This article try to make some analysis and distinguish between only-workers or workers-owners and social aspects or profit-loss.

Social aspect cover the worker side, his security, health care, and a salary to support his family.
Ownership mean profit or loss and capital resources to keep running the business.

Depending on the culture system and the farm size, we can find more workers-owners than only workers.

In Thailand with average farm size of 1.5 to 2.5 hectares we might find a lot more worker-owner having their own home at the farm than only workers with a boss at the city.
In Ecuador due the farm size the ownership is for people living in the city having workers in the farm and in the office in the city.

This differences are not good or bad, they are because demographic - population situation in those countries.

Regardless there are workers or worker-owner in both cases their social aspects shall be covered. To fulfill those social aspects has nothing to do with ownership but with producer margin.

Been owner does not mean always a profit, in Ecuador there are a lot of abandoned shrimps farms and more with bank loans problems. I´m aware of farm owner selling their properties to the workers because can not afford to pay their salary.

In Thailand I guess there should be worker-owner that does not fulfill social aspects and having losses, and therefore can not get at least a salary to support their families.

Them if we wish to cover in a better way the workers or worker-owners social aspects, the distribution chain between producer and consumer should be address.
In Italy with a high Organic consciences, the distribution chain between organic producer and consumer is very short, with the producers offering their products directly to the consumers.

In the other hand, some people might think that intensive farms provide more jobs than extensive farms and therefore is better for the country, let´s see;

Intensive shrimp farm 2.0 hectares;
2 workers-owner (maybe father and son)
production: 12.000 kg/year = 12 tons/year

Extensive shrimp farm 60.0 hectares;
10 workers
production: 72.000kg/year = 72 tons/year

The intensive shrimp farm produces 6 times more shrimps/ha than the extensive but the ratio worker/shrimp is almost the same;

Intensive; 2/12 = 0.16 worker/ Ton of shrimp
Extensive; 10/72 = 0.14 worker/ Ton of shrimp

or

Intensive; 12/2 = 6 Ton of shrimp/ worker
Extensive; 72/10 = 7.2 Ton of shrimp/ worker

Therefore there are no more jobs because they are producing more shrimps in a small area. There is a more intensive use of the land.

In both systems intensive or extensive jobs are depending in the shrimp output.
In both systems social aspect are a risk depending in the producer margin that is related to the commercialization chain, producer-packer-importer-broker-retailer.

Social aspects are covered in IFOAM standards and therefore in certified farms regardless culture systems or only-worker - worker-owner status.

If those social aspects wants to be enhanced the commercialization chain should be address in the organic shrimp business, otherwise the owner will not be able to pay the salary and health care or the worker-owner will not have enough income to pay his own salary -health care.

In the other hand from my point of view intensive farms might have some risk for virus outbreak like white spot (originated in Asia), or chicken flu.
Extensive conventional (not organic) farms in Ecuador did have their own virus outbreak in old conventional farms for example Taura syndrome, but those outbreak were much more limited and less harmful.
Organic density controlled shrimp farm with a short commercialization chain should be a good approach to enhance social aspects.

.................................
by: Enrique F. Bolona
ebolona@southtropical.com
February 2004