| GROUP | AQUACULTURE DEVELOPMENT CONSTRAINTS 1 | REGION IN SUB SAHARAN AFRICA 2 | TOTAL FREQUENCY | GEN. RANK | ||||||||||||||||
| WEST | CENTRAL | EAST | SOUTHERN | NAT STUDY | ALL | |||||||||||||||
| IVC | NIR | FREQ | CMR | CAF | PRC | FREQ | RWA | KEN | MAG | FREQ | URT | MLW | ZAM | ZIM | FREQ | |||||
| A Public Administration | No reliable production statistics | V | - | 1 | V | - | V | 2 | V | V | V | 3 | X | X | V | X | 4 | 3 | 10 | 1 |
| Lack coordination develop/research | - | X | 1 | V | X | X | 3 | X | X | V | 3 | - | - | - | V | 1 | 5 | 8 | 3 | |
| Finances availab (salaries, run costs) | - | X | 1 | X | X | X | 3 | - | X | - | 1 | - | X | X | - | 2 | 7 | 7 | 4 | |
| Lack collaboration various admin | - | X | 1 | X | X | - | 2 | - | X | - | 1 | X | - | - | X | 2 | 6 | 6 | 5 | |
| Unstability institutional framework | - | X | 1 | X | X | X | 3 | - | X | - | 1 | - | - | - | V | 1 | 5 | 6 | 5 | |
| Inefficient rural extension system | - | X | 1 | X | - | - | 1 | - | - | X | 1 | X | - | X | X | 3 | 6 | 6 | 5 | |
| No national aquacult development plan | V | X | 2 | - | X | X | 2 | - | X | - | 1 | - | - | - | - | 0 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| Low priority status within government | - | X | 1 | X | - | X | 2 | - | X | - | 1 | X | - | - | - | 1 | 5 | 5 | 6 | |
| Lack coordination govt/foreign aid | - | V | 1 | - | - | X | 1 | X | X | - | 2 | X | - | - | - | 1 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| Unstability trained personnel | - | - | 0 | - | X | X | 2 | - | X | - | 1 | - | - | - | - | 0 | 3 | 3 | 8 | |
| Underutilization trained personnel | - | - | 0 | V | V | X | 3 | - | - | - | 0 | - | - | - | - | 0 | 1 | 3 | 8 | |
| Legal constraints using exotic species | - | - | 0 | - | - | - | 0 | - | - | - | 0 | - | X | - | X | 2 | 2 | 2 | 9 | |
| Lack govt support to start activity | - | - | 0 | - | - | - | 0 | - | - | - | 0 | - | X | - | - | 1 | 1 | 1 | 10 | |
| B Socio-economics + Human resources | Credit: diff access for small farmers | V | X | 2 | X | X | V | 3 | - | X | - | 1 | X | X | X | X | 4 | 8 | 10 | 1 |
| Technicity level fish farmers too low | V | - | 1 | V | V | V | 3 | V | V | X | 3 | X | X | V | - | 3 | 3 | 10 | 1 | |
| Well trained senior personnel limited | V | - | 1 | X | X | X | 3 | - | - | X | 1 | X | X | X | X | 4 | 8 | 9 | 2 | |
| No sound economic data for private | V | X | 2 | X | V | V | 3 | - | V | - | 1 | - | - | X | X | 2 | 4 | 8 | 3 | |
| Insecurity (poaching fish/livestock) | - | V | 1 | - | X | - | 1 | X | V | V | 3 | V | V | V | - | 3 | 2 | 8 | 3 | |
| Extensionists not adequately trained | - | X | 1 | X | - | - | 1 | - | - | - | 0 | X | X | X | X | 4 | 6 | 6 | 5 | |
| Land tenure system | - | X | 1 | X | - | - | 1 | - | - | X | 1 | X | - | - | X | 2 | 5 | 5 | 6 | |
| Social scientists unavailable | - | X | 1 | - | - | V | 1 | - | - | - | 0 | V | - | V | V | 3 | 1 | 5 | 6 | |
| Extensionists limited number | - | X | 1 | - | - | X | 1 | - | - | X | 1 | - | X | - | - | 1 | 4 | 4 | 7 | |
| Lack tradition controlled an husbandry | - | - | 0 | - | X | X | 2 | X | - | - | 1 | - | - | - | - | 0 | 3 | 3 | 8 | |
| Village socio-econ poorly understood | - | - | 0 | - | V | - | 1 | - | - | - | 0 | - | - | X | V | 2 | 1 | 3 | 8 | |
| Gender issues not addressed | - | - | 0 | - | - | - | 0 | - | - | - | 0 | - | X | - | - | 1 | 1 | 1 | 10 | |
| C Technology | Fish feed ingredierts availability low | - | X | 1 | - | X | X | 2 | X | X | X | 3 | V | X | X | V | 4 | 8 | 10 | 1 |
| Transport costs prohibitive | - | V | 1 | V | V | X | 3 | X | - | V | 2 | V | V | V | - | 3 | 2 | 9 | 2 | |
| Lack juveniles for restock priv ponds | - | X | 1 | X | V | - | 2 | - | V | X | 2 | X | X | X | X | 4 | 7 | 9 | 2 | |
| Bad management of state farms | - | V | 1 | X | - | V | 2 | - | V | - | 1 | - | - | X | - | 1 | 2 | 5 | 6 | |
| Broodstock degeneration | - | - | 0 | - | - | - | 0 | - | - | X | 1 | V | - | X | - | 2 | 2 | 3 | 8 | |
| Indigenous species not well known | - | X | 1 | - | - | - | 0 | - | - | - | 0 | X | V | - | - | 2 | 2 | 3 | 8 | |
| Good-growing indig sp unavailable | - | - | 0 | - | - | - | 0 | - | - | - | 0 | - | X | - | V | 2 | 1 | 2 | 9 | |
| Lack of organic wastes as fertilizers | - | - | 0 | - | - | X | 1 | V | - | - | 1 | - | - | - | - | 0 | 1 | 2 | 9 | |
| Commercial feeds too expensive | - | X | 1 | - | - | - | 0 | - | - | - | 0 | - | - | - | V | 1 | 1 | 2 | 9 | |
| D Physical environment | Land availability limited | - | X | 1 | - | - | - | 0 | X | V | - | 2 | - | V | - | V | 2 | 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Climate too cold for tropical fish | - | - | 0 | - | - | - | 0 | X | V | - | 2 | - | X | - | V | 2 | 2 | 4 | 7 | |
| Transport means unavailable | - | - | 0 | - | X | - | 1 | - | - | - | 0 | X | X | X | - | 3 | 4 | 4 | 7 | |
| Road network in bad condition | - | - | 0 | - | V | X | 2 | - | - | X | 1 | - | - | - | - | 0 | 2 | 3 | 8 | |
| Infrastructure too old | - | - | 0 | - | V | X | 2 | - | - | - | 0 | - | - | X | - | 1 | 2 | 3 | 8 | |
| Basic equipment lacking | - | - | 0 | - | - | - | 0 | - | - | - | 0 | X | - | V | X | 3 | 2 | 3 | 8 | |
| Water availability limited | - | - | 0 | - | X | - | 1 | - | - | - | 0 | - | X | - | X | 2 | 3 | 3 | 8 | |
| Suitable soils availability limited | - | - | 0 | - | - | - | 0 | - | - | - | 0 | - | X | - | X | 2 | 2 | 2 | 9 | |
| IVC | NIR | - | CMR | CAF | PRC | - | RWA | KEN | MAG | - | URT | MLW | ZAM | ZIM | - | NAT STUDY | ALL | RANK GEN | ||
1 Within each group, constants are ranked from top (highest priority) to bottom (lowest priority)
2 Constraints identified in national studies are checked X
Constraints identified by FAO/SIFR consultants are checked V
