Ecological Economics 176 (2020) 106717

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ecological Economics
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon

Do Aquaculture Farmers Have an Incentive to Maintain Good Water T

Quality? The Case of Small-Scale Shrimp Farming in Indonesia
⁎
Venticia Hukom , Rasmus Nielsen, Mette Asmild, Max Nielsen
University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics, Rolighedsvej 25, 1958 Frederiksberg C, Denmark

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: While shrimp is the most important farmed seafood product worldwide, its production often induces negative
Shrimp farming externalities as discharge of nutrients to the aquatic environment. If farmers have an incentive to maintain good
Culture system farm-level water quality, it may also positively affect the surrounding environment, reducing the risk of eu-
Sidoarjo trophication in downstream river systems. If this is done, then the need for public intervention regulating the
Indonesia
externalities may be reduced. This study analyzes the incentives for farmers to maintain good water quality by
Environmentally sustainable aquaculture
identifying whether technical efficiency increases with improved water quality. Based on interviews with 183
shrimp farmers producing Litopenaeus vannamei and Penaeus monodon in Sidoarjo, Indonesia, technical efficiency
was estimated using data envelopment analysis (DEA). A positive correlation between good water quality and
technical efficiency was identified using a second stage DEA, but only found in L. vannamei. L. vannamei farmers
thus have an incentive to improve farm-level water quality, potentially decreasing the need for public inter-
ventions. Moreover, the technical efficiency of farmers of P. monodon was significantly higher than for farmers of
L. vannamei. The higher productivity and environmental robustness of P. monodon indicate a possibility for
revitalizing the global supply of the species after two decades of stagnation.

1. Introduction due to negative environmental impacts related to land use changes,

Sustainable growth necessitates the internalization of externalities
in any given production decision. Regulation is often considered the
necessary instrument for regulating aquaculture production (Nielsen,
2012; Nielsen et al., 2014; Abate et al., 2016). While regulation could
ensure that producers internalize environmental impacts, in some cases,
producers could also internalize them without public intervention
(Coase, 1960). One such example is sea-cage farming in Norway, where
producers have managed to internalize externalities originating from
feed waste and diseases that negatively influence both the local en-
vironment and farm productivity. These issues were largely resolved by
innovations in feed, vaccines and technology, allowing farmers to uti-
lize feed more efficiently and moving production further from the coast
(Asche et al., 1999. Tveteraas, 2002). Hence, the need for public in-
tervention can be reduced in cases where farmers are negatively af-
fected by the environmental impact of their own production. Knowl-
edge of how farmers internalize environmental impacts is therefore
important, especially when production takes place in developing
countries without strict environmental enforcement (Abate et al.,
2016).
Shrimp aquaculture is one sector that may face reduced productivity
water and soil pollution, and mangrove destruction (FAO, 2018a,
2018b; Jayanthi et al., 2018; Ottinger et al., 2016; Primavera, 2006).
Shrimp aquaculture in Indonesia contributes to 7% of the global shrimp
production (FAO, 2018a, 2018b), and Indonesia has a long tradition of
shrimp farming (see appendix 1). In the Sidoarjo region, shrimp
farming has existed for more than three hundred years (Murai, 1988),
making it an appropriate place to study the interactions between water
quality and farm economics. The unique pond shape and extensive
system have been passed on from generation to generation. Local
shrimp farmers have managed to survive, even though the rivers that
serve as the primary source of water are polluted, not only from shrimp
production and other industries but also from the mud volcano incident
in 2006 (Fitrianto, 2012). Considering the poor water quality
(Purwaningsih and Notosiswoyo, 2013; Kure et al., 2014), the cap-
ability to survive might be related to the shrimp farmer's skills and
ability to use their inputs efficiently to produce the highest output
possible (technical efficiency).
The purpose of this article is to provide knowledge on the re-
lationship between water quality and technical efficiency to investigate
whether shrimp farmers have an economic incentive to manage the
water quality in production ponds and thereby internalize the

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: vh@ifro.ku.dk (V. Hukom).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106717
Received 7 August 2019; Received in revised form 6 May 2020; Accepted 18 May 2020
Available online 05 June 2020
0921-8009/ © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
V. Hukom, et al.
externality. If the relationship exists, then it indicates a strong incentive
to internalize the externalities of extensive shrimp farming. The water
quality parameters of the individual ponds were treated as exogenous
variables in a second-stage analysis of the data envelopment analysis
(DEA) score to investigate the relationships of these parameters with
the technical efficiency of the shrimp farmers.
The first hypothesis is that water quality is correlated with the
technical efficiency of the individual farms. This hypothesis tests
whether a shrimp farmer's efficiency in using inputs increases with
good water quality. If technical efficiency and good environmental
practices are correlated, then the environmental problems may be re-
duced by farmers acting in their own interest, as shown for Norwegian
salmon farming. Such a finding would indicate that farm management
could play a more substantial role when regulators want to regulate the
environmental impacts of shrimp farming. Nevertheless, internalizing
one environmental problem may not resolve all environmental issues
(Tveteraas, 2002), and regulation may be needed for other environ-
mental problems, such as the abundant plastic wastes.
The second hypothesis is that the technical efficiency of groups of
farms differs between species and production systems. Testing this
hypothesis will also indicate which species among the two dominant
cultured shrimp is more susceptible to a polluted environment and thus
may be more efficiently produced in the future. Currently, many
farmers in shrimp-producing countries, such as Thailand, Malaysia,
Vietnam, and Indonesia, are shifting gradually to Penaeus monodon
cultures from Litopenaeus vannamei cultures due to the higher selling
price of the species (FAO, 2018a, 2018b). This study indicates which of
the two species are most resilient when taking environmental impacts
on farm productivity into account.
This article analyzes the interaction between water quality and
technical efficiency in aquaculture and, to the best of our knowledge, is
the first on the technical efficiency of internalizing environmental
concerns in the practice of shrimp culture in developing countries. The
article is divided into six sections. Section 2 provides a review of the
existing literature related to our research. The methodology is ex-
plained in section 3. Data and summary statistics are reported in section
4. The results are discussed in section 5, and conclusions are provided
in the last section.
2. Literature Review
One type of research analyzes the technical efficiency of shrimp
farming using stochastic frontier analysis and data envelopment ana-
lysis. Shang et al. (1998) compared the economic efficiency of ex-
tensive, semi-intensive and intensive shrimp farming in Asia and
identified the highest cost of production in intensive systems, followed
by semi-intensive and extensive systems, except for in India, where
semi-intensive systems had the highest cost of production. Nguyen
(2012) found higher technical efficiency in the production of P.
monodon than L. vannamei under the assumption of variable returns to
scale.
At the scale of production, Kumar and Birthal (2004) concluded that
large-scale production is more efficient than small-scale production.
They also found a correlation between technical efficiency and shrimp
farmers' education, which corroborates Begum et al. (2013) considering
age, nonfarm income, and location. Conversely, Nguyen and Fisher
(2014) found that extensive shrimp farming is relatively more efficient
and that efficiency is negatively correlated with pollution. Kumaran
et al. (2017) analyzed extensive shrimp farming in India using sto-
chastic frontier analysis and found correlations between technical ef-
ficiency and farm characteristics such as stocking density, feed quan-
tity, duration of culture and technology adoption, which confirms the
results of Reddy et al. (2008).
Another type of research focuses on water quality and management.
Boyd (1989) pointed to the importance of water quality management in
shrimp farming with his finding that low dissolved oxygen (less than
2
Ecological Economics 176 (2020) 106717
2 ppm) and high ammonia (above 1 ppm) induce stress on shrimp,
making them prone to diseases and reducing the growth rate. Moreover,
dissolved oxygen is produced by photosynthesis or comes from in-
flowing water exchange, aeration and diffusion and is consumed by
respiration of the phytoplankton, shrimp and fish in the ponds. These
metabolic activities produce ammonia. However, Hopkins et al. (1993)
argue that ammonia is also produced when organic matter is decom-
posed. The higher the concentration of ammonia in the water, the more
toxic the water is for the organisms living in it. Allan et al. (1990) found
that decreased dissolved oxygen increased the acute toxicity of am-
monia, with 0.21 ppm being the “minimum acceptable” for P. monodon.
McGraw et al. (2001) confirmed that survival in penaeid shrimp in
earthen ponds increased as dissolved oxygen increased from 1.1 ppm to
4.6 ppm. Finally, Kautsky et al. (2000) noted that changes to extreme
levels of these parameters cause mortality.
Boyd (1989) studied the role of the pH value in shrimp farming. It
fluctuates during the day and night with an optimal pH value between 6
and 9. Values outside this range cause stress, less efficient feed con-
version and thereby lack of growth. Allan and Maguire (1992) found
that low pH levels can cause soft shells in P. monodon, while Han et al.
(2018) found that L. vannamei is more resistant to higher rather than
lower pH values.
Soft shell can also result from unsuitable salinity and temperature
levels since they affect the level of dissolved oxygen. An increase in
salinity and temperature reduces the maximum possible level of dis-
solved oxygen in the water. Although 15–25 ppt is an ideal salinity for
cultured shrimp (Boyd, 1989), many shrimp farms have lower salinity
levels due to a lack of available production sites (Flaherty et al., 2000).
Moreover, in comparison to P. monodon, L. vannamei grows better in
low saline water (Bray et al., 1994; Ye et al., 2009). Temperatures of
25–35 °C ensure the highest survival rates for L. vannamei, while tem-
peratures of 18–28 °C are optimal for P. monodon (Ponce-Palafox et al.,
1997; Wyban et al., 1995; Jackson and Wang, 1998). Changes to ex-
treme levels of these parameters cause mortality, and water quality
parameters are therefore pivotal in management (Kautsky et al., 2000).
Recently, Mohanty et al. (2018) suggested using the water quality
suitability index as an approach to improve operational efficiency.
Finally, the third type of research simultaneously studied technical
efficiency and water quality. Martinez-Cordero and Leung (2004a,
2004b) introduced an environmentally adjusted input distance function
and a multicriteria decision-making model. They concluded that in-
tensification is not a sustainable way to perform shrimp farming.
However, since extensive farming is not sufficient to meet global de-
mand, intensive farming may present a sustainable solution, as this
occupies less land locally, particularly when producers internalize their
externalities. Few studies have identified the incentives of farmers to
reduce pollution; Asche et al. (1999, 2009) concluded that by im-
proving technical efficiency, Norwegian salmon farmers can simulta-
neously reduce environmental impacts.
3. Methodology
Data envelopment analysis (DEA) introduced by Charnes et al.
(1978) measures efficiency among decision-making units. The method
is often used to identify best practices to provide producers with
knowledge on how they can improve efficiency (Bogetoft and Otto,
2010). It is a nonparametric method; thus, no functional form is re-
quired for the modeling. Furthermore, multiple inputs and outputs can
be used to estimate the “best practice frontier” (Hoff, 2007; Liu et al.,
2013; Cook et al., 2014). DEA has been used in many efficiency studies
for banking, healthcare, education, and agriculture. Sharma and Leung
(2003) and Iliyasu and Mohamed (2016) focused on shrimp farming
(Gunaratne and Leung, 1997; Shang et al., 1998; Nguyen and Fisher,
2014).
Using mathematical programming, an input-oriented DEA model is
presented below based on Bogetoft and Otto (2010):
V. Hukom, et al. Ecological Economics 176 (2020) 106717

Table 1
Descriptive statistics of sociodemographic variables.
Variable Traditional L. vannamei Traditional plus L. vannamei Traditional Traditional plus P. monodon
(N = 58) (N = 38) P. monodon (N = 16)
(N = 71)

Experience (years) Average 19 16 18 28

SD 11 11 11 15
Min 3 2 1 4
Max 40 50 50 52
Age Average 48 44 48 51
(years) SD 10 9 9 8
Min 25 24 28 36
Max 72 63 75 64
Pond area Average 5 6 3 2
(area) SD 6 15 4 1
Min 1 1 0.5 1
Max 34 100 30 6
Monoculture/ No other species 10 20 3 0
polyculture (farms) Milkfish 46 12 68 16
Tilapia 2 6 0 0
Ownership status (farmer) Owner 28 20 37 9
Rent 11 3 10 1
Worker 19 16 24 6
Education (farmer) No education 10 5 16 1
Elementary school 20 12 26 9
Middle school 12 8 13 2
High school 8 12 11 4
Bachelor's degree 7 1 5 0
Postgraduate 1 0 0 0

min → E 4. Study Area and Data

E, λ1, …..,λS
Subject to:
S
E x io ≥
∑ λs xis , i = 1, ..…,m
s=1
S tional plus” if additional feed is used. The only difference between the
yjo ≤ ∑ λsyjs , j = 1, ……,n
s=1
λs ≥ 0
where S is the total number of decision-making units, which, in this
study, is shrimp farms. xis is the i-th input of the s-th DMU, and yjs is the
j-th output of the s-th DMU, whereas m and n denote a number of inputs
and outputs, respectively. The value acquired for E is the technical ef-
ficiency score for the shrimp farm (xo, yo), which ranges between 0 and
1. If E equals 1, then shrimp farmers can utilize the necessary minimum
inputs to produce the possible maximum output, hence making this
approach technically efficient. Finally, λ is a vector of S weights. In this
article, variable returns to scale were chosen with an assumption that
shrimp farmers do not produce at their optimal size (Rasmussen, 2012).
To confirm the second hypothesis, after estimating the technical
efficiency scores for each farm using DEA, the Mann-Whitney test
(Wijnand and van de Velde, 2000) was applied. The Mann-Whitney test
is a nonparametric test that was used to resolve whether the two groups
commence from the same population. Once the groups were estab-
lished, Spearman's nonparametric correlation was used for further
second-stage DEA, where the first hypothesis was tested. Spearman's
test is selected when the efficiency score is not normally distributed,
with small numbers of observations, and when a linear relationship
between variables is not mandatory (Artusi et al., 2002; Labajova et al.,
2016). A second-stage analysis of a DEA score is a method for relating
the efficiency score to exogenous variables that might affect efficiency
(Hoff, 2007) but are not included as production input (e.g., water
quality variables).
Sidoarjo, located on Java Island in Indonesia, has two million in-
habitants, with 6% working in the agricultural or aquaculture sectors.
The temperature ranges from 20 °C to 35 °C, which makes it a perfect
place to culture black tiger shrimp (P. monodon) and whiteleg shrimp
(L. vannamei), which grow optimally at 25 °C–32 °C (Boyd and Tucker,
2012). In Sidoarjo, most shrimp production systems are extensive and
referred to as “traditional” if no feed is added to the pond and “tradi-
two systems is the additional feeding in the “traditional plus” farms.
The samples of shrimp farmers were randomly chosen from different
districts in Sidoarjo, where the shrimp farms are located near the
coastal area. The local governments sent invitations to all the local
shrimp farmers to participate in the interviews. The invitation was
followed by a visit to each of the shrimp farmers who was willing to
participate in an interview. The data were collected using a ques-
tionnaire and in-depth, face-to-face interviews with each shrimp farmer
and a water quality analysis.
In total, 350 farmers who identified themselves as shrimp farmers
were interviewed between October 2017 and June 2018 in eight major
shrimp-producing districts in Sidoarjo. However, after a thorough data-
cleaning process, only 183 farms, of which at least 40% of the total
production value came from shrimp, were included in the analysis. The
excluded farmers were large-scale farmers using intensive technology,
farmers that had a share of shrimp produced in the polyculture systems
at less than 40% of the production value (e.g., due to low survival rate
of shrimp in those particular cycles) and farmers with more than three
species in the polyculture systems. Among the 183 shrimp farmers, 96
were producing L. vannamei. Of these producers, 58 farms used tradi-
tional culture systems, and 38 used traditional plus culture systems. The
remaining 87 farmers produced P. monodon, with 71 using traditional
systems and 16 using traditional plus culture systems (Table 1).
On average, P. monodon shrimp farmers have more years of ex-
perience than L. vannamei farmers at the same age. Pond areas seem to
be larger for L. vannamei culture than for P. monodon culture and are
combined with the production of milkfish and tilapia, whereas P.
monodon culture most often includes milkfish production because P.

3
V. Hukom, et al. Ecological Economics 176 (2020) 106717

Table 2
Descriptive statistics of the variables used in the DEA.
Output or Input Traditional Traditional plus L. vannamei Traditional Traditional plus
L. vannamei (N = 38) P. monodon P. monodon
(N = 58) (N = 71) (N = 16)

Yield (USD) Average 19,148 30,634 7524 6820

SD 65,782 68,137 5717 3089
Min 387 1169 328 2660
Max 496,930 380,005 29,304 11,692
Seed Average 823 2108 310 129
(in 1000 pcs) SD 1365 4841 471 128
Min 75 155 35 40
Max 9000 30,000 3250 585
Feed (USD) Average 81 26,556 48 1040
SD 146 110,761 113 840
Min 5 150 5 22
Max 876 687,186 730 3010
Lime (kg) Average 549 4384 335 147
SD 1037 19,402 476 79
Min 10 100 24 66
Max 6000 120,000 3000 300
Medicine (USD) Average 2127 329 85 142
SD 15,157 836 82 114
Min 2 4 4 6
Max 115,566 4417 548 412
Fuel (liter) Average 410 689 50 15
SD 1783 1828 135 12
Min 10 10 10 10
Max 13,500 11,200 1000 60
Labor (person) Average 8 10 8 7
SD 3 5 3 1
Min 3 4 3 4
Max 23 32 20 11

monodon can tolerate different levels of salinity (e.g., euryhaline or
stenohaline). Most of the farmers who were interviewed are managers
working on a farm and involved in the day-to-day work on the farm.
They most often graduated from elementary school and have been
working as shrimp farmers ever since. Due to the lack of training,
shrimp farmers' record keeping is often minimal; in fact, they are fre-
quently unaware of the importance of keeping records. However, in
other parts of Indonesia, aquaculture field schools have increased their
awareness of better practices (Bosma et al., 2019).
Consequently, time-series data were not available. The primary data
within this study were from the conducted interviews and in situ water
quality measurements, whereas secondary data were collected by local
government officials. Data collected for this analysis included economic
data (values and quantities) on output and input of production
(Table 2), as well as water quality data (Table 3). Output included the
polyculture production of shrimp, milkfish, and tilapia. Due to multiple
production, the output variable was measured as the total value instead
of quantities. The total value of costs was also used for the input vari-
ables feed and medicine. The feed variable combined feed and fertilizer
usage, whereas medicine was a combination of probiotics, vitamin C
and herbal treatments. Other inputs, such as seeds, lime, fuel and labor,
were measured in quantities. Lime was used to increase pH values in
water. Fuel was used when pumping water into ponds at the beginning
of a production cycle for water exchange and during harvest. Labor
included the number of workers on the farm who prepare, maintain,
and harvest the shrimp.
The use of inputs such as seed, feed, lime, fuel and labor in the
traditional plus L. vannamei was on average the highest among the
groups. However, medicine was used the most in traditional L. van-
namei despite the common belief among shrimp farmers in Sidoarjo that
P. monodon is more susceptible to diseases because of its “captured
broodstock” (Flegel, 2009). This increased medicine use might be be-
cause more seeds are used for L. vannamei (Table 2), potentially leading
to higher stocking densities or due to the different quality of seeds.
Disease outbreaks can originate from many different sources, such as
lack of nutrition, non-optimal environmental conditions, intensification
and low water quality (Flegel, 1997; Kautsky et al., 2000).
During the interviews, in situ water quality measurements were
conducted either by the interviewer or by a government official
(Table 3). Water was sampled in the ponds of the interviewed farmers
where the researcher was allowed to access the ponds, or the govern-
ment official conducted the test. The water quality measurement was
taken using equipment from a water quality laboratory, either owned
by the government or privately owned. Dissolved oxygen and tem-
perature were measured using a DO meter, and ammonia was measured
by a combination of an ammonia test kit and a spectrophotometer. The
pH was measured by a pH meter, whereas salinity was measured by a
refractometer. Water exchange during the season is rather limited due
to the cost (fuel for pumping) and the risk of introducing diseases and
contaminated water from the rivers into the ponds during the produc-
tion cycle. Although some shrimp farmers have options for tidal ex-
change, there is limited water exchange for the same reasons. This
scenario indicates that higher water quality in individual ponds will
also be reflected in the water quality discharged from the farms at the
end of a production period.
5. Empirical Results and Discussion
The mean technical efficiency for an extensive shrimp farm in
Sidoarjo was 0.78. This value indicates that the average shrimp farm
could reduce inputs by 22% without lowering output if the farm pro-
duced like those among the samples using best practices for production.
Farmers choosing to culture P. monodon had a higher technical effi-
ciency than those who farm L. vannamei, with a mean efficiency score of
0.84 for traditional and 0.90 for traditional plus (Table 4). A higher
score for P. monodon than for L. vannamei was also observed in the study
by Nguyen (2012) for shrimp farming in Vietnam.
Farmers culturing L. vannamei had a different technical efficiency
than farmers culturing P. monodon, at a 1% significance level (Table 5).
There were also significant differences at the 5% level (or less) in the

4
V. Hukom, et al. Ecological Economics 176 (2020) 106717

Table 3
Descriptive statistics of the variables used in the second stage of the DEA.
Water Quality Traditional Traditional plus L. vannamei Traditional P. monodon Traditional plus
L. vannamei (N = 38) (N = 71) P. monodon
(N = 58) (N = 16)

DO (ppm) Average 5.04 3.48 4.82 3.53

SD 1.26 1.34 1.22 1.33
Min 1.90 1.20 1.60 2.40
Max 8.40 6.10 9.00 7.19
Ammonia (ppm) Average 0.18 0.47 0.09 0.44
SD 0.30 0.29 0.22 0.34
Min 0.01 0.001 0.01 0.01
Max 1.50 1.50 1.00 1.50
pH Average 7.99 7.84 8.34 8.64
SD 0.67 0.61 0.54 0.46
Min 6.16 6.40 6.60 7.50
Max 9.68 9.00 9.10 9.00
Salinity (ppt) Average 14.16 11.05 20.07 20.25
SD 7.24 8.89 5.52 3.07
Min 1.00 1.00 4.00 15.00
Max 29.00 30.00 35.00 25.00
Temperature (°Celsius) Average 30.07 29.82 31.00 30.44
SD 2.54 1.83 1.85 1.26
Min 20.00 23.90 22.00 29.00
Max 35.50 33.00 33.00 33.00

technical efficiency for the two production systems (traditional vs tra-
ditional plus), for the two types of L. vannamei production systems, for
the two species in the traditional production system and for the two
species in the traditional plus production system. On the other hand, a
significant difference between the two production systems producing P.
monodon was identified. This result corroborates the findings in Table 4
that for the species P. monodon outperforms L. vannamei and for the
production systems, traditional L. vannamei is better than traditional
plus L. vannamei. Thus, the second hypothesis of different technical
efficiencies between different groups of farms and species was con-
firmed for almost all combinations.
When all farms (overall) were tested, the levels of efficiency of the
shrimp farms were significantly negatively correlated with ammonia
but positively correlated with dissolved oxygen, pH, salinity and tem-
perature (Table 6). Thus, an increasing level of ammonia in the water
reduces efficiency since the rho value was negative. This result was as
expected since higher levels of ammonia reduce growth rates (Chen and
Kou, 1992). Higher levels of DO available for shrimp positively affect
growth (McGraw et al., 2001; Allan et al., 1990). The natural pH in
shrimp farming ponds in Sidoarjo was lower than the optimal pH for
shrimp culture. Thus, the addition of lime is necessary to achieve better
production conditions, as reflected in the positive rho value for pH.
However, water quality parameters seemed to generally only correlate
with the technical efficiency of L. vannamei.
In the traditional system, no intervention was taken to change the
natural salinity level, which on average, was lower in Sidoarjo than the
optimal levels for shrimp farming. Thus, to increase efficiency, a higher
level of salinity is still preferable on traditional farms. As such, the
higher the salinity that a farmer can manage at a farm, the more effi-
cient the farm will be. Temperature was also significant but only in the
traditional plus production system (Table 7).
No correlation was found between the technical efficiency and
Table 5
Results for the significance of the different groups.
Mann-Whitney W p-value
L. vannamei vs P. monodon 2641 0.000***
Traditional vs Traditional Plus 4386 0.005**
Traditional P. monodon vs Traditional Plus P. monodon 455 0.201
Traditional L. vannamei vs Traditional Plus L. vannamei 1559 0.000***
Traditional L. vannamei vs Traditional P. monodon 1649 0.048**
Traditional Plus L. vannamei vs Traditional Plus P. monodon 96 0.000***
***, **, and * indicate significance at p < .001, p < .05, and p < .1, re-
spectively.
water quality parameters for P. monodon. On the other hand, L. van-
namei were more susceptible to changes in water quality. DO seemed to
significantly affect the traditional L. vannamei group. The positive
correlation between DO and efficiency was expected because the lit-
erature suggests that higher DO is better for shrimp growth (McGraw
et al., 2001; Allan et al., 1990). Ammonia was significant in both the
traditional and traditional plus systems for L. vannamei. As seen in
Table 2, a higher input of L. vannamei seeds might have caused a higher
stocking density than that of P. monodon. Since ammonia is produced by
the metabolic activities of shrimp and fishes, a higher stocking density
could lead to higher ammonia. Moreover, in traditional plus, using the
additional feed in these extensive farms may have led to a less efficient
practice. Adding feed is good for growth, but only to a certain level; if
the feed is not consumed, then it can lead to an increase in ammonia,
which is not efficient for production. Temperature was also significant
for traditional L. vannamei. Growth increased with temperature when it
was within the window of the optimal growth conditions for L. van-
namei between 25 and 35 °C.
Overall, the empirical results indicate that a correlation exists

Table 4
Technical efficiency score.
ALL Traditional L. vannamei Traditional plus Traditional P. monodon Traditional plus
L. vannamei P. monodon

Mean efficiency 0.78 0.78 0.63 0.84 0.90

Number of farms 183 58 38 71 16
Efficient farms 58 16 6 26 10
Min 0.27 0.31 0.27 0.34 0.67

5
V. Hukom, et al. Ecological Economics 176 (2020) 106717

Table 6
Correlation between water quality and technical efficiency.
Water Quality Overall L. vannamei P. monodon Traditional Traditional plus

DO (ppm) Optimal 4–8 4–7 5. 3–8 4–8 4–8

S 799,836 94,214 109,256 269,541 30,044
p-value 0.003** 0.000*** 0.96 0.004** 0.29
Rho 0.21 0.36 0.00 0.24 −0.14
Ammonia (ppm) Optimal < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1
S 1,422,140 231,541 112,343 474,467 37,291
p-value 0.000*** 0.000*** 0.82 0.000*** 0.001**
Rho - 0.39 −0.57 −0.02 −0.32 −0.42
pH Optimal 6.8–9.0 6.8–9.0 8.0–8.6 6.8–9.0 6.8–9.0
S 849, 197 139,611 100,255 331,419 18,200
p-value 0.022** 0.60 0.42 0.40 0.024**
Rho 0.16 0.05 0.08 0.07 0.30
Salinity Optimal 15–32 15–25 15–32 15–32 15–32
S 786,605 111,424 120,441 302,387 18,482
p-value 0.001** 0.016** 0.36 0.079* 0.030**
Rho 0.22 0.24 −0.09 0.15 0.29
Temperature Optimal 26–30 28–30 26–30 26–30 26–30
S 891,958 141,925 100,427 342,158 19,951
p-value 0.087* 0.71 0.43 0.62 0.081*
Rho 0.12 0.03 0.08 0.04 0.23

***, **, and * indicate significance at p < .001, p < .05, and p < .1, respectively.

between technical efficiency and water quality, as the second-stage
analysis of the DEA scores showed a significant correlation between the
technical efficiency scores and all water quality parameters, which af-
firms the first hypothesis. The analysis further showed that the tech-
nical efficiency of L. vannamei farming was correlated with dissolved
oxygen, ammonia, salinity and temperature. The results indicate that L.
vannamei farmers have an economic incentive to maintain high water
quality in the ponds, which involves maintaining the tested water
quality variables within an optimal range for growing shrimp. The re-
sults also support the second hypothesis that technical efficiency differs
between the species of shrimp produced and the production system
used.
The positive correlation between water quality and technical effi-
ciency for L. vannamei farmers indicates that farmers have an incentive
to improve water quality at the pond level. Improved water quality and
management of water at the pond level may also reduce the discharge
of nutrients into the aquatic environment outside the farm, especially
when water exchange during the production season is limited. If
nutrient discharge is reduced, then it may have a positive effect on the
local aquatic environment, implying that the need for public interven-
tion to limit pollution may be reduced. As indicated by Tveteraas
(2002), however, regulation may still be needed to address other types
of externalities, e.g., to limit the abundant littering of plastic used in
aquaculture. As opposed to that for L. vannamei farmers, a correlation
between water quality and efficiency could not be identified for P.
monodon farmers. This result indicates the continued need for inter-
nalizing the externality of nutrient discharges for P. monodon farmers,
possibly through regulation. Hence, while L. vannamei farmers have an
incentive to maintain good water quality, farmers of P. monodon may
not have that incentive in the studied production systems.
Our study found that L. vannamei farmers have an incentive to take
environmental concerns into account in their production and that im-
proved technical efficiency at the farm level may benefit the overall
environment, as found in the salmon farming industry (Asche et al.,
1999; Tveteras 2002; Asche et al., 2009). This finding aligns with stu-
dies identifying a self-regulating mechanism through good water

Table 7
Correlation between water quality and technical efficiency for the two farming systems of the two shrimp species.
Water Quality Traditional L. vannamei Traditional Plus L. vannamei Traditional P. monodon Traditional plus
P. monodon

DO (ppm) Optimal 4–7 4–7 5.3–8 5.3–8

S 20,339 10,669 50,333 835
p-value 0.003** 0.30 0.19 0.39
Rho 0.37 −0.17 0.15 −0.22
Ammonia (ppm) Optimal < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1
S 46,918 13,710 68,624 832
p-value 0.000*** 0.001** 0.20 0.40
Rho −0.44 −0.50 −0.15 −0.22
pH Optimal 6.8–9.0 6.8–9-0 8.0–8.6 8.0–8.6
S 33,111 8931 54,810 737
p-value 0.89 0.89 0.50 0.75
Rho - 0.01 0.02 0.08 −0.08
Salinity Optimal 15–25 15–25 15–32 15–32
S 23,962 8153 65,002 747
p-value 0.046** 0.51 0.45 0.71
Rho 0.26 0.10 - 0.08 - 0.09
Temperature Optimal 28–30 28–30 26–30 26–30
S 35,339 6388 53,213 586
p-value 0.51 0.066* 0.37 0.61
Rho −0.08 0.30 0.10 0.13

***, **, and * indicate significance at p < .001, p < .05, and p < .1, respectively.

6
V. Hukom, et al. Ecological Economics 176 (2020) 106717

quality management in shrimp farming (Thongrak et al., 1997). Finally,
the results confirm that applying the water quality suitability index can
enhance operational efficiency, as suggested by Mohanty et al. (2018).
The implication of the combined findings that farmers culturing P.
monodon are more efficient than farmers culturing L. vannamei and
cause more robust to changes in the water environment is that the
studied production system of P. monodon becomes economically more
interesting relative to that of L. vannamei. This is particularly the case in
areas where farmers currently produce L. vannamei and face environ-
mental constraints in the form of low water quality. Hence, the sub-
stantially larger growth rates of the supply of L. vannamei compared to
that of P. monodon seen both worldwide and in Indonesia over the last
two decades (see appendix) may change to be in favor of P. monodon.
6. Conclusions
The study concludes that knowledge on the correlation between
water quality and technical efficiency mirrors the incentive farmers
have to internalize externalities. The second-stage analysis of the DEA
scores confirmed the first hypothesis of a positive correlation between a
farm's technical efficiency and good water quality for farmers of L.
vannamei. The farmers implementing best production practices (better-
input management) have higher water quality within their ponds.
Farmers who cultured L. vannamei therefore have economic incentives
to manage their water quality because bad water quality in the ponds
will have negative effects on their productivity. Thus, the L. vannamei
shrimp farmers in Indonesia have an incentive to maintain good water
quality. The results indicate that these Indonesian shrimp farmers may
be part of the solution for addressing some of the environmental chal-
lenges of nutrient discharges while maintaining good water quality at
the farm level to benefit both farm productivity and the environment.
For the farming of P. monodon, technical efficiency was not correlated
with water quality.
The results also reveal that in comparison to L. vannamei, P.
monodon was less affected by the water quality parameters selected
within this analysis. The mean technical efficiency score was highest for
traditional plus P. monodon (0.90), followed by that for traditional P.
monodon (0.84), traditional L. vannamei (0.78), and traditional plus L.
vannamei (0.63). Thus, the DEA analysis confirms the second hypothesis
and supports the conclusion that inefficiency exists among traditional
shrimp farmers in Indonesia and that technical efficiency could be
improved by reducing input and considering the choice of species and
production system. In general, culturing P. monodon had a higher
technical efficiency than culturing L. vannamei.
The implication of farmers having incentives to maintain good
water quality is that externalities in the form of nutrient discharges
from upstream farms to downstream farms, as well as to the down-
stream aquatic environment in river systems, are lower than what they
otherwise could have been. While the need for regulation to avoid the
risk of eutrophication following nutrient discharges may remain, the
need for regulation may be reduced with more efficient farming.
Although fulfilling this incentive may only partially solve the problem,
it can be important in developing countries with weak institutional
settings for implementing regulations in the form of tradable pollution
permits or taxes. In such countries, co-management or strong local
norms may often be the only reliable method to internalize the nutrient
externality. However, internalizing the nutrient externality may work
better when the right farmer incentives prevail and limit the environ-
mental problem. The implication of the combined presence of in-
creasing environmental problems and the resulting lower water quality
in shrimp-producing countries in addition to the higher technical effi-
ciency and environmental robustness of P. monodon farmers over L.
vannamei farmers is that P. monodon is becoming relatively revitalized
as an important supply growth species in the world shrimp market.
Future research could focus on how collaboration between shrimp
farmers in river basins could be initiated using the results from this
study as an incentive for more cooperation. Furthermore, the inclusion
of more environmental and social indicators, such as soil quality, bio-
diversity, farmer's knowledge, technical support, cooperation between
farmers, adoption of new technologies and credit support, would be
useful for obtaining a better understanding of how these are related to
technical efficiency.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ-
ence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
This study was supported by a grant from the Indonesia Endowment
Fund for Education funded by the Ministry of Finance (LPDP), Contract
number : PRJ-65/LPDP.3/2016, Republic of Indonesia. The funding
agency had no role in study design, data collection, data interpretation,
or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Appendix A. Appendix 1. The case of shrimp farming development in Indonesia

Shrimp farming in Indonesia started as a byproduct of milkfish production in brackish water ponds known as “tambak.” It has existed since the
15th century, with an extensive production form being used due to its lower risk and higher quality than that of intensive farming systems
(Kusumastanto, 1994; Muluk and Bailey, 1996). The rapid international demand for shrimp in the 1960s and 1970s generated a significant increase
in fishing efforts, with catches of 1.7 to 1.8 million MT. This development promoted shrimp export in Indonesia, with shrimp later becoming one of
the primary export commodities. In this period, most shrimp from Indonesia were wild-caught using trawlers (Bailey, 1988).
When the Indonesian government started to regulate and reduce trawling at the beginning of the 1980s due to overexploitation, the in-
tensification of shrimp farming began. Donor support and government subsidies increased the possibilities for expansion in new regions where
“tambak” had never been used before as a means to continue export growth. By the end of the 1980s, many small-scale farmers had incorporated
private companies that provided water, electricity, finance, and technical assistance, with intensive systems growing in number (Yusuf, 1995; Muluk
and Bailey, 1996). In this first “expansion,” mainly Penaeus monodon was cultured, as displayed in Fig. 1. However, intensification resulted in a
disease outbreak in the late 1990s. With the relatively higher risk in the more intensified systems, many small-scale shrimp farmers switched back to
extensive production systems (Kusumastanto et al., 1998; Rimmer et al., 2013).
Broodstock of Penaeus monodon primarily comes from capture fisheries, and these broodstock are susceptible to viral and bacterial diseases.
However, in 2000, an innovation in the shrimp industry called specific pathogen-free broodstock for Penaeus vannamei was introduced. The seed
supply for Penaeus vannamei became more reliable than that for Penaeus monodon (Flegel, 2009). This availability led to a shift in species to Penaeus
vannamei, as shown in Fig. 1. Simultaneously, a second “expansion” occurred, where the Asian economic crisis caused an exchange rate drop that led
to a remarkably higher selling price of shrimp exported to the United States and Japan (Rimmer et al., 2013). Since then, Penaeus vannamei has been
the main shrimp species produced in Indonesia and worldwide, globally accounting for 65% of the total shrimp production from fisheries and
aquaculture in 2016, whereas Penaeus monodon accounted for 15% (FAO 2018). The two species supply the integrated world shrimp market (Vinuya,

7
V. Hukom, et al. Ecological Economics 176 (2020) 106717

600

500

400

300

200

100

Indonesia P.monodon Indonesia L.vannamei

Fig. 1. Indonesia farmed shrimp production (1000 tons).

4,500

4,000

3,500

3,000

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

Global P.monodon Global L.vannamei

Fig. 2. Global farmed shrimp production (1000 tons).

2007; Asche et al., 2012; Ankamah-Yeboah et al., 2017; Nielsen et al., 2018; Hukom et al., 2020), where the trend is continuous growth, which is
similar to the trend in Indonesia. Hence, the result achieved in Indonesia most likely mirrors the situation in other shrimp-producing countries (See
Fig. 2).

References
Abate, T.G., Nielsen, R., Tveteraas, R., 2016. Stringency of environmental regulation and
aquaculture growth: a cross-country analysis. Aquac. Econ. Manag. 20 (2), 201–221.
Allan, G.L., Maguire, G.B., 1992. Effects of pH and salinity on survival, growth and os-
moregulation in Penaeus P. monodon Fabricius. Aquaculture 107 (1), 33–47.
Allan, G.L., Maguire, G.B., Hopkins, S.J., 1990. Acute and chronic toxicity of ammonia to
juvenile Metapenaeus macleayi and Penaeus monodon and the influence of low
dissolved-oxygen levels. Aquaculture 91 (3–4), 265–280.
Ankamah-Yeboah, I., Staahl, L., Nielsen, M., 2017. Market integration of cold- and warm-
water shrimp in Europe. Mar. Resour. Econ. 32 (4), 371–390.
Artusi, R., Verderio, P., Marubini, E., 2002. Bravais-Pearson and Spearman correlation
coefficients: meaning, test of hypothesis and confidence interval. Int. J. Biol. Markers
17 (2), 148–151.
Asche, F., Guttormsen, A.G., Tveteraas, R., 1999. Environmental problems, productivity
and innovations in Norwegian salmon aquaculture. Aquac. Econ. Manag. 3 (1),
19–29.
Asche, F., Roll, K.H., Tveteraas, R., 2009. Economic inefficiency and environmental im-
pact: an application to aquaculture production. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 58 (1),
93–105.
Asche, F., Bennear, L.S., Oglend, A., Smith, M.D., 2012. U.S. shrimp market integration.
Mar. Resour. Econ. 27, 181–192.
Bailey, C., 1988. The social consequences of tropical shrimp mariculture development.
Ocean and Shoreline Management 11 (1), 31–44.
Begum, M.E.A., Hossain, M.I., Papanagiotou, E., 2013. Technical efficiency of shrimp
farming in Bangladesh: an application of the stochastic production frontier approach.
J. World Aquacult. Soc. 44 (5), 641–654.
Bogetoft, P., Otto, L., 2010. Benchmarking with Dea, Sfa, and R (Vol. 157). Springer Science
& Business Media.
Bosma, R.H., Ariyati, R.W., Rejeki, Sri, Widowati, L.L., 2019. The impact of aquaculture
field school on Farmers’ yields and income from shrimp and milkfish in Central Java.
Presented at: ecological intensification: a new paragon for sustainable aquaculture.
Int. Conf. 28–30 October 2019, Bogor (Indonesia).

8
V. Hukom, et al.
Boyd, C.E., 1989. Water Quality Management and Aeration in Shrimp Farming.
Boyd, C.E., Tucker, C.S., 2012. Pond Aquaculture Water Quality Management. Springer
Science & Business Media.
Bray, W.A., Lawrence, A.L., Leung-Trujillo, J.R., 1994. The effect of salinity on growth
and survival of Penaeus L. vannamei, with observations on the interaction of IHHN
virus and salinity. Aquaculture 122 (2–3), 133–146.
Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., Rhodes, E., 1978. Measuring the efficiency of decision making
units. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2 (6), 429–444.
Chen, J.C., Kou, Y.Z., 1992. Effects of ammonia on growth and molting of Penaeus ja-
ponicus juveniles. Aquaculture 104 (3–4), 249–260.
Coase, R.H., 1960. The Problem of Social Cost. In Classic papers in natural resource
economics (Pp. 87–137) Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Cook, W.D., Tone, K., Zhu, J., 2014. Data envelopment analysis: prior to choosing a
model. Omega 44, 1–4.
FAO, 2018a. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2018 - Meeting the sustainable
development goals. Rome. License : CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.
FAO, 2018b. http://www.fao.org/in-action/globefish/market-reports/resource-detail/
en/c/1189878/.
Fitrianto, A.R., 2012. Shrimp farmers’ innovation in coping with the disaster (a case study
in Sidoarjo mud volcano disaster toward shrimp farmers’ responses). Procedia
Economics and Finance 4, 168–176.
Flaherty, M., Szuster, B., Miller, P., 2000. Low salinity inland shrimp farming in Thailand.
AMBIO: A J. Hum. Environ. 29 (3), 174–179.
Flegel, T.W., 1997. Major viral diseases of the black tiger prawn (Penaeus P. monodon) in
Thailand. World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 13 (4), 433–442.
Flegel, T.W., 2009. Current status of viral diseases in Asian shrimp aquaculture. Israeli J.
Aquaculture – Bam – idgeh 61, 229–239.
Gunaratne, L.H.P., Leung, P.S., 1997. Productivity analysis of Asian shrimp industry: the
case of Malaysian shrimp culture. World Aquacul. 97, 19–23.
Han, S.Y., Wang, B.J., Liu, M., Wang, M.Q., Jiang, K.Y., Liu, X.W., Wang, L., 2018.
Adaptation of the white shrimp Litopenaeus L. vannamei to gradual changes to a low-
pH environment. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 149, 203–210.
Hoff, A., 2007. Second stage DEA: comparison of approaches for modelling the DEA score.
Eur. J. Oper. Res. 181 (1), 425–435.
Hopkins, J.S., Hamilton, R.D., Sandier, P.A., Browdy, C.L., Stokes, A.D., 1993. Effect of
water exchange rate on production, water quality, effluent characteristics and ni-
trogen budgets of intensive shrimp ponds. J. World Aquacult. Soc. 24 (3), 304–320.
Hukom, V., Nielsen, M., Ankamah-Yeboah, I., Nielsen, R., 2020. A hedonic price study on
warm-and cold-water shrimp in danish retail sale. Aquac. Econ. Manag. 24 (1), 1–19.
Iliyasu, A., Mohamed, Z.A., 2016. Evaluating contextual factors affecting the technical
efficiency of freshwater pond culture systems in Peninsular Malaysia: a two-stage
DEA approach. Aquacul. Rep. 3, 12–17.
Jackson, C.J., Wang, Y.G., 1998. Modelling growth rate of Penaeus P. monodon Fabricius
in intensively managed ponds: effects of temperature, pond age and stocking density.
Aquac. Res. 29 (1), 27–36.
Jayanthi, M., Thirumurthy, S., Muralidhar, M., Ravichandran, P., 2018. Impact of shrimp
aquaculture development on important ecosystems in India. Glob. Environ. Chang.
52, 10–21.
Kautsky, N., Rönnbäck, P., Tedengren, M., Troell, M., 2000. Ecosystem perspectives on
management of disease in shrimp pond farming. Aquaculture 191 (1–3), 145–161.
Kumar, A., Birthal, P.S., 2004. Technical efficiency in shrimp farming in India: estimation
and implications. Indian J. Agri. Econon. 59 (3), 413.
Kumaran, M., Anand, P.R., Kumar, J.A., Ravisankar, T., Paul, J., Vimala, D.D., Raja, K.A.,
2017. Is Pacific white shrimp (Penaeus L. vannamei) farming in India is technically
efficient?—A comprehensive study. Aquaculture 468, 262–270.
Kure, S., Winarta, B., Takeda, Y., Udo, K., Umeda, M., Mano, A., Tanaka, H., 2014. Effects
of mud flows from the LUSI mud volcano on the Porong River estuary, Indonesia. J.
Coast. Res. 70 (sp1), 568–574.
Kusumastanto, T., 1994. An Investment Strategy for the Development of Brackishwater
Shrimp Aquaculture Industry in Indonesia.
Kusumastanto, T., Jolly, C.M., Bailey, C., 1998. A multiperiod programming evaluation of
brackishwater shrimp aquaculture development in Indonesia 1989/1990–1998/
1999. Aquaculture 159 (3–4), 317–331.
Labajova, K., Hansson, H., Asmild, M., Göransson, L., Lagerkvist, C.J., Neil, M., 2016.
Multidirectional analysis of technical efficiency for pig production systems: the case
of Sweden. Livest. Sci. 187, 168–180.
Liu, J.S., Lu, L.Y., Lu, W.M., Lin, B.J., 2013. Data envelopment analysis 1978–2010: a
citation-based literature survey. Omega 41 (1), 3–15.
Ecological Economics 176 (2020) 106717
Martinez-Cordero, F.J., Leung, P., 2004a. Sustainable aquaculture and producer perfor-
mance: measurement of environmentally adjusted productivity and efficiency of a
sample of shrimp farms in Mexico. Aquaculture 241 (1–4), 249–268.
Martinez-Cordero, F.J., Leung, P.S., 2004b. Multicriteria decision making (MCDM) model
for regional sustainable shrimp farming development in Northwest Mexico. Aquac.
Econ. Manag. 8 (3–4), 179–192.
McGraw, W., Teichert-Coddington, D.R., Rouse, D.B., Boyd, C.E., 2001. Higher minimum
dissolved oxygen concentrations increase penaeid shrimp yields in earthen ponds.
Aquaculture 199 (3–4), 311–321.
Mohanty, R.K., Ambast, S.K., Panigrahi, P., Mandal, K.G., 2018. Water quality suitability
and water use indices: useful management tools in coastal aquaculture of Litopenaeus
vannamei. Aquaculture 485, 210–219.
Muluk, C., Bailey, C., 1996. Social and environmental impacts of coastal aquaculture in
Indonesia. Aquacultural development: Social dimensions of an emerging industry
193–209.
Murai, Y., 1988. Shrimp and Japanese. Iwanami-shoten, Tokyo.
Nguyen, K.T., Fisher, T.C., 2014. Efficiency analysis and the effect of pollution on shrimp
farms in the Mekong River Delta. Aquac. Econ. Manag. 18 (4), 325–343.
Nguyen, T.H.A., 2012. Profitability and technical efficiency of Black tiger shrimp (Penaeus
monodon) culture and White leg shrimp (Penaeus vannamei) culture in Song Song Cau
district, Phu Yen province, Vietnam (Master’s Thesis, Universitetet I Tromsø).
Nielsen, M., Ravensbeck, L., Nielsen, R., 2014. Green growth in fisheries. Mar. Policy 46,
43–52.
Nielsen, M., Ankamah-Yeboah, I., Staahl, L., Nielsen, R., 2018. Price transmission in the
trans-Atlantic northern shrimp value chain. Mar. Policy 93, 71–79.
Nielsen, R., 2012. Introducing individual transferable quotas on nitrogen in Danish fresh
water aquaculture: production and profitability gains. Ecol. Econ. 75, 83–90.
Ottinger, M., Clauss, K., Kuenzer, C., 2016. Aquaculture: relevance, distribution, impacts
and spatial assessments–a review. Ocean Coast. Manag. 119, 244–266.
Ponce-Palafox, J., Martinez-Palacios, C.A., Ross, L.G., 1997. The effects of salinity and
temperature on the growth and survival rates of juvenile white shrimp, Penaeus
vannamei, Boone, 1931. Aquaculture 157 (1–2), 107–115.
Primavera, J., 2006. Overcoming the impacts of aquaculture on the coastal zone. Ocean
Coast. Manag. 49 (9–10), 531–545.
Purwaningsih, E., Notosiswoyo, S., 2013. Hydrochemical study of groundwater in
Sidoarjo mud volcano area, East Java Indonesia. Procedia Earth and Planetary
Science 6, 234–241.
Rasmussen, S., 2012. Production Economics: The Basic Theory of Production
Optimisation. Springer Science & Business Media.
Reddy, G.P., Reddy, M.N., Sontakki, B.S., Prakash, D.B., 2008. Measurement of efficiency
of shrimp (Penaeus monodon) farmers in Andhra Pradesh. Measurement 63 (4).
Rimmer, M.A., Sugama, K., Rakhmawati, D., Rofiq, R., Habgood, R.H., 2013. A review
and SWOT analysis of aquaculture development in Indonesia. Rev. Aquac. 5 (4),
255–279.
Shang, Y.C., Leung, P., Ling, B.H., 1998. Comparative economics of shrimp farming in
Asia. Aquaculture 164 (1–4), 183–200.
Sharma, K.R., Leung, P., 2003. A review of production frontier analysis for aquaculture
management. Aquac. Econ. Manag. 7 (1–2), 15–34.
Thongrak, S., Prato, T., Chiayvareesajja, S., Kurtz, W., 1997. Economic and water quality
evaluation of intensive shrimp production systems in Thailand. Agric. Syst. 53 (2–3),
121–141.
Tveteraas, S., 2002. Norwegian salmon aquaculture and sustainability: the relationship
between environmental quality and industry growth. Mar. Resour. Econ. 17 (2),
121–132.
Vinuya, F., 2007. Testing for market integration and the law of one Price in world shrimp
markets. Aquac. Econ. Manag. 11 (3), 243–265.
Wijnand, H.P., van de Velde, R., 2000. Mann–Whitney/Wilcoxon’s nonparametric cu-
mulative probability distribution. Comput. Methods Prog. Biomed. 63 (1), 21–28.
Wyban, J., Walsh, W.A., Godin, D.M., 1995. Temperature effects on growth, feeding rate
and feed conversion of the Pacific white shrimp (Penaeus L. vannamei). Aquaculture
138 (1–4), 267–279.
Ye, L., Jiang, S., Zhu, X., Yang, Q., Wen, W., Wu, K., 2009. Effects of salinity on growth
and energy budget of juvenile Penaeus monodon. Aquaculture 290 (1–2), 140–144.
Yusuf, D., 1995. Aquaculture in Indonesia. In: Towards sustainable aquaculture in
Southeast Asia and Japan: Proceedings of the Seminar-Workshop on Aquaculture
Development in Southeast Asia, Iloilo City, Philippines, 26-28 July 1994. SEAFDEC
Aquaculture Department, pp. 109–115.