials, good formulation and processing etc. Quality control and certification must be put in place to ensure viability of farms. Feed account for 60-70 % of fish production cost and is therefore an essential item. As for seed, affordability, accessibility and volumes must be available to meet production targets.

7.1.4 Expertise and technical know-how

EAC has good academic levels in aquaculture, but has few experienced aquaculturists. More centres of excellence are needed to ensure training and research. Model/incubation commercial farms are also needed to ensure practical and managerial training. The trainings must cover science, technical and managerial aspects as aquaculture projects are complex to operate efficiently and profitably. Centres of excellence and model farms should aim to self-sustainability up to a certain extent so that they do not entirely rely on public subsidies. Regional and international cooperation is needed to create emulation on both training and research aspects.

7.1.5 Financial resources

Aquaculture is capital consuming as it involves capital investments in facilities, inputs and equipment, and also because it has to build up a biomass. This biomass corresponds generally to about a third of the annual production of a fish farm i.e. a farm that produces annually 600 t of fish will always hold a standing stock of about 200 t of fish. These 200 tonnes of fish are an immobilised capital. There is a need to document success stories to give confidence to bankers and other institutions to lend or co-invest with promoters. Guarantee from the Authorities would also facilitate credit extension to the private sector. There is a need of modelling business plans that could be used by financiers and attract investment.

7.1.6 Equipment

As the aquaculture subsector is under-developed, equipment for fish farming is difficult to find locally and small stakeholders are not in a position to order equipment overseas. A value chain approach in the policy drafting will ensure that the area of inputs is integrated. Aquaculture projects should be exempted of duties and VAT for all equipment and construction materials to encourage aquaculture promoters. The development of aquaculture projects will also attract investment in equipment manufacturing and marketing in the region.

7.1.7 Markets

As all profitable businesses are led by their markets, it is particularly important to ensure a smooth distribution of aquaculture products. Many smallholders do not find their ways to market and might have to discount their harvested fish, which leads to disappointment and sometimes business failures. This has been reported in many areas in the EAC, including Kenya and Uganda. Good distribution network will also increase the quality of the products as well as their nutritional value; especially with good cold chain management.




7.1.8 Monitoring and evaluation

There is a need to monitor the aquaculture subsector development at EAC level. It is therefore recommended that an existing institution takes the responsibility for this task for the whole region. As the LVFO is already in place and its mandate being extended, this role should be devoted to it. It is essential to collect accurate figures from each fish farmers from each Partner State so that the EAC has a precise idea on the subsector’s development in order to eventually adjust its actions to meet the targets set. Statistics are also a precious tool for fund raising as good follow-up give confidence to lenders.

7.1.9 Conclusion

Failing to benefit from all of the above elements, an aquaculture venture is weakened. Only major investors can develop fully vertically integrated projects that provide solutions for all these components. The developers of an aquaculture policy should therefore have a whole value chain approach so that all aquaculture inputs and outputs are integrated in the policy.

7.2 Current context

The development of aquaculture policies and master plans has been undertaken by the Competent Authorities but at different levels in each Partner State. Review of available documents and interviews with key stakeholders reveal that there is room for development and improvement of aquaculture policy. Aquaculture policies appear either within agriculture or fisheries policy but are often not detailed and remain general. In the case of Kenya, a National Aquaculture Policy already exists (2011) with support from the ACP Fish II Programme. In Tanzania, the National Policy is being reviewed and is at Ministry Cabinet level for adoption. In the concerned region, the fish consumption per capita varies from country to country, but is very low in some of them (i.e. Burundi and Rwanda) due to fishing subsector decline and high prices. The national or regional production is far from being able to satisfy the demand. Although some developments in the commercial aquaculture subsector have been observed over the past 4 or 5 years in the region, it has become urgent to develop adequate policies to enhance its development. It is the role of the EAC to compile the existing work and develop it in a Regional Aquaculture Policy.

7.3 Aquaculture policy

7.3.1 Definition and goals of an aquaculture policy

A policy is a plan of action, taken by a Government or ruling authorities, intended to influence and determine decisions that will allow reaching the objectives. An aquaculture policy will then provide the elements that will be the basis for:

1) A strategy, including the support to the research activities and private sector involvement that will boost the aquaculture activities development;

2) A legal framework, a regulation and monitoring of the aquaculture activities.

7.3.2 Definition and goals of aquaculture policy brief

The Aquaculture Policy Brief presents the current situation of the aquaculture in the region, analyses it and presents recommendations to policy makers.

Aquaculture Policy should address the whole value chain as the activity is dependent from various inputs and outputs. It has also to be linked to agriculture policy as aquaculture is largely dependent of other activities such as crops production.

The ToRs of this assignment (EA-1.3-B5) include the production of a policy brief that should inspire the EAC Secretariat and the Partner States in the drafting of aquaculture policy at regional level. It should also help to define an aquaculture development strategy and to build a legal framework and support to the investment of the private sector in commercial aquaculture.




As the Partner States are keen to adopt common development strategies, the policy brief will be adapted so that it can be used by the EAC Secretariat. The adoption of subsector development policies is the first step and the foundation of a development strategy in agribusinesses. As far as aquaculture is concerned, being still a nascent industry in the EAC, an Aquaculture Development Policy will constitute a strong and positive signal to the private sector. It will also avoid uncontrolled or incoherent attempts to develop aquaculture. The policy framework and brief presented in annex results from the conclusions of the field mission, documentation collection and stakeholders inputs during the National Consultation Meetings held individually in each of the five Partner States. The policy brief takes into account the existing aquaculture policy being developed by the authorities in the Partner States.




8 Annexes

8.1 Annex 1 - Terms of reference

1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1.1 Beneficiary country The beneficiary countries for the implementation of this assignment are the East African Community (EAC) Secretariat and the Partner States of Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Uganda. 1.2 Contracting Authority ACP Fish II Coordination Unit 36/21 Av. de Tervuren 5th Floor Brussels 1040, Belgium Tel.: +32 (0)2.7390060 Fax: +32 (0)2.7390068 1.3 Relevant regional background The Eastern Africa (EA) region for the purposes of the implementation of the ACP Fish II Programme, operating through the Regional Facilitation Unit (RFU) in Kampala, Uganda is made up of Fisheries Administrations (FAs) in Burundi, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Tanzania, and Uganda. These countries are members of a variety of Regional Fishery Bodies (RFBs) including the Lake Victoria Fisheries Organisation (LVFO), the Lake Tanganyika Authority (LTA), the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC), and the Southwest Indian Fisheries Commission (SWIOFC), as well as Regional Economic Communities (RECs) including the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA), the East African Community (EAC), the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), and the Southern African Development Community (SADC). The EAC is an intergovernmental organisation comprising five EA countries: Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Uganda. It was originally founded in 1967, collapsed in 1977 due to political differences, and was officially revived in July 2000. In 2010, the EAC launched its own common market for goods, labour and capital within the region, with the goal of a common currency by the year 2012 and full political federation in 2015. The EAC region covers an area of over 1.8 million km2 and is endowed with significant natural resources. Kenya and Tanzania have had a relatively peaceful history since achieving independence, in contrast to the wars and civil strife that have occurred in Rwanda, Burundi and Uganda. Today, EAC Partner States seek to maintain stability and prosperity in the midst of ongoing conflicts in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and the Horn of Africa. The most prevalent languages in the region are Swahili, English, Kirundi and Kinyarwanda, although French is also common in Burundi and Rwanda. The EAC has stated its intention to expand to include neighbouring countries that have expressed interest to join the Community (e.g., Malawi, DRC, and Zambia). South Sudan and Sudan have also applied to join the EAC. This region has a combined population of about 134 million (2009 estimates), varying from 8.30 million in Burundi, close to 10 million in Rwanda, 32.71 million in Uganda, 39.80 million in Kenya, to 43.74 million in Tanzania. Population growth rates (2010–2015) range from 1.9% in Burundi to 3.1% in Tanzania and Uganda (being 2.7% in Kenya, and 2.9% in Rwanda) according to the UNFPA State of World Population 2011 Report. Average gross national income (GNI) per capita is US$432 but masking huge disparities between Burundi with US$140, Rwanda (US$410), Uganda (US$420), Tanzania (US$460), and Kenya (US$730) according to several sources. Poverty is still widespread in the region and these countries are all classified in the low human development group, ranking from 143rd (Kenya), 152nd (Tanzania), 161st (Uganda), 166th (Rwanda), to 185th (Burundi) out of 187 countries in terms of 2011 Human Development Index (HDI).




1.4 Current state of affairs in the relevant sector Partner States of the EAC have important inland fisheries, which play a critical part in their respective economies ― contributing 0.5% (Kenya), 1% (Burundi), 1.3% (Tanzania), 1.5% (Rwanda), and 1.6% (Uganda) of their GDP annually according to various estimates ― in terms of foreign exchange earnings, while supporting the livelihoods of millions of people. A major proportion of the regional fish production originates from Lake Victoria providing around 1 million tons of fish protein for the region. Lake Victoria is the largest freshwater lake in Africa and the second largest in the world (68,800 km²). It is shared between Kenya (6% of the total area), Tanzania (49%) and Uganda (45%). Its shoreline is around 3,440 km long and a catchment area of about 184,000 km² extending into Rwanda and Burundi through Kagera River, and lies at the head of the Nile River Basin system. Alongside their dependence on inland fisheries, these countries have also identified aquaculture as an important activity, especially in the wake of declining fish catches from the wild, increasing population, food and livelihood insecurity. National policy statements in Rwanda, Kenya, Uganda, and Tanzania all reflect the importance attached to aquaculture in its many forms. Aquaculture is often singled out, from general fisheries, as a key sector priority in meeting food security, economic growth and development targets. At the regional level, the LVFO, with support from FAO, has developed a Regional Aquaculture Strategy and Investment Plan in 2009 to guide development of the sector; it also stressed the regional commitment through the Joint Communiqué of the Council of Ministers (CoM) of the LVFO issued on 28 May 2010 in which Partner States were urged “to promote aquaculture development in the EAC.” The EAC Food Security Action (2011–2015), as approved by the EAC Summit in April 2011, identifies aquaculture as one of the areas that contribute to food security in the EAC region. Similarly, the EAC has identified aquaculture as one of the sources of fish which is repeatedly identified as a candidate for investment and export growth. Moreover, it has, in the last 6 years, firmly put collaboration with the private sector as one of the cornerstones for the region’s development. This approach was set out in the EAC Private Sector Development Strategy (PSDS) adopted in Arusha in June 2006 and has been further promoted through investment policies, investment conferences and projects in support of the Small and Medium Enterprise (SME) sector. These various policy statements and activities have noted the potential contribution and the opportunity for investment in the broad fisheries sector. Although fish farming has long been present in the countries of this assignment, it has generally remained underdeveloped, with a total annual production estimated (over 2007–2010) at 15,000 tons in Uganda, 12,150 tons in Kenya, 4,000 tons in Rwanda, 1,200 tons in Tanzania, and 200 tons in Burundi. At present it is largely practiced at subsistence or small-scale level, and most fishponds have remained unproductive due to poor management and lack of adequate support in terms of provision of extension, guidance and quality inputs (seeds, feeds). Several of these fishponds have been abandoned as a result. On the other hand, with a few exceptions (in Kenya and Uganda in particular) commercial aquaculture is yet to be established in most of these countries. Despite its potential, long history, policy pronouncements and emphasis, there are still a host of constraints and challenges hindering aquaculture growth and development in the target countries, the most important of which are:

• Lack of comprehensive policy and legislation for aquaculture; • Weak institutional capacity and technical support in terms of provision of basic infrastructure, research,

demonstration and extension services; • Lack of technical skills in aquaculture including capacity to deal with value chain especially fish health; • Lack of adequate inputs and facilities (fingerlings, feeds, cold chain, transport and power); • Inadequate entrepreneurship and business-oriented skills by farmers; • Inadequate market information and limited access to markets and credit; • Low Government budget and funding and low investment by private sector; • Poor yields and returns on investment (due to poor management and absence of established marketing

mechanisms and adequate infrastructure). There is now increasing realisation that if the above challenges are to be overcome, the role of the private sector must be brought to the forefront. Governments need to encourage and facilitate commercial scale aquaculture which allows economies of scale to be brought to bear on many of the problems and challenges listed above. Necessary conditions established by Government often include a supportive regulatory framework for the industry




and an enabling environment for serious private investor, whilst generating professionalism in the national regulatory and support departments. This assignment will support the process for the Fisheries Administrations to effectively engage with the private sector by increasing the understanding of the private sector and its needs. In some cases the level of public-private partnership (PPP) is limited and is often dependent on a few key individuals who communicate and interact in such a way that things will progress, but this PPP is generally not institutionalised and may be vulnerable to external and internal shocks. Currently, the EAC and the private sector are in the course of developing a framework for a structured dialogue between the EAC, the private sector and the civil society within the context of requirements of Articles 127, 128 and 129 of the Treaty Establishing EAC. For engagement and effective PPP there is need for better understanding of the private sector and how it operates. The assignment will develop the understanding of the private sector involvement in aquaculture in EAC Partner States through a critical analysis of this involvement and, through a Regional Validation Workshop, will effectively transfer this understanding to key officers responsible for public and private initiatives in the fisheries, aquaculture and other related subsectors in the EAC region. The assignment will also provide clear recommendations for future areas of growth and support. 1.5 Related programmes and other donor activities The countries included in this assignment have received a variety of support for their fisheries sector in recent years but few have specifically targeted the aquaculture subsector. The most significant recently completed or ongoing projects relevant to the assignment are reviewed below. In Kenya

• FAO TCP support to Aquaculture Cluster Groups in 2009 to the tune of US$400,000. • FAO TCP on Preparation of National Aquaculture Development Plan worth US$40,000. • The Fish Farming Enterprise and Productivity Programme (FFEPP) — This programme is expected to

construct and stock on Government funds (about US$67 million) some 47,000 fishponds and fish processing facilities countrywide between 2009 and 2012 with a view to producing fish food, creating employment and generating income through sustainable aquaculture enterprises.

In Rwanda

• The Inland Lakes Integrated Development and Management Support Project (PAIGELAC) — PAIGELAC is a six-year (2005–2012) project co-funded by the African Development Fund (AfDF) and the Rwanda Government for an estimated cost of Unit of Account (UA) 16.8 million. Its main objective is to contribute to enhanced food security in the country. Specifically the project aims to sustainably increase fishers and fish farmers’ incomes, and hence their standards of living through market-oriented activities.

• Sustainable Production and Development of African catfish (Clarias gariepinus) in Rwanda — The main objective of this eight-year (2003–2011) Wallonie-Bruxelles Federation-funded project worth €354,278 was to collect relevant data on the market chain of the African catfish first to be tested on the experimental level, and then at farmer level.

• Helpage Project — The main objective of this project funded by the Netherlands Embassy to the tune of US$298,305 over the period 2007–2011 was to produce fingerlings to be used for stoking lakes and fishponds in the northern part of the country.

In Uganda

• FAO TCP support to Agribusiness mini-estates to promote the Commercialisation Strategy of the Agricultural Sector (2010–2012), to the tune of US$495,000.

• Formulation of Aquaculture Plan and TCP Proposal (2010–2011) worth US$78,938. • The Fisheries Investment for Sustainable Harvest (FISH) Project — The goal of this U.S Agency for

International Development (USAID)-funded project over the period 2005–2008 was to “‘jump-start’ commercial aquaculture development in Uganda through development of model fish farms for farmer-to-farmer technology transfer.” To attain this goal the project has facilitated development of a private




sector-driven commercial aquaculture industry by making available valuable information for prospective investors including production costs, quality feed, seed, and markets, among other achievements.

• Study on Promoting Commercial Aquaculture in Uganda — This EC-funded study, which was undertaken between January and May 2011, aimed “to examine factors constraining aquaculture development in Uganda, and to propose actions and activities which will assist with development of the sector.”

At regional level

• The FAO Special Programme for Aquaculture Development in Africa (SPADA) — “SPADA’s objective is to improve economic and rural development by enhancing fish supply and distribution as well as benefiting nutrition through increased aquaculture production; this goal [will be] achieved by promoting sustainable aqua-businesses at national level including the necessary public and private support services.”

• FAO TCP Support to the Aquaculture Subsector in the Riparian Countries around Lake Victoria (TCP/RAF/3102A) — This two-year (2006–2008) project, worth US$360,000, strengthened the capacity of the LVFO Aquaculture Regional Working Group (ARWG); it also initiated the development of Regional Aquaculture Strategy and Investment Plan through technical inputs in setting up a regional catalogue/database on economically viable aquaculture production systems and methods which can be promoted in the region.

• The Sustainable Aquaculture Research Networks for Sub-Saharan Africa (SARNISSA) — The focus of this EC-funded project for €1.2 million is on initiating regular communication among stakeholders (researchers, commercial and market sectors, government agencies, NGOs, and others) in aquaculture in Africa. The intervention was due for completion in late 2011.

In carrying out this assignment, the Consultant will be expected to liaise with the representatives of the concerned institutions not only to gather the relevant information, but also to maximise project synergies while minimising duplication. 2. OBJECTIVE, PURPOSE AND EXPECTED RESULTS 2.1 Overall objective The overall objective of the ACP Fish II Programme is to contribute to the sustainable and equitable management of fisheries in ACP regions, thus leading to poverty alleviation and improving food security in ACP States. 2.2 Purpose The purpose of this assignment is to strengthen the capacity of the EAC Secretariat and Fisheries Administrations of EAC Partner States such that they can provide effective support to the development of the private sector in aquaculture in the region. 2.3 Results to be achieved by the Consultant The Consultant will achieve the following results as part of this assignment:

i. An inventory is undertaken of all relevant development instruments currently in the EAC Partner States;

ii. A study on analytical review is conducted on private sector involvement in aquaculture in the EAC region providing clear recommendations for future areas of growth and support;

iii. Results and findings are reviewed during the Regional Validation Workshop; iv. A Policy Brief is prepared summarising the main study findings and making recommendations.

Qualitative indicators to measure progress in achieving these results are outlined in Section 8.1 below. 3. ASSUMPTIONS AND RISKS 3.1 Assumptions underlying project intervention An important assumption underlying project intervention is that the target groups are well prepared to allocate official hours to this project and to support its implementation. The need for this intervention was clearly identified in the Regional Needs Assessment Workshop (RNAW) with representatives from FAs and RFBs carried out in Kampala, Uganda in December 2009. The relevance of this need for EAC Secretariat and Partner States has




been confirmed in all subsequent meetings and discussions between the RFU-EA Manager and the ACP Fish II Focal Points including the Programme Planning Workshop in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania in October 2010, and Monitoring Workshops in Kisumu, Kenya and Addis Ababa, Ethiopia in March and December 2011, respectively. The triangulation of ToR appropriateness with the FAs and international partners further reaffirmed the target groups’ need for the intervention. These ToR have been produced in cooperation with local administrations. The ACP Fish II, through this intervention, sets out to respond to this felt need. Since it is a demand-driven programme, it is assumed that counterpart institutions will take all the necessary measures to ensure their fulfilment of obligations and responsibilities as set forth under this project. Failure to meet that requirement is likely to end up in the project not achieving the desired results. 3.2 Risk factors underlying project intervention The risks of overlap and lack of coordination with other Government or donors’ initiatives will be minimised through a wide participatory planning approach as adopted in the development of this intervention. The success, relevance and utility of the study findings will ultimately depend on the information inputs for the analysis. Concerted efforts are required by all parties to ensure that the correct information is made available at the correct time to the correct persona 4. SCOPE OF THE WORK 4.1 General 4.1.1 Project description The assignment will provide the EAC Secretariat and its Partner States with a detailed and comprehensive inventory and analysis of aquaculture activities in areas under their jurisdiction - marine and freshwater. The Consultant will consult closely with the relevant EAC institutions - such as Lake Victoria Basin Commission (LVBC) and the LVFO - , national Fisheries Administrations and the private sector, as well as other key stakeholders (e.g. not-for profit sector) in the target countries. The study will be based on field research, in-country consultations and an analytical review of existing documentation. It will include, but not be limited to:

i. An inventory of all relevant development instruments currently in the EAC Partner States; ii. An analysis of existing policy, institutional and regulatory frameworks governing the establishment

and management of commercial and subsistence aquaculture operations in the region; iii. An assessment of existing local financial, business development and technical support services

available in the region for the sector; iv. An inventory of aquaculture operations in each of the participating countries based on consultations

and documentary review; v. An assessment of the status and characteristics of commercial aquaculture in the region, examining

constraints and opportunities in national, regional and international context; vi. An assessment of technical capacity as regards fish production and wholesomeness and institutional

capacities to address them; vii. Recommendations of the changes required to the regulatory framework to enable aquaculture to

contribute to the national growth objectives in each of the countries and the region through facilitating private investment and encouraging entrepreneurship.

The study report will provide regional synthesis and also stand-alone country papers. The study will consider the above aspects, as well as any other issues which may be identified as relevant for the growth and development of the subsector. The Consultant will organise one technical consultation in each country to support the national inventory of aquaculture, and consult key stakeholders. Its Key Expert (KE) will visit the offices of the LVBC in Kisumu, Kenya and the LVFO Secretariat in Jinja, Uganda and as part of these national and regional consultations. Whilst the regional organisation mandated to coordinate fisheries and aquaculture activities within the EAC is without a doubt the LVFO with a Secretariat in Jinja, the opportunities and potential linkages and awareness




fostered as a result of focusing the KE’s time in Arusha are felt to outweigh the benefits of locating in Jinja. There will be additional spin-off benefits of having the study team and particularly the Workshop event, located in Arusha hosted by the EAC. Missions will be made to Jinja and other parts of the region as necessary. The Regional Validation Workshop will be attended by nominated Government officers able to initiate change in national Fisheries Administrations and will also involve representatives from the private and not-for-profit sector to ensure accuracy and relevance of findings. Participants will be agreed between the EAC Secretariat, the RFU-EA and the Consultant’s team. The KE will be supported during this assignment through other experts (one expert in each country) particularly in the collection of information and stakeholder details in the aquaculture subsector and to assist in the consultations and workshop activities, both technically and administratively. The Consultant will organise one Regional Validation Workshop in the EAC Secretariat Headquarters in Arusha to review the findings of the study and to raise awareness both of the importance of the subsector and present opportunities for the EAC to make significant and long term impact in this field. All project activities will be carried out in strict coordination and collaboration with the staff of the concerned FAs, RFBs and RECs. The Consultant must give a full recognition of EC funding, ACP Secretariat’s involvement and visibility to the ACP Fish II Programme, in all the activities implemented as part of the project. 4.1.2 Geographic area to be covered The countries covered by this contract will be the five EAC Partner States, namely Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Uganda. 4.1.3 Target groups The target groups of this assignment will be officers from the EAC Secretariat and Fisheries Administrations of the EAC Partner States. 4.2 Specific activities 4.2.1 Specific activities The Consultant will carry out the following specific activities:

i. Inception activities: a. Briefing by the ACP Fish II and EAC and review of the purpose of the consultancy and the

proposed structure of the study and methodology; b. Collect all relevant background documentation and materials; c. Devise a work plan for the assignment, to be presented to, and approved by, the EAC Secretariat

and ACP Fish II Programme; ii. Undertake a review and analysis of the relevant documentation; iii. In collaboration with the EAC Secretariat and contracted experts, organise and conduct national field

visits and working sessions/consultations with key stakeholders (at least 1 meeting in each participating country, with estimated 20 participants) and conduct informal face-to-face meetings as required;

iv. Prepare a first draft of the study on analytical review of private sector involvement in aquaculture in the EAC region;

v. Revise first draft to incorporate inputs from EAC, LVFO and ACP Fish II; vi. Prepare “Information Note” containing the key findings of the study to be distributed widely ahead of the

Regional Validation Workshop; vii. In collaboration with the EAC Secretariat, convene and conduct a Regional Validation Workshop in

Arusha to present and validate main findings of the final study; viii. Revise and finalise draft study report taking inputs received at the Workshop into account; ix. Prepare a Policy Briefing Note with main agreed recommendations of the study.

The Consultant will make all the logistical arrangements (subcontracting for workshop organisation is allowed) to organise the Regional Validation Workshop (including invite participants, arrange travel, book and pay for flights and vehicles for participants as necessary, training venue costs, provision of interpretation services




English/Swahili/French – as necessary). The indicative number of participants in the Workshop is 20 for an expected duration of 2 days. Participants in the Workshop will be identified by the EAC Secretariat in collaboration with the RFU-EA and Consultant. The Consultant is allowed to subcontract the production of the 200 Policy Briefs. 4.2.2 Communication and project visibility

a) ACP Fish II projects should follow the EU requirements and guidelines for communication and visibility available on the Programme website at:

http://acpfish2-eu.org/index.php?page=templates&hl=en b) The CU will provide ACP Fish II templates for various communication products. c) When validation workshops (where technical documents are presented to stakeholders for

validation) are needed, given their importance for disseminating the results of the Project and ACP Fish II Programme, the following activities will be requested:

1) The Consultant will provide all necessary information in press-release style (“information note”) on the project objectives and results, the activities to undertake, the main axes or strategic goals proposed and the future role of the beneficiaries.

2) The concerned Fisheries Administrations/Regional Fishery Bodies/Regional Economic Communities will receive the information note at least 3 days before the workshop, through their Government communication/press bodies or officials, in order to mobilise local media and to assure full coverage of the event. Financial support to media coverage is included in the “Incidental Expenditure”. Receipt(s) of the incurred cost for media coverage will be required to verify the costs incurred.

d) The Consultant will provide photographic record of the project activities including the workshop.

4.3 Project management 4.3.1 Responsible body The Coordination Unit (CU) of the ACP Fish II Programme, on behalf of the ACP Secretariat is responsible for managing the implementation of this assignment. 4.3.2 Management structure The ACP Fish II Programme is implemented through the CU in Brussels and six Regional Facilitation Units (RFUs) across the ACP countries. The RFU in Kampala, Uganda, covering ACP member countries in Eastern Africa, will closely supervise the implementation of this intervention and equally monitor its execution pursuant to these Terms of Reference. For the purposes of this assignment, the ACP Fish II Programme Coordinator will act as the Project Manager. All contractual communications including requests for contract modifications or changes to the Terms of Reference during the execution period of the contract must be addressed with a formal request to the CU and copied to the RFU. Beneficiary’s support for these changes is required. 4.3.3 Facilities to be provided by the Contracting Authority and/or other parties Not applicable. 5. LOGISTICS AND TIMING 5.1 Location The normal place of posting for this assignment will be the EAC Secretariat in Arusha, Tanzania. Missions will be undertaken to the target countries according to the agreed work plan and timeline. 5.2 Commencement date and period of implementation The intended commencement date is March, 25th 2013 and the period of implementation of the contract will be four (4) months from this date. Please refer to Articles 4 and 5 of the Special Conditions for the actual commencement date and period of implementation.




6. REQUIREMENTS 6.1 Personnel 6.1.1 Key experts All experts who have a crucial role in implementing this assignment are referred to as key experts. Their profile is described as follows: Key expert 1: Senior Aquaculture Specialist Qualifications and skills

• A postgraduate degree or equivalent in a related field (for example, aquaculture, fisheries management, fisheries economics);

• A high level of proficiency in spoken and written English; knowledge of Kiswahili and/or French would be an advantage;

• Experience as Study Team Leader.

General professional experience • Minimum 8 years of experience in aquaculture management and development; • Proven analytical, communication, report-writing and project management skills.

Specific professional experience

• Demonstrated experience in conducting analytical studies of aquaculture management or development (minimum of 5 assignments);

• Practical experience in promotion or analysis of commercial aquaculture (minimum of 3 assignments);

• Practical experience of aquaculture issues in Eastern Africa will be an advantage; • Practical experience of carrying out similar assignments for the EU or other international

development agencies (minimum of 3 assignments required). The indicative number of missions for this expert outside the normal place of posting requiring overnights is 5. There will be in-country field visits for this expert. Indicative number of working days by expert and task

No. Indicative Task Working Days for Key Expert 1

1 Briefing with ACP Fish II Programme and EAC Secretariat 1

2 Document collection and initial review 2

3 Fieldwork, consultations and analysis 22

4 Preparation of study report 8

5 Preparation and conduct of Regional Validation Workshop 4

6 Revision of Study Report 4

7 Final report preparation 1

Total 42

Additional information

a) The Key Expert is expected to spend at least 80% of the total indicative number of working days in the countries concerned.

b) Note that civil servants and other staff of the public administration of the beneficiary countries cannot be recruited as experts, unless prior written approval has been obtained from the European Commission (EC).

c) The Consultant must complete a timesheet using the ACP Fish II template provided by the CU at the start of the implementation period. The Consultant is entitled to work a maximum of 6 days per week. Mobilisation and demobilisation days will not be considered as working days.

6.1.2 Other experts




The Consultant may hire, for a period not exceeding 5 days in each country, the services of an Aquaculture Specialist in each country, to support the KE in the collection of information and documentation and to facilitate field visits and investigations with stakeholders. These experts will have the following profile: Qualifications and skills

• Degree in aquaculture, fisheries, natural resource management or related subject; • Fluent in written and spoken English; knowledge of French or Swahili will be an advantage (selected

countries). General professional experience

• At least 3 years experience in supporting the development and implementation of fisheries and aquaculture projects.

Specific professional experience

• Experience in the aquaculture subsector in the country concerned; CVs for experts other than the KE are not examined prior to the signature of the contract. They should not have been included in tenders. The Consultant shall select and hire other experts as required according to the profile identified in these Terms of Reference. They must indicate clearly which profile they have so it is clear which fee rate in the budget breakdown will apply. All experts must be independent and free from conflicts of interest in the responsibilities accorded to them. The selection procedures used by the Consultant to select these other experts shall be transparent, and shall be based on pre-defined criteria, including professional qualifications, language skills and work experience. The findings of the selection panel shall be recorded. The selected experts shall be subject to approval by the Contracting Authority. Note that civil servants and other staff of the public administration of the beneficiary country cannot be recruited as experts, unless prior written approval has been obtained from the European Commission. 6.1.3 Support staff and backstopping Backstopping and support staff costs must be included in the fee rates of the experts. 6.2 Office accommodation Office accommodation of a reasonable standard and of approximately 10 square metres for each expert working on the assignment is to be provided by the beneficiary. 6.3 Facilities to be provided by the Consultant The Consultant shall ensure that experts are adequately supported and equipped. In particular it shall ensure that there is sufficient administrative, secretarial and interpreting provision to enable experts to concentrate on their primary responsibilities. It must also transfer funds as necessary to support its activities under the assignment and to ensure that its employees are paid regularly and in a timely fashion. If the Consultant is a consortium, the arrangements should allow for the maximum flexibility in project implementation. Arrangements offering each consortium member a fixed percentage of the work to be undertaken under the contract should be avoided. 6.4 Equipment No equipment is to be purchased on behalf of the Contracting Authority or beneficiary country as part of this service contract or transferred to the Contracting Authority or beneficiary country at the end of the contract. Any equipment related to this contract which is to be acquired by the beneficiary country must be purchased by means of a separate supply tender procedure.




6.5 Incidental expenditure The Provision for incidental expenditure covers the ancillary and exceptional eligible expenditure incurred under this contract. It cannot be used for costs which should be covered by the Consultant as part of its fee rates, as specified above. Its use is governed by the provisions in the General Conditions and the notes in Annex V of the contract. It covers amongst others:

a) KEY EXPERTS • Travel costs and daily subsistence allowances (per diems) for missions for Key Experts, outside

the normal place of posting, to be undertaken as part of this contract. If applicable, indicate if the provision includes costs for environmental measures, for example CO2 offsetting.

• Travel costs for field visits for the Key Experts (car or boat rental, fuel and domestic flights or other appropriate means of transport).

Any subsistence allowances to be paid for missions undertaken as part of this contract must not exceed the per diem rates published on the European Union (EU) website at: http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/work/procedures/implementation/per_diems/index_en.htm

b) WORKSHOP/TRAINING/CONSULTATIONS ORGANISATION • The cost of organisation of the National Consultations and Regional Validation Workshop including

cost for venue, communication and media activities, transport (domestic travel or car or boat rental to/from);

• The payment of a lump-sum to participants requiring an overnight stay to cover accommodation and meals. This lump-sum payment will be up to 150 EUR and must not exceed the published EU per diem rate for the country;

• The payment of a lump sum, up to 30% of the published EU per diem rate for the country, to all participants not requiring an overnight stay, to cover the cost of transport and meals;

In the two cases above, an attendance list signed by each participant and a separate list stating that the lump-sum was received (with an indication of the amount) shall be used to justify the expenditure.

c) FUNDING OF NATIONAL/REGIONAL ADMINISTRATION OFFICERS ACCOMPANYING KEY EXPERTS ON MISSIONS

Exceptionally, the cost of flights, accommodation and meals for the representatives of FAs, RFBs or RECs accompanying the Key Experts on regional or national missions or in-country field visits, under the following conditions:

i) Request of a prior approval to the CU, attaching to this request the declaration issued by local FAs, RFBs or RECs stating that the cost of this extra activity for their officers cannot be covered given the internal budget restrictions. The administration should acknowledge, despite this, the need of the attendance of its officer for an effective project implementation.

ii) The total cost for accommodation and meals based on actual cost (invoices to be provided) cannot exceed the EU per diem rate for the country.

iii) If private or administration’s means of transport are used by the representatives of FAs, RFBs or RECs accompanying the Key Experts on regional or national missions, fuel cost will be reimbursed upon receipt of the officer’s reimbursement request based on distance travelled and local price for fuel per unit. In case of field visits, not requiring overnights, the same procedures apply for meal and transport costs.

d) TRANSLATION

• Cost of translating the Draft Technical Report and the Final Technical Report, as well as the Policy Brief from English into French.

e) OTHER

• The cost of producing and sending 200 Policy Briefs summarising the main findings of the study. • The cost of sending the Final Technical Report to beneficiary countries.




• The cost of producing communication items and visibility items. • The cost of producing and delivering two (2) hard copies of the approved Final Technical Report

each to the Fisheries Administrations in Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Uganda. The Provision for incidental expenditure for this contract is EUR 55,788. This amount must be included without modification in the Budget breakdown. 6.6 Expenditure verification The Provision for expenditure verification relates to the fees of the auditor who has been charged with the expenditure verification of this contract in order to proceed with the payment of further pre-financing instalments if any and/or interim payments if any. The Provision for expenditure verification for this contract is EUR 1,500. This amount must be included without modification in the Budget breakdown. This provision cannot be decreased but can be increased during the execution of the contract. 7. REPORTS 7.1 Reporting requirements Please refer to Article 26 of the General Conditions. There must be a final report, a final invoice and the financial report accompanied by an expenditure verification report at the end of the period of implementation of the tasks. The approved Final Technical Report (FTR) must be annexed to the Final Report (FR). The Final Report must be submitted to the CU after receiving the approval of the FTR. The Final Report (FR) shall consist of a narrative section and a financial section. The financial section must contain details of the time inputs of the experts, of the incidental expenditure and of the provision for expenditure verification. To summarise, the Consultant shall provide the following reports:

Name of Report Content Time of Submission

Inception Report (IR)

Analysis of existing situation and work plan for the project, proposed methodology, calendar of activities, places to visit and people to consult and outline of the content of final technical report. The 10 page report will be submitted to the RFU, CU and the EAC Secretariat.

No later than 10 days after the first expert arriving in the place of posting for the first time. Comments, if any, on the IR must be provided by the within 5 days from receipt.

Draft Final Technical Report (DFTR)

Description of achievements, problems encountered, recommendations and technical proposals suggested by the Consultant (including the study on Aquaculture and the Policy Brief as the key technical outputs).

Within one week of the experts leaving the country on conclusion of the assignment. Comments on the DFTR, if any, must be provided by the RFU/CU and EAC Secretariat within 14 days.

Final Technical Report (FTR)

Draft FTR taking into account changes and comments from the RFU/CU and EAC Secretariat.

Within 10 days after receiving comments on the DFTR. If no comments on the report are given within the time limit of 14 days, the DFTR shall be considered as the FTR.

Final Report (FR) Short description of achievements including problems encountered, recommendations and suggestions together with the FTR and a final invoice and the financial report accompanied by the expenditure verification report.

Within 1 month of receiving the approval of the FTR.

The formats of technical reports are available on the ACP Fish II Programme website at: http://acpfish2-eu.org/index.php?page=templates&hl=en




7.2 Submission and approval of reports Two hard copies of the approved Final Technical Report (FTR) must be submitted to the Project Manager identified in the contract (CU), one copy to the RFU. The original and a copy of the Final Report (FR) must be submitted to the CU together with its annexes and supporting documents. All Reports must be written in English. The Draft Technical Report and the Final Technical Report must be translated into French. The Project Manager is responsible for approving these reports. The cost of producing such material will be included in the fees. 8. MONITORING AND EVALUATION 8.1 Definition of indicators The results to be achieved by the Consultant are included in Section 2.3 above. Progress to achieving these results will be measured through the following indicators:

i. Quality of experts fielded in terms of demonstrated skills and experience; ii. Speed of mobilisation to the beneficiary country will indicate a positive start of the assignment; iii. Identification of issues and problems as recorded in the Inception Report; iv. Reported attendance and involvement of stakeholders in national consultations and the Regional

Validation Workshop; v. Nature and quality of evaluation reports from workshop participants; vi. Number and nature of comments received on the Draft Study Report; vii. Number and nature of comments received on the Draft Final Technical Report; viii. Respect of project milestones with regard to timeframe and report delivery.

The Consultant may suggest additional monitoring tools for the contract duration. 8.2 Special requirements Not applicable.




8.2 Annex 2 - Itinerary, institutions and individuals consulted

8.2.1 Itinerary

First mission

Date Location Activity

20/05 Belgium - Arusha Travel, documentation review

21/05 Arusha Briefing with EAC Secretariat - Mission preparation

22/05 Dar es Salaam Travel, documentation review, meeting with other expert for Tanzania

23/05 Dar es Salaam Meeting at Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries - National Consultation Meeting preparation. Mr K. Osewe & Mrs R. Maly

24/05 Arusha Univ.of Morogoro & Kingolwira Aquaculture Centre

25/05 Dar es Salaam and Pugu Visit of Eden Fish Farm

26/05 Zanzibar 27/05 Dar es Salaam National Consultation Meeting preparation

28/05 Dar es Salaam National Consultation Meeting

29/05 Travel Dar es Salaam - Kisumu Prog. Preparation. E. Yongo

30/05 Kisumu Field visits – Dominion Fish Farm, Jewlet Hatchery

31/05 Kisumu National Consultation Meeting

01/06 Kisumu area Field Visit (Bidii Fish Farmers) - Reporting

02/06 Kenya - Uganda Travelling

03/06 Entebbe Meetings (Ph. Borel - Michel De San)

04/06 Kampala Meetings (ACP Fish II, EU Delegation, Min. of Fisheries

05/06 Kampala - Jinja Meetings (Aquaculture Services, UDB)

06/06 Jinja Meeting LVFO, National Consultation Meeting preparation

07/06 Jinja National Consultation Meeting

08/06 Entebbe - Belgium Visit NaFIRRI, cage project. Travel to Belgium (23h30)

Second mission


16/06 Belgium - Burundi Travel to Bujumbura (day flight)

17/06 Bujumbura and around Meeting with P Kiyuku. Programme drafting. L. Sinzinkayo (MINAGRIE and CNDAPA)

18/06 Bujumbura and around Field visits Private project (Samaki Nzuri Tilapia farm ) and Lake Tanganyika Authorities

19/06 Bujumbura and around Field visits, PRODAP, DEPA and private producer, Mr Minani.

20/06 Bujumbura and around Field visits. B. Akisimana Environment Dir.

21/06 Bujumbura National Consultation Meeting

22/06 Kigali Travel Bujumbura / Kigali

23/06 Kigali Documentation review

24/06 Kigali Field visits meeting RAB, Dr. Alphonse Nshimiyimana

25/06 Lake Kivu Field visits - fish farms (Sakapi & Copelacc)

26/06 Butare - Kigembe Field visits Kigembe Aquaculture Centre

27/06 Kigali - Belgium National Consultation Meeting

Third Mission


20/08 Travel to Arusha

21/08 Arusha Validation workshop preparation

22/08 Arusha Regional Validation Workshop





23/08 Arusha Regional Validation Workshop

24/08 Arusha Report and policy review and writing





8.2.2 List of stakeholders met

Name Country Organisation Position

1 MINANI Jean Burundi Private Owner

2 NIYONGENDAKO Jean Claude

Burundi Min. of EAC Advisor

3 KAREGA Deogratias Burundi MINAGRIE Responsible du Centre National d’Aquaculture

4 NZEYIMANA Léonie Burundi MINAGRIE Director / ACP Fish II Focal Point

5 SINZINKADO Leopold Burundi MINAGRIE Assistant Director

6 BUTKWARE Béatrice Burundi BNDB Senior Investment Officer

7 CHANDJA MUBIGALO Jean Jacques

Burundi API Assistant Director

8 KIYUKU Antoine Burundi CNDAPA Senior Officer

9 KIYUKU Prosper Burundi Univ. Bujumbura et FAO Other Expert on this project

10 MACARIA Sammy Kenya Min. of Fisheries Assistant Director of Fisheries

6 MUSEBE Irene Kenya Min. of Fisheries Senior Assistant Director

7 CHARO-KARISA Harrison

Kenya Min. of Fisheries Acting Director

8 ODENDE Timothy Kenya Min. Fisheries Senior Fisheries Officer / ACP Fish II Focal Point

9 YONGO Ernest Kenya

KMFRI Consultant Fisheries Economist / Other Expert on this project

10 OGWANG Vincent Kenya Min. of Fisheries Principal Fisheries Officer

11 ABIR Philip Kenya Private MD Dominion FF

12 ONIM Moses Kenya Private Consultant LagroTech

13 MUSA Safina Kenya Min. of Fisheries Researcher

14 OJWANG William Kenya KMFRI Assistant Director

15 MAKOKHA Wilfred Kenya Private Fish Farmer (Safe Farm)

16 KUNDU Rodrick Kenya Min. of Fisheries Fisheries Specialist

17 OBADHA Michael Kenya Min. of Fisheries Assistant Director Fisheries

18 GATUNE Charles Kenya KMFRI Aquaculture Specialist

19 NYANDAT Beatrice Kenya Min of Fisheries Assistant Director Fisheries

20 BUSIEGA Aggrey Kenya Min. of Fisheries County Director Fisheries

21 BIDII Fish Farmers Kenya Private 22 SHAW Roger Rwanda Private Farm Owner

23 KAMUGISHA Emmanuel

Rwanda Min. of Agriculture Senior Officer





24 NZAMWITA Vincent Rwanda Private Farm Owner

25 RUTAGANIRA Wilson Rwanda PAIGELAC Programme Coordinator

26 KABAGAMBE Jean Bosco

Rwanda Independent consultant Other expert for Rwanda

27 WESONGA Timothy Tanzania EAC Senior Livestock and Fisheries Officer / ACP Fish II Focal Point

28 WAFULA David Tanzania EAC Livestock and Fisheries Economist

29 ERIYO Jesca Tanzania EAC Deputy Secretary General

30 OLAHO William Tanzania EAC Programme Coordinator

31 MALY Ritha Tanzania Min. Fisheries Assistant Director Mariculture

32 SIMON Ephraim Tanzania Private Farm General Manager

33 OSEWE Kajitanus Tanzania Min. Fisheries Assistant Director Aquaculture

34 BYARUGABA Charles Tanzania Min. Fisheries Senior Fisheries Officer / ACP Fish II Focal Point

35 BALLARIN John Tanzania Private Consultant

36 MULOGO Tanzania Min. of Fisheries Secretary

37 FRANCIS Frederick Tanzania Min. of Fisheries Fisheries Officer

38 ZUHURA Muita Tanzania Min of Fisheries Secretary

39 DADU Antony Tanzania Min. of Fisheries Principal Fisheries Officer

40 SIMTOE Ambakisye Tanzania

Min. of Fisheries Director Mbegani Fisheries Development Centre

41 MKAWA Bakari Tanzania Private Seaweed producer

42 MUGASHA Fidelis Tanzania Private Fish Farmer

43 MWAMBA Abdala Tanzania Private Pearl Farmer

44 MPOSO Abubakai Tanzania Private SFO Bagamoyo

45 MUKANDARA Romuald Tanzania Private Fish Farmer

46 SIMON Ephraim Tanzania Private Dir. Eden Fish Farm

47 SHOKO Amon Tanzania Private Senior Research Officer

48 MANYIKE Thomas Tanzania Private Director Fisheries

49 MKANDAMA Sungura Tanzania Private Fish Farmer

50 LUOMBA Joseph Tanzania

TAFIRI Consultant Fisheries Economist / Other Expert on this project

51 BOREL Reginald Philip Uganda Greenfields Managing Director / Other Expert on this project

55 WADANYA Jackson Uganda Min. Fisheries Fisheries Commissioner

53 TUMWEBAZE Rhoda Uganda LVFO Senior Fisheries Management Officer

54 MKUMBO Oliva Uganda LVFO Deputy Executive Secretary / ACP Fish II Focal Point

55 OLYEL Daisy Uganda Min. Fisheries Senior Fisheries Officer / ACP Fish II Focal Point

56 SERUYANGE Patrick Uganda

EU Delegation Operations Officer, Rural Development

57 PANDE Johnson Uganda UDB Director

58 KIGOZI Margaret Uganda Uganda Investment





Authority

59 BWANIKA Gladys Uganda Makerere Un. 60 OWANI Simon Uganda Private Aquaculture Specialist

61 OMANYI Paul Uganda Min. of Fisheries 62 NYEKO Dick Uganda LVFO Executive Secretary

63 RUTAISIRE Justus Uganda NaFIRRI 64 BALIRWA John Uganda NaFIRRI 65 MBABAZI Dismas Uganda NaFIRRI Head Aquaculture Research

66 OSINDE Robert Uganda Private SON Fish Farm

67 SEBINYANSI Paul Uganda Private WAFICOS

68 KOBUSINGYE Lovin Uganda Private Katifarms

69 MWANJA Wilson Uganda

Scientific Committee NaFIRRI

70 NDIKUMANA Jean Uganda ASARECA 71 MINDJIMBA Koane Uganda ACP Fish II Regional Manager

72 WERE Enos Kenya Private Jewlet Fish Farm

73 OKELLO Otieno Kenya Private Maseno Fish Farm

74 VAN DER KNAAP Martin Burundi

FAO - Autorités du Lac Tanganica

Expert Adviser delegated from the FAO

75 AKISINAMA Bernadette Burundi Min. Environment Director




8.3 Annex 3 - Inception Report

The Inception Report is attached separately.




8.4 Annex 4 - List of reports and documents consulted

8.4.1 General documentation

Blue Frontiers: Managing the Environmental Costs of Aquaculture. WorldFish Centre, May 2011

Agriculture and Rural Development Strategy for the East African Community. EAC Secretariat, 2006

Situation Mondiale des Pêches et de l’Aquaculture. FAO, 2012

EAC regional strategy and implementation plan for sustainable aquaculture plan. SmartFish Programme, IOC / FAO

Mariculture in the WIO region “Challenges and Perspectives”. December 2009.

Fisheries and Aquaculture Policy. FAO

8.4.2 Tanzania documentation

Coastal Aquaculture Development in Tanzania; Sustainable and Non-sustainable Experiences – WIOMSA Bryceson, 2002.

Support to legislative development in Tanzania and Preparation of a draft Aquaculture policy in Kenya. ACP Fish II, June 2011.

National Fishery sector overview – The United Republic of Tanzania – FAO, Dec. 2007

Investment Opportunities in the Fisheries Industry - United Republic of Tanzania, Dec. 2011.

Fisheries Sector Development Programme – United Republic of Tanzania, Dec. 2010.

Fisheries Policy, United Republic of Tanzania, 1997.

Seaweed Farming in Zanzibar: Increases women's purchasing power and social empowerment, Written by Special Correspondent, Sunday, 02 September 2012 13:07

The Status and Development of Aquaculture in Tanzania, East Africa: Shoko, A.P., Lamtane, H.A., Wetengere, K., Kajitanus, O.O., Msuya, F.E., Mmochi, A.J. and Mgaya, Y.D. 2012

Aquaculture in Tanzania, M. Rice – World Aquaculture n° 55 Dec. 2006

A Strategic Guide to Expanding Aquaculture - Production and Promoting its Development in Zanzibar, P. Bueno, 2011

8.4.3 Kenya Documentation

Business Opportunities for Aquaculture in Kenya. IMARES LEY, Dec 2011.

Support to legislative development in Tanzania and Preparation of a draft Aquaculture policy in Kenya. ACP Fish II, June 2011.

Fisheries Development Flagship Project 2012 - 2030, Min. Of Fisheries Development – Republic of Kenya May 2012

National Aquaculture Policy, Min. of Fisheries Development, Republic of Kenya. Nov. 2011

Assessment of National Aquaculture Policies and Programmes in Kenya, Ngugi & Manyala, Apr. 2009.

National Aquaculture Development Strategy and National Development Plan 2010-2015 (2010)

Draft National Aquaculture Policy (2010)

Strategic Plan for Fisheries Development 2008-2012 (2008)

Aquaculture Communication Strategy

National Fish Feed Strategy (2010)

National Oceans and Fisheries Policy (2008)

8.4.4 Uganda Documentation

National Investment Policy for Aquaculture Park Development in Uganda, Republic of Uganda, Jan. 2012.

Feasibility study to design, cost and operationalise model commercial Aquaculture Parks in Uganda. EU, COWI Jan 2013

Regional Aquaculture Strategy and Investment Plan, LVFO, Feb. 2009.

The Fish (Aquaculture) Rules, 2003. Republic of Uganda.




8.4.5 Burundi Documentation

Stratégie Nationale de Développement de l’Aquaculture au Burundi. République du Burundi – FAO, Dec. 2010.

Projet de Loi sur la Pêche et l’Aquaculture, Ministère de l’Agriculture et de l’Elevage, Mars 2013.

8.4.6 Rwanda Documentation

Master Plan for Fisheries and Fish Farming in Rwanda, J. Rutaisire for MINAGRI, July 2011.

Quick scan to identify and discuss options for improved fish production in Rwanda. Petra Spliethoff & Pascal Murasira, February 2013

SFE Fisheries and Aquaculture Action Plan 2009-2013 report




8.5 Annex 5 - Photographs of project, key activities and events

Picture 1 – Cage farming at NaFFIRI, Uganda

Picture 2 – CNPADA, aquaculture station of Mubone

Picture 3 – Eden fish farm, Pugu, Tanzania

Picture 4 – Integrated aquaculture, Kigembe, Rwanda

Picture 5 - Jewlet Hatchery Homa Bay, Kenya

Picture 6 - Samaki Nzuri Tilapia Farm, Burundi




Picture 7 – Sokapi project, Lake Kivu

Picture 8 – Sokoine University, Tanzania

Picture 9 – National Consultation Meeting in Uganda




8.6 Annex 6 – Policy framework

This Policy Framework was presented at the Regional Validation Workshop and was the work base on which all participants intervened. It has been the foundation of the Aquaculture Policy Brief.

8.6.1 Introduction

Several conditions need to be fulfilled to lead to success of an aquaculture project, in any part of the world: 1. Suitable sites; 2. Quality seeds; 3. Quality feed; 4. Expertise and know-how; 5. Financial resources; 6. Equipment; 7. Market.

All items will be covered in the following sections. Suitable sites

Too many examples of poor locations for fish farms are found in Africa where there are many excellent sites available. There is a need to carry out studies and research on the most adequate zones and sites for aquaculture development. The mapping of these sites will help the private sector for their projects location. Quality seeds (fry or fingerlings)

The seed issue is always mentioned by stakeholders in Africa. Good quality fry are a key of success to a project. It is a specialised task that needs a lot of attention and husbandry. Tilapia (Oreochromis spp) will be preferably from a good and known genetic strain and will be all male to assure good growth and optimal conversion ratios. Clarias spp. genetic also needs some research to ensure rearing performances. In Africa, the private sector usually needs to invest in every aspect of production, including hatcheries, as fingerlings are not readily available on the market. The development of the aquaculture subsector in Africa will probably witness the specialisation of tasks (fingerlings production, table fish production, feed, value addition, etc.). Quality, affordability, accessibility, quantity Quality feed

Also now well understood by the stakeholders, a quality feed is important in semi-intensive systems and essential in intensive systems. Production of fish feed is a skilled, much more complex than chicken or other animal feed. Quality feed can cut the production cost by half in certain cases as it lowers significantly Food Conversion Ratios (FCRs), increase survival rates and speed up fish growth. No feed or low quality feed means no access to some aquaculture systems such as cages, Recirculation Aquaculture Systems (RAS) or (semi)-intensive farming. The only option with no quality formulated feed is extensive fish farming in fertilised ponds (green water). Locally available raw materials / ingredients Quality, affordability, accessibility, quantity Expertise and know-how

EAC has good academic levels in aquaculture, but has few experienced aquaculturists. More centres of excellence are needed to ensure training and research. Model/incubation commercial farms are also needed to ensure practical and managerial training. This training needs to be both technical and managerial as aquaculture projects are complex to operate efficiently and profitably. A centre of excellence has to have a commercial component; i.e. fry and feed sales and training has also to be financed etc. public / private partnership should be encouraged (internships training – on-farm training) Financial resources




Aquaculture is capital consuming as it involves capital expenditures in facilities, inputs and equipment, because it has to build up biomass. This biomass corresponds generally to a third of the annual production; i.e. a farm that produces annually 600 t of fish will always hold a standing stock of 200 t of fish. These 200 tonnes of fish is an immobilised capital. Access to finance is therefore essential to ensure the development of the subsector. Need to document success stories to give confidence to bankers and other institutions to lend or co-invest with promoters. But formula of guarantee from the public sector could also facilitate credit extension. Modelling business plans that could be used by financiers and attract investment. Documenting success stories for bankers Equipment

As the aquaculture subsector is under-developed, equipment for fish farming is difficult to find locally and small stakeholders are not in a position to place an order overseas. A value chain approach in the policy drafting will ensure that the area of inputs is integrated. Make sure that no duties/VAT is applied on equipment (to be addressed in the policy) Need advocacy to exempt all aquaculture inputs from export levies. Markets

As all profitable businesses are led by their markets, it is particularly important to ensure a smooth distribution of products. Many smallholders do not find their ways to market and might have to discount their harvested fish. This has been reported in many areas in Africa, including Kenya and Uganda. Good distribution network will also increase the quality of the products as well as their nutritional value; especially with good cold chain management. Conclusion

Failing to benefit from all of the above elements, an aquaculture venture is weakened. Only major investors can develop fully vertically integrated projects that provide solutions for all these components. The developers of an aquaculture policy should therefore have a whole value chain approach so that all aquaculture inputs and outputs are integrated in the policy.

8.6.2 Current context

The development of aquaculture policies has been undertaken by the relevant authorities but at different levels in each Partner State. Review of available documents and interviews with key stakeholders reveal that there is room for improvement in aquaculture policy. Aquaculture policies actually exist either within agriculture or fisheries policy but are often not detailed and remain general. In some cases, like Tanzania, they are being reviewed and are at Ministry Cabinet level for adoption. In the concerned region, the fish consumption per capita vary from country to country, but is very low in some of them (Burundi and Rwanda) due to fishing subsector decline and high prices. Although some developments in the commercial aquaculture subsector have been observed over the past 4 or 5 years in the region and in Africa in general, it has become urgent to develop adequate policies to enhance its development.

8.6.3 Aquaculture Policy Framework

Areas to be covered by an aquaculture policy

General aquaculture policy framework for the EAC region:

An aquaculture policy should express a global vision and goal.

Institutional / stakeholders linkages should be identified and strengthened.

Aquaculture activities must be recognized as an important means to increase the production of white proteins, hence the improvement of food security, income generation and poverty alleviation.

Being cold blooded, fish are better converters of feed compared to warm blooded animals. Its production should be then encouraged.




A clear commitment from the EAC and the individual Partner States has to be adopted for the development of the aquaculture subsector. This general commitment will define the objectives and milestones to be achieved.

An aquaculture policy should ease the task of the private sector, by the creation of a favourable environment, for example through the creation of “one stop shops” to liaise with the different administrations concerned. The private investor should also be supported all along the administrative approval process that needs to be done in a reasonable time frame.

Legislation and regulations must derive from the aquaculture policy. Good governance will be included.

The aquaculture policy should look attractive to the private sector rather than constraining. A communication platform should be created where individual Partner States could see what is happening in other countries on various aquaculture topics (import of strains, hormone use, etc.) also within the countries themselves. Information and mobilisation strategy of stakeholders:

It should be necessary to reinforce institutions like LVFO to increase its involvement in aquaculture development in the region i.e. by creating a more important aquaculture section with a precise mandate that could be extended to all water bodies in the EAC.

An aquaculture policy should be revised every 5 years in order to fit with: o actual needs of the population; o new and appropriate technologies; o environmental changes; o social evolution of the countries or the region.

Climate change development of a financing framework Legal and regulatory framework

Regulations are meant to put the law into application.

Regulations are important to the private sector as they will guide investment decisions. All aspects of the aquaculture activities (fresh and marine water, if applicable) should be covered so that there is no pending issue and applications can be treated rapidly. Maximum delays need to be set for the treatment of application.

Definitions of specific terms employed should be included.

The process to obtain licenses and permits must be defined and adequate application forms must be available.

Monitoring tools must be developed to control the aquaculture activities.

Penalties for non-compliance to the law have to be indicated.

Having an EAC aquaculture regulation would be a plus. Environmental issues

- Environmental impact assessment

Commercial projects are generally subject to an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). It shall be required for all commercial aquaculture projects.

Small scale aquaculture projects not exceeding certain volumes (to be defined) could benefit from a simplified EIA.

Good Aquaculture Practices (GAP) should be developed and implemented

Clear directives to applicants have to be made so that the documents submitted are not sent back for review more than once.

It is also recommended to minimise the number of interlocutors for EIA. Applications for permits and licences often depend from different ministries (i.e. Fisheries, Water Use, Land, Transport, etc.). The applicant should have one stop shop to submit his file and this should be treated in reasonable time.




- Sites for aquaculture

Aquaculture sites must be carefully selected in order to minimise its impacts on the environment.

Sites must also have sound economic sense.

Aquaculture Parks should be encouraged to ease access to the aquaculture activities to small and medium size projects.

Mapping of aquaculture favourable zones should be undertaken.

Maximum carrying capacity of the water systems (lakes and rivers) should be carried out in order to preserve the water resources.

Areas of particular biological interest (breeding areas, mangroves, etc.) must be protected. Aquaculture might not be allowed in such areas.

- Fish species and genetically improved local strains

The region needs to have a common understanding on the use of fish species and adopt a common policy on introduction of new strains or new species in the water systems, especially when these water systems are shared.

In general, the introduction of new species should not be allowed where there is a risk of impacting the environment. The case of Recirculation Aquaculture Systems (RAS), using exotic species, should be examined and controlled to avoid introduction of invasive species in the environment.

The introduction of foreign strains of local species should also be examined by the policy. The import of improved strains (Non GMO) should, at least, be subject to health certificate presentation and appropriate quarantine measures.

Discuss regional programme for genetic improvement of species (broodstock production).

Production of certified seeds.

- Drugs and treatments

The use of drugs and chemicals has to be regulated, including the use of antibiotics, hormones, fungicides and pesticides.

Appropriate water treatment must be in place to minimise the impact on the environment.

- Feeds

Fish feed must be highly digestible and convertible by the fish. Quality feed will minimise the impact on the environment. This can be measured by Food Conversion Ratios (FCRs) records. These FCRs should always be maintained below 2.

Standards and certifications on feed producers should apply.

- Animal welfare

Standards on rearing practices should apply so that fish are prevented from unnecessary pain or discomfort.

Social issues

Commercial aquaculture projects should have a Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) plan. This can be integrated in the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA). This concerns the whole value chain, including aquaculture inputs activities such as feed production and products distribution.

Aquaculture policy should define and document the social requirements of projects.

ESIA should always address the possible conflicts with other water or land users and present a mitigation plan.

Gender issues have to be addressed. Fish farming is an activity that suites well to women and youths at all level of job description. ESIA should be performed by private auditors, eventually licensed by the authorities to guarantee the professionalism of these auditors.




Private investment drivers

It is recommended that aquaculture be promoted on a whole value chain basis.

Aquaculture subsector should be promoted through demonstration projects on a private / public sector basis.

Aquaculture parks creation would give better access to small and medium stakeholders.

Information on tax incentives on aquaculture inputs should be more widely advertised.

Investment guides for private investors should be made available.

Access to finance should be reinforced at reasonable interest rates.

Communication of the various incentives should be enhanced. Trade and market issues

Sensitisation campaign should be made to promote farmed fish.

Facilities for fish distribution should be made available in main market places.

Barriers to trade should be removed on fish products and aquaculture inputs within EAC and extension to COMESA.

Address SPS according to the current EAC protocol and measures. Protection of aquaculture nascent industry from Asian products dumping must be addressed. Tilapia produced in Asia is actually offered at very low prices and compete unfairly with local production.

Certification issues on imported products.

Mechanism for trade facilitation between Partner States.

Exports levies on aquaculture products within the region should be lifted.

Fingerlings movements in the region.

Market information systems to be put in place; Technical expertise, training, human resources and research

- Education

A database of trained people should be put on line with frequent updating.

Incentives should be offered to trained people to come back to work in their own country or region.

- Training

Practical training should be offered in centres of excellence to labour, technicians and managers.

Study visits to model farms should be organised.

Updating of curricula to address demand.

- Extension Services

Platform to be created to balance offer and demand on employment opportunities.

EAC to facilitate the collaboration of education and research centres from EAC and overseas.

- Research and development

Promotion of research planning.

Availability of research facilities.

Dissemination of research findings. Proposed areas to be researched:

Identification of land and cage sites with research on carrying capacities.

Research on fish pathology.

Research on genetics and genetic improvements.

Research on formulated feed and live feed (artemia, rotifers, etc.).

Research on O. niloticus impact on Lake Tanganyika if reared in cages.




Monitoring and evaluation There is a need to monitor the aquaculture subsector development at EAC level. It is therefore recommended that an existing institution takes the responsibility for this task for the whole region. Unless the creation of a specific body would be envisaged, the mandate of LVFO could be extended to the whole region including all water bodies, in cooperation with other existing authorities in charge of specific water bodies (i.e. Lake Tanganyika Authority). This topic should be left for debate at the validation workshop. Recommendations Development partners conference should be held to sensitise and mobilise funds for the subsector in the region. A Regional Aquaculture Network should be encouraged; capitalising on LVFO Working Group. Integrating private sector network groups in decisions making processes. Organising interface between research and end users




8.7 Annex 7 – Policy brief

ANALYTICAL REVIEW OF PRIVATE SECTOR INVOLVEMENT IN AQUACULTURE IN EAC PARTNER

STATES, WITH RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE AREAS OF GROWTH AND SUPPORT

8.7.1 Executive summary

The EAC Secretariat has identified the need to develop an Aquaculture Policy at regional level and has requested the ACP Fish II Programme to assist with an “analytical review of private sector involvement in aquaculture in the EAC Partner States, with recommendations for future areas of growth and support”. The EAC recognises that aquaculture production has to be generated by the private sector. In turn, the Governments have to create a favourable context for the aquaculture industry to blossom, especially through Public-Private Partnership (PPP) programmes. The EAC offers a huge potential for aquaculture development. In order to meet the increasing demand for quality proteins, aquaculture represents one of the 21st century challenges. The population in the EAC is around 140 million people according to the World Bank statistics, but it is also the region of the world where the population growth is the highest. In the meantime, fisheries resources are fully exploited and over exploited in some cases. The development of the aquaculture subsector is therefore a necessity; failing to meet the future aquaculture products demand would endanger the region food security and could therefore jeopardize the social and political stability. The Governments have understood the challenge and are looking for the way forwards to address this situation. An aquaculture policy is a first step that will engage the private sector to invest in the subsector, but the policy needs to be followed rapidly by a strategy, a budget to implement it and a regulation that will ensure a sustainable development.

8.7.2 Context

Aquaculture is one of the world’s fastest growing food production sectors. Today half the fish being consumed in the world comes from fish farming and it continues to grow rapidly – the average annual growth rate since 1970 is 8.4 %. The aquaculture food production system has clear advantages over other types of animal protein production. It contributes less to global emissions of nitrogen and phosphorus. Less water and energy is needed to cultivate fish, resulting in lower environmental demands per unit produced compared with protein derived from cattle, pigs and poultry. These efficiencies are essential as natural resources become more constrained. With its high population growth, the EAC has the challenge to increase its white proteins production to meet its actual demand and create the conditions to face the future demand. According to the FAO, the aquaculture production in Sub-Saharan Africa has increased from 55 000 tonnes in 2000 to 360 000 t in 2010 and only represents a contribution of 0.6 % of the total aquaculture production in the world12. As a continent, Africa contributes to 2.2 % of the world aquaculture production, mainly produced in Egypt (920 000 t in 2010) which is the second tilapia producing country in the world after China.

The “aquaculture challenge” has been clearly identified by the EAC Partner States. As it is indicated in the ToRs of this assignment: “At the regional level, the LVFO, with support from FAO, has developed a Regional Aquaculture Strategy and Investment Plan in 2009 to guide development of the sector; it also stressed the regional commitment through the Joint Communiqué of the Council of Ministers (CoM) of the LVFO issued on 28 May 2010 in which Partner States were urged “to promote aquaculture development in the EAC”. The EAC Food Security Action (2011–2015), as approved by the EAC Summit in April 2011, identifies aquaculture as one of the areas that contribute to food security in the EAC region. Similarly, the EAC has

12 FAO (2012). The state of world fisheries and aquaculture 2012, 230p.




identified aquaculture as one of the sources of fish which is repeatedly identified as a candidate for investment and export growth. Moreover, it has, in the last 6 years, firmly put collaboration with the private sector as one of the cornerstones for the region’s development. This approach was set out in the EAC Private Sector Development Strategy (PSDS) adopted in Arusha in June 2006 and has been further promoted through investment policies, investment conferences and projects in support of the Small and Medium Enterprise (SME) sector. These various policy statements and activities have noted the potential contribution and the opportunity for investment in the broad fisheries sector.


In terms of natural resources, the EAC region offers a variety of opportunities to develop aquaculture. The hydrographical network, beside the semi-arid and arid areas in Kenya and Tanzania, is dense and feeds both the Congo and the Nile basins. The Great Lakes also offer huge aquaculture potential in a region that is in need of additional proteins resources. Kenya and Tanzania, including Zanzibar and other islands, on their 3 440 km of shoreline, have also the opportunity to develop mariculture at a much higher level than the current one. The actual aquaculture production levels are low as compared to the potential and the demand. The statistics are not always reliable, but at least they give some indications. The whole EAC region might produce between 30 000 and 35 000 tonnes of aquaculture products in 2013 (excluding seaweed). These figures are based on official statistics, personal communications and the experts experience in the region. With the current aquaculture production, there are only 250 g of fish per capita per year available for local consumption. It means that the challenge is not less than increasing the production by 20 times the actual levels. Such an ambition requires a serious planning, support and legal frame. The high agriculture potential of many areas of the EAC region can also generate the raw materials needed in aquaculture, mainly soya and maize. The access to these crops is a considerable advantage to the development of aquaculture and that is why an aquaculture policy needs to be linked to agriculture policy. There is a transition in the stakeholders’ mentality and the idea of moving from subsistence to commercial aquaculture is now widely shared. It is also recognised that the aquaculture industry must be driven by the private sector with the support of the public sector. The mission has identified that, despite remarkable progresses compared to the situation prevailing before 2007, there remains a lack of professionalism amongst many stakeholders. This is the task of the Governments to allocate more means to training and research, but also to facilitate Public-Private Sector initiatives. Aquaculture Excellence Centres are also to be developed further. Farms management must become more professional. Missing links along the value chain are also observed at both inputs and outputs levels, leading to inefficiencies and loss of value. For example that is observed in quality / volume of fish feed available or insufficient post-harvest skill or poor marketing of fish. Each EAC Partner State has made progresses on its approach of the aquaculture development policy and strategy over the last 4 or 5 year. Kenya has taken the lead in adopting and implementing various measures to promote aquaculture, especially through its Economic Stimulus Programme and its National Aquaculture Development Strategy and National Development Plan 2010-2015. Kenya has also a National Aquaculture Policy and various development instruments. The other EAC Partner States are also working on strategies, master plans and policies. Uganda has various documents such as Aquaculture Rules, Aquaculture Strategy, Standard Operating Rules for Aquaculture Inspection, Code of Practice for Aquaculture, National Aquaculture Policy for Aquaculture Parks. Tanzania has a National Aquaculture Development Strategy Plan and the Aquaculture Policy is being reviewed. Rwanda has a Fisheries and Fish Farming Master Plan (2011 -2020) and has also an Aquaculture and Fisheries Policy, but it needs to be reviewed as it was produced in 1994. Burundi has a National Strategy for the Development of Aquaculture. These actions should be accelerated and followed by




implementation in order to achieve the production increases that are needed to assure food security in the region. There is still a considerable amount of work to be done before seeing the region producing the hundreds of thousands tonnes of aquaculture products needed by the populations. The first step is certainly the adoption of an ambitious policy. The Aquaculture Policy brief is being drafted to give guidelines to the policy maker and draw their attention on essential topics to be addressed. These recommendations are inspired by the various meeting with both the public and the private sector in the five Partner States through individual meetings and National Consultations with good panels of stakeholders. It is hoped that the EAC Aquaculture Policy will be developed in the near future and that a strategic plan and related legislation will path the way to the development of a flourishing aquaculture industry that will provide fish to the region and beyond.

8.7.4 Policy implications and recommendations

The EAC Policy should recognise that:

Aquaculture is under-developed in the region while fisheries are declining, hence creating a potential food security problem, especially regarding the population increasing rate that is one of the highest in the world (up to 3,1 % annual increase rate in Uganda, Worldwatch Institute13).

As production of white proteins, fish is a premium candidate as it is a better feed converter compared to any other animal.

EAC Policy should take the following, not exhaustive, resolutions:

44. The EAC should set production targets for the region with milestones that can be periodically verified. Each Partner State will set its own targets that should be compiled at regional level.

45. The EAC should organise a development Partners’ conference to sensitise and mobilise funds for the subsector in the region.

46. The Policy must encourage projects that are economically sound i.e. production costs and market price driven.

47. The EAC should encourage a Regional Aquaculture Network capitalising on LVFO’s Aquaculture Working Group which should itself integrate and involve private sector network groups in decisions making processes.

48. The EAC should organise an interface between research and end-users within the region and beyond. 49. The EAC aquaculture policy should express a global vision and goals. 50. The EAC should put in place a legislation and regulations that derive from the Aquaculture Policy. Good

governance should be included in the EAC Aquaculture Policy. 51. A communication platform at EAC level should be created where individual Partner States could see

what is happening in other countries on various aquaculture topics (import of strains, hormone use, etc.). 52. The EAC Aquaculture Policy must put in place an information and mobilisation strategy of stakeholders. 53. The decision to increase LVFO’s involvement in aquaculture development in the region is to be

implemented so that its mandate is extended to Rwanda and Burundi and to all water bodies within the region.

54. The EAC Aquaculture Policy should be revised every 5 years in order to fit with:

actual needs of the population;

new and appropriate technologies;

environmental changes;

social evolution of the countries or the region. 55. Climate change considerations must be integrated at policy level, insisting on the sustainable

characteristic that the projects must meet for approval. 56. The Aquaculture Policy will elaborate a development plan of a financing framework. 57. Definitions of specific terms employed in the policy and the regulation should be included.

13 http://www.worldwatch.org/node/4525




58. Monitoring tools must be developed to control the aquaculture activities within the EAC and evaluate the milestones achieved.

59. Penalties for non-compliance to the law have to be indicated. 60. The EAC Aquaculture Policy must inspire the Partner States that have not yet put in place their own

policy. 61. All commercial aquaculture projects will be subject to an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) that

complies with the EAC standards that will have to be elaborated. 62. Small scale aquaculture projects not exceeding certain volumes (to be defined) could benefit from a

simplified EIA. 63. Good Aquaculture Practices should be developed and implemented at EAC level. 64. The EAC Aquaculture Policy should encourage Aquaculture Parks creation in order to ease access to

the aquaculture activities to small and medium stakeholders. 65. Mapping of aquaculture favourable zones should be undertaken region wise. 66. Maximum carrying capacity of all major water systems should be carried out in order to preserve the

water resources. 67. Areas of particular biological interest (breeding areas, mangroves, etc.) must be identified and protected

by the EAC Aquaculture Policy. 68. The EAC Aquaculture Policy will adopt a clear position on the introduction of exotic species or strains

of fish. 69. The introduction of GMO fish should be examined in the Aquaculture Policy. 70. The EAC Aquaculture Policy should encourage the development of programmes for genetic

improvement of species (broodstock production) and gene banks. 71. Certification of fish seed should be put in place. 72. The use of drugs and chemicals has to be regulated, including the use of antibiotics, hormones,

fungicides and pesticides. 73. The EAC Aquaculture Policy should also put in place a certification process for fish feed to ensure

quality and food safety as well as profitability of fish farms. 74. An animal welfare component should be part of the EAC Aquaculture Policy. 75. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) plans should be encouraged. 76. Aquaculture policy should define and document the social requirements of the aquaculture subsector. 77. Gender issues have to be addressed so that the employment of women and youths are encouraged. 78. At EAC level, information on tax incentives on aquaculture inputs should be more widely advertised. 79. The EAC Aquaculture Policy should lift barriers to trade on fish products and aquaculture inputs within

EAC and engage discussion to extend it to COMESA. 80. The EAC Aquaculture Policy should address SPS according to the existing EAC protocol and measures. 81. The EAC Aquaculture Policy should also envisage the protection of its aquaculture nascent industry

from cheap fish, especially tilapia from Asia. 82. The EAC should lift exports levies on aquaculture products within the region. 83. The EAC Aquaculture Policy should aim to ease fingerlings movements in the region. 84. At EAC level, a database of trained people and graduates should be put on line with frequent updating. 85. The EAC should find funding and mechanisms for practical training that should be offered in centres of

excellence to labour, technicians and managers. 86. EAC should facilitate the collaboration of education and research centres from EAC and overseas.

8.7.5 Source consulted or recommended

General documents Aquaculture Policy, Managing Environmental costs of Aquaculture. Blue Frontiers, 2011.

Agriculture and rural development strategy for the East African Community (2005 – 2030). EAC Secretariat, 2006.

Situation Mondiale des Pêches et de l’Aquaculture. FAO, 2012)

EAC Regional Strategy and Implementation Plan for Sustainable Aquaculture Plan. IOC/FAO, 2012

Mariculture in the WIO Region “Challenges and Prospects”. Sida, MISTRA, IFS, NIOMSA, 2009




Fisheries and Aquaculture in a Changing Climate. FAO, 2011.

Regional Aquaculture Strategy and Investment Plan. LVFO, 2009.

Burundi Stratégie Nationale pour le Developpement de l’Aquaculture au Burundi. MINAGRIE, 2013.

Kenya Assessment of National Aquaculture Policies and Programmes in Kenya. SARNISSA, 2009.

National Aquaculture Policy. Ministry of Fisheries Development, Republic of Kenya, 2011.

Fisheries Development Flagship Project 2012 – 2030. Ministry of Fisheries Development, Republic of Kenya. 2012.

Support to Legislative Development in Tanzania and Preparation of a Draft Aquaculture Policy in Kenya. ACP Fish II, June 2011.

Business Opportunities for Aquaculture Development in Kenya. IMARES / LEI, 2011.

Rwanda Master Plan for Fisheries and Fish Farming in Rwanda. Rutaisire, 2011.

Quick Scan to indentify and discuss options for improved fish production in Rwanda. Petra Splielthoff, 2013.

Tanzania Investment Opportunities in the Fishery Industry. Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development, 2011.

Fisheries Sector Development Programme. Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development, 2010.

The Fisheries Sector Policy and Strategic Statement. Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development, 1997.

Aquaculture in Tanzania, World Aquaculture. M. Rice, 2006.

The Status of Aquaculture Development in Tanzania. Soko, Lamtane, Wetengere, Kajitanus, Msuya, Mmochi and Mgaya. 2007.

A Strategic Guide to expanding aquaculture production and promoting its development in Zanzibar. FAO, 2011.

Uganda National Investment Policy for Aquaculture Parks in Uganda. Republic of Uganda, 2012.

Feasibility study for model commercial aquaculture parks in Uganda. Delegation of the European Union in Uganda. 2013.

Aquaculture Rules, The Fish Act. Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries, 2003.




8.8 Annex 8 - Presentations of the workshop
















8.9 Annex 9 - Workshop report

Annexes of the workshop report are not included in the FTR.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Convening of the Workshop

The Regional Validation workshop on ‘Analytical Review of Private Sector involvement in Aquaculture in EAC Partner States, with Recommendations for Future Areas of Growth and Support’ was held on 22nd-23rd August, 2013 in Arusha, Tanzania. The workshop was convened under a collaborative arrangement between EAC and ACP Fish II.

1.2 Background

Pursuant to the EAC Food Security Action Plan, Fish Production is one of the areas identified as key in the contribution to Food Security and income generation in the region. Fresh water fish has remained one of the key export products for some of EAC Partner States to Europe. Due to increased fishing pressure on inland water fisheries in the region as a result of increased demand for fish proteins, resulting in declining fish stocks and illegal fishing in breeding grounds, as well as increasing market price for fish; consequently, the need to invest in aquaculture is crucial and inevitable. Alongside their dependence on inland fisheries, EAC Partner States have also identified aquaculture as an important activity, especially in the wake of declining fish catches from the wild, increasing population, food and livelihood insecurity. Aquaculture is often singled out, from general fisheries, as a key priority subsector in meeting food security, economic growth and development targets. National policy statements in all EAC Partner States reflect the importance attached to aquaculture in its many forms. However, investments in this area have remained generally low. Nevertheless, we would like to recognise and congratulate the efforts the Republic of Kenya has made in developing aquaculture in the recent past through the Economic Stimulus Initiative and urge the other EAC Partner States to invest in fish farming. Considering the potential of aquaculture in East Africa, investments in aquaculture will significantly contribute to food, nutritional and income security and ultimately to attainment of Millennium Development Goal no.1 on alleviation of poverty and hunger. Fish Production in the region Aquaculture is one of the fastest growing subsectors worldwide. Global aquaculture production reached 52.5 million tonnes in 2010 and is on the rise. Globally, aquaculture accounts for over 45 % of the world's fish production for human consumption. In Africa, aquaculture production has soared from 10 271 tonnes in 1970 to about 1 288 320 tonnes in 2010. The question therefore is –how well is the EAC prepared in increasing aquaculture production to meet the rising demand for white meat (i.e. fish). Although fish farming has long been present in the EAC Partner States, it has generally remained underdeveloped, with a total annual production estimated (between 2007–2010) at 15 000 tonnes in Uganda, 12 150 tonnes in Kenya, 4 000 tonnes in Rwanda, 1 200 tonnes in Tanzania, and 200 tonnes in Burundi. At present it is largely practiced at subsistence or small-scale level, and most fishponds have remained unproductive due to poor management and lack of adequate support in terms of provision of extension, guidance and quality inputs (mainly seeds, feeds). Aquaculture Subsector constraints and Aquaculture in the EAC The East African Community, in its development instruments, has provided for Fisheries and Aquaculture development in the region. The Agriculture and Rural development Strategy provides for development of the Aquaculture. Despite its potential, long history, policy pronouncements and emphasis, there are still a host of




constraints and challenges hindering aquaculture growth and development in the EAC Partner States, the most important are:

Lack of comprehensive policy and legislation for aquaculture;

Weak institutional capacity and technical support in terms of provision of basic infrastructure, research, demonstration and extension services;

Lack of technical skills in aquaculture including capacity to deal with value chain especially fish health;

Lack of adequate inputs and facilities (fingerlings, feeds, cold chain, transport and power);

Inadequate entrepreneurship and business-oriented skills by farmers;

Inadequate market information and limited access to markets and credit;

Low Government budget and funding and low investment by the private sector; and

Lack of awareness and interest among the private sector to tap the opportunity and invest in aquaculture.

Nevertheless, there is now increasing realisation that if the above challenges are to be overcome, the role of the private sector must be brought to the forefront. Governments need to do more to encourage and facilitate commercial scale aquaculture which allows economies of scale to be brought to bear on many of the problems and challenges listed above. Collaboration with the private sector is one of the cornerstones for the region’s development. This approach was set out in the EAC Private Sector Development Strategy (PSDS) adopted in Arusha in June 2006 and has been further promoted through investment policies, investment conferences and projects in support of the small and medium enterprise (SME) sector. These various policy statements and activities have noted the potential contribution and the opportunity for investment in the broad fisheries sector. ACP Fish II Project The overall objective of the ACP Fish II Programme is to contribute to the sustainable and equitable management of fisheries in ACP regions, thus leading to poverty alleviation and improving food security in ACP States. Aquaculture Study The EAC with funds from ACP Fish II Project is undertaking a study on ‘Reviewing of Private Sector Involvement in Aquaculture in EAC Partner States, With Recommendations for Future Areas of Growth and Support’. The purpose of the study was to strengthen the capacity of the EAC Secretariat and Fisheries Administrations of EAC Partner States such that they can provide effective support to the development of the private sector in aquaculture in the region. The study was expected to:

i. Generate an inventory of development instruments currently in the EAC Partner States;

ii. Generate a study report on analytical review of private sector involvement in aquaculture in the EAC region providing clear recommendations for future areas of growth and support; and

iii. Generate Policy Brief summarising the main study findings.

1.3 Objectives of Workshop

The objective of the workshop was to review and improve the study results and findings including the study report and policy briefs. The regional validation workshop was a requirement as per the Terms of Reference (ToRs).

Specifically the workshop was to:

i. Examine and review the inventory of aquaculture development instruments currently in the EAC Partner States;




ii. Review the study mission report on ‘Analytical Review of Private Sector Involvement in Aquaculture in the EAC region, Providing Clear Recommendations for Future areas of Growth and Support’; and

iii. Review and develop a Policy Brief summarising the main study findings.

1.4 Participation

The meeting was attended by technical experts from Ministries responsible for Fisheries, East African Community Affairs, the private sector stakeholders involved in aquaculture, ACP Fish II and the consultancy firm (COFREPECHE) engaged to conduct the aforementioned study. The list of participants is hereto attached as Annex I.

1.5 Constitution of the Bureau

In accordance with EAC Rules of Procedure, the meeting was chaired by Mr Wadanya Jackson, Ag. Head of Fisheries, Office of the Commissioner Department of Fisheries Resources, Republic of Uganda while Mr Jean Claude Niyongendako, Republic of Burundi was the Rapporteur.

1.6 Opening Remarks

1.6.1 Opening Remarks of the Chairperson

The chairperson welcomed all the delegates and noted that aquaculture is an important food security and income generation enterprise. The Chairperson observed that it was of great honour that the Deputy Secretary General had accepted to come officially open the workshop. He noted that this underscored the importance of the Aquaculture Subsector in the region. The Chairman observed that involvement of the private sector in aquaculture development was giant step in the development of the subsector within EAC region.

1.6.2 Opening remarks of the Regional Manager of ACP Fish II

The ACP Fish II Programme Regional Manager for Eastern Africa, Mr Koane Mindjimba, expressed his gratitude to aquaculture stakeholders (both from the private and private sectors) from the five EAC Partner States. He noted that their presence reflected interest in aquaculture and recognition of the importance the subsector in meeting food security, economic growth and development targets. The opening remarks as made by Mr Koane Mindjimba are hereto attached as Annex II.

1.6.3 Opening Remarks by LVFO

The representative of LVFO Dr Oliva Mkumbo informed the participants that LVFO as a specialized institution of the EAC responsible for the coordination and management of fisheries of Lake Victoria. She observed that there is huge unexploited potential of aquaculture in the region. She observed that there is need to harmonize standards and certification processes for fish seeds and feeds. Dr Mkumbo also informed the Participants the EAC is in the process of exploring the possibility of expanding the mandate of LVFO to cover all inland water bodies in EAC Partner States.

1.6.4 Opening Remarks by the Deputy Secretary General – Productive and Social

The official opening remarks were delivered by Hon. Jesca Eriyo the Deputy Secretary General of EAC. She emphasized the importance of the Fisheries Sector in EAC and called for more investments in the Sector. She observed that the EAC region has a huge potential for aquaculture. She underscored that investments in aquaculture will significantly contribute to food, nutritional and income security and ultimately to attainment of Millennium Development Goal no.1 on alleviation of poverty and hunger. The Deputy Secretary General noted that involvement of private sector in development of aquaculture is important and sustainable. Hon. Eriyo further




observed that appropriate loan packages should be developed for aquaculture in order to enable aquaculture farmers to access credit. The Deputy Secretary General thanked EU for funding the study on Reviewing of Private Sector Involvement in Aquaculture in EAC Partner States’. The remarks as made by Hon. Eriyo are hereto attached as Annex III.

1.6.5 Adoption of Agenda

The meeting adopted the Agenda and Programme of work hereto attached as Annex IV. 2.0 PRESENTATION OF THE BACKGROUND PAPER The presentation outlined the background to study on ‘Reviewing of Private Sector Involvement in Aquaculture in EAC Partner States giving the need for involvement of the private sector in the Aquaculture Subsector’. The presentation is hereto attached as Annex V. 3.0 PRESENTATION BY CONSULTANTS ON THE AQUACULTURE STUDY

3.1 Presentations on Findings of the Aquaculture Study The presentation was made by Mr Damien Legros the consultant from COFREPECHE. The workshop participants made inputs section by section of the study findings. The presentation as on study findings on the role of private role in Aquaculture is hereto attached as Annex VI.

3.2 Presentation and Review of the National Consultation Meetings Outcomes The presentation as made by consultants on National Consultations Meetings is hereto attached as Annex VII.

3.3 Presentation of the Policy Briefs The presentation as made by consultants on Policy Briefs from the aquaculture findings is hereto attached as Annex VIII.

3.4 Workshop Observations The workshop discussed in plenary the presentations as made by the contracted consultant. The workshop participants made the following observations; General Observations on Aquaculture Development in the Region

a) There is need for updated information on aquaculture at the national level. Methods of collecting data and statistics on aquaculture should be harmonized.

b) National Budgetary allocations to support aquaculture in each country are very low and need to be increased;

c) There is need for comparative value chain analysis of the cost of establishing and running fish farms in different countries to advise and inform policy;

d) There is need for in-depth study to ascertain adequacy of raw materials for fish feed production in the EAC region;

e) The EAC Partner States’ Governments should create enabling environment for aquaculture farmers and investors to access credit/loans from banks, microfinance institutions, etc.;

f) There is a need to make provision for tax exemption on aquaculture inputs (supplies and equipment); g) Put in place measures to counteract the flooding of EAC market with cheap aquaculture products; h) There is need to incorporate the private Sector in the regional EAC Technical Working Group on

Aquaculture; i) The EAC Sanitary Measures on Aquaculture and Fisheries products should be rolled out along the

fisheries value chain; j) A common harmonized regional policy on aquaculture should be formulated to benefit at Partner States; k) There is need for a strategy for mobilization of stakeholders and formation of aquaculture networks at

national and regional levels; l) There is need to develop a Communication Strategy to reach out to investors and policy makers;




m) It observed that the level of aquaculture development in the Republics of Burundi and Rwanda are rather low and there is need for them to be assisted to catch up.

Observations on Study Findings and Policy Brief

a) The study findings were appropriate with facts but required more refining and incorporation of inputs from plenary.

b) The inventory of policy instruments was incomplete and the Partner States delegations were requested to provide the updates.

c) The policy brief had all the information but should be re-organised into a structure of a policy brief. The recommendations therein should be properly highlighted by including a section on recommendations. As presented the document was more of a policy framework.

4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS The workshop discussed the study findings in detailed and made the following key recommendations:

a) The study findings should be submitted after incorporation of the corrections and inputs from the plenary discussions;

b) The LVFO regional Technical Working Group on Aquaculture should be expanded to bring on board the Republics of Burundi and Rwanda. The Technical Group should incorporate the private sector aquaculture stakeholders to inform and steer the Aquaculture subsector in the region;

c) There is need for urgent development of aquaculture policies at National and Regional levels to guide aquaculture development in the EAC;

d) A framework on financing the fisheries subsector should be developed; e) A Development Partners’ Conference should be held at regional and national level to mobilize

funds and sensitize private and public stakeholders in the region on aquaculture development; f) The regional fisheries subsector should be cushioned from importation of especially cheap

tilapia into the EAC Partner States; g) The Partner States should make deliberate efforts to promote the fish feeds production value

chain and production of fish seeds; h) The EAC Secretariat should initiate resource mobilization for development of the Aquaculture

Subsector in the region; i) National and regional Aquaculture networks should be formed and supported; j) The process of expanding the scope and mandate of LVFO to cover the EAC Partner States

should be expedited; k) The EAC should setup regionally coordinated genetic improvement programme for the main

cultured species; l) Urge Partner States to explore measures that would make aquaculture production more efficient

and profitable.

A.O.B

Fish Imports

During the discussions it became apparent that the EAC region is receiving tilapia imports to the region that are much cheaper than locally produced tilapia. It was claimed that the fish is landed (Cost Insurance and Fright) at ports for one Kiol per one US dollar. This is much cheaper than the local fish produced Tilapia and likely to disrupt the growth of the nascent aquaculture industry in the EAC region. In view of the above, participants discussed and called for the need for a study on the importation of these imports mainly in the form Tilapia Fish fillet. They recommended that the EAC should move to protect the young aquaculture industry.




Signed on this 23rd August, 2013 by the respective Heads of National Delegations as indicated hereunder:

Dr Harrison Charo

Ag. Director NARDTC

Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries

Dr Wilson Rutaganira

Coordinator Fisheries and Aquaculture programme.

Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources

Ms Leonie Nzeyimana

Director of Water,Fisheries and Aquaculture

Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock.

Mr Jakson Wadanya

Ag. Head Fisheries

Ministry Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries

Mr Kajitanus Osewe

Assistant Director of Aquaculture

Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development

Republic of Kenya

Republic of Rwanda Republic of Burundi Republic of Uganda

The United Republic of Tanzania




8.10 Annex 10 - Participants to the workshop


1 MINANI Jean Burundi Private Owner

2 NIYONGENDAKO Jean C Burundi Min. of EAC Advisor

3 KAREGA Deogratias Burundi MINAGRIE Responsable du Centre National d’Aquaculture

4 NZEYIMANA Léonie Burundi MINAGRIE Director / ACP Fish II Focal Point

5 MACARIA Sammy Kenya Min. of Fisheries Assistant Director of Fisheries

6 MUSEBE Irene Kenya Min. of Fisheries Senior Assistant Director

7 CHARO-KARISA Harrison Kenya Min. of Fisheries Acting Director

8 ODENDE Timothy Kenya Min. Fisheries Senior Fisheries Officer / ACP Fish II Focal Point

9 SHAW Roger Rwanda Private Farm Owner

10 KAMUGISHA Emmanuel Rwanda Min. of Agriculture

Senior Officer

11 NZAMWITA Vincent Rwanda Private Farm Owner

12 RUTAGANIRA Wilson Rwanda PAIGELAC Programme Coordinator

13 WESONGA Timothy Tanzania EAC Senior Livestock and Fisheries Officer / ACP Fish II Focal Point

14 WAFULA David Tanzania EAC Livestock and Fisheries Economist

15 ERIYO Jesca Tanzania EAC Deputy Secretary General

16 OLAHO William Tanzania EAC Programme Coordinator

17 MALY Ritha Tanzania Min. Fisheries Assistant Director Mariculture

18 SIMON Ephraim Tanzania Private Farm General Manager

19 OSEWE Kajitanus Tanzania Min. Fisheries Assistant Director Aquaculture

20 BYARUGABA Charles Tanzania Min. Fisheries Senior Fisheries Officer / ACP Fish II Focal Point

21 BOREL Reginald Philip Uganda Greenfields Managing Director / Other Expert

22 WADANYA Jackson Uganda Min. Fisheries Fisheries Commissioner

23 TUMWEBAZE Rhoda Uganda LVFO Senior Fisheries Management Officer

24 MKUMBO Oliva Uganda LVFO Deputy Executive Secretary / ACP Fish II Focal Point

25 OLYEL Daisy Uganda Min. Fisheries Senior Fisheries Officer / ACP Fish II Focal Point

26 ALIO Andrew Uganda Min. Fisheries Senior Fisheries Officer

27 MINDJIMBA Koane Uganda ACP Fish II Regional Manager for Eastern Africa

28 LEGROS Damien Belgium COFREPECHE Key Expert