↓ Skip to main content

Why are Prices in Wild Catch and Aquaculture Industries so Different?

Overview of attention for article published in Ambio, November 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
3 policy sources
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 Mendeley
Title
Why are Prices in Wild Catch and Aquaculture Industries so Different?
Published in
Ambio, November 2013
DOI 10.1007/s13280-013-0449-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sebastián Villasante, David Rodríguez-González, Manel Antelo, Susana Rivero-Rodríguez, Joseba Lebrancón-Nieto

Abstract

Through a comparative analysis of prices in capture fisheries and aquaculture sectors, the objectives of this paper are a) to investigate three the trends in prices of forage catches to feed the aquaculture species, b) to analyze the amount of fish species need to feed aquaculture species in order to assess the level of efficiency in resource use, and c) to examine the degree of economic concentration either in wild-catch industry and aquaculture sectors. The results show that prices of cultivated species are higher than prices of the same species when harvested from the sea. We explain this fact by the interplay of three forces. First, the amount of wild fish to feed aquaculture species continues to improve over time. Second, the pressure of fishing activities has not been reduced since catches of most forage fishes are declining, which induce higher prices of capture species that feed aquaculture production. Third, the level of seafood market concentration is significantly higher in aquaculture than in wild catches, which generates higher prices in aquaculture.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
Malaysia 1 1%
France 1 1%
Sweden 1 1%
Italy 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Unknown 64 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 17%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Student > Master 6 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 7%
Other 13 18%
Unknown 13 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 31%
Environmental Science 15 21%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 6 8%
Social Sciences 4 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 17 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 February 2024.
All research outputs
#3,289,054
of 24,717,692 outputs
Outputs from Ambio
#591
of 1,760 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,884
of 221,328 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ambio
#6
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,717,692 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,760 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 221,328 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.