A review and SWOT analysis of aquaculture development in Indonesia Michael A. Rimmer 1 , Ketut Sugama 2 , Diana Rakhmawati 3 , Rokhmad Rofiq 3 and Richard H. Habgood 4 1 Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Sydney, ACIAR Field Support Office, Makassar, Indonesia 2 Centre for Aquaculture Research and Development, Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, Jakarta, Indonesia 3 Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, Jakarta, Indonesia 4 Richard Habgood Consulting, Warragul, Vic., Australia Correspondence Michael Rimmer, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Sydney, ACIAR Field Support Office, 8th Floor, Fajar Graha Pena, Jl. Urip Sumohardjo No. 20, Makassar, South Sulawesi 90234, Indonesia. Email: mike.rimmer@sydney.edu.au Received 11 February 2012; accepted 16 October 2012. Abstract Indonesia has a long history of aquaculture, dating from the 15th century. Subsequently, the country has become a significant contributor to global aquacul- ture production, destined for both international and domestic markets. In 2009 the Government of Indonesia announced its vision to see Indonesia become the highest (volume) producer of aquaculture products in the world by 2015, with production targets equivalent to an overall increase in production of 353% between 2009 and 2014. This paper comprises a PEEST (policy, economic, envi- ronmental, social, technical) review undertaken as a background study for a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) analysis, the outcomes of the SWOT analysis and a discussion of possible approaches to support sustainable aquaculture development in Indonesia. To meet the vision of a dramatic expan- sion of aquaculture production, one or more of the following strategies is required: intensification and production segmentation, areal expansion, and/or production diversification. Most likely the continued development of aquaculture in Indonesia will be a combination of these three strategies, with the relative influ- ence of each depending on production sector and market demands. A key issue identified in the PEEST review and SWOT analysis is the dominance (in terms of number) of Indonesian aquaculture by smallholder aquaculture farmers. We argue that a range of influences, including aquaculture production expansion and changing international market requirements, have the potential to negatively impact smallholder aquaculture farmers in Indonesia, and that further policy development should specifically address these issues. Key words: aquaculture development, brackishwater, freshwater, Indonesia, mariculture. Introduction The first reports of aquaculture in Indonesia date from around 1400 when Javanese law prescribed punitive mea- sures against those who stole from freshwater or salt-water ponds (Schuster 1952; Rabanal 1988). From Indonesia, brackishwater pond farming spread to neighbouring areas including the Philippines, Malaysia, Thailand, Taiwan and southern parts of China (Taiwan) (Rabanal 1988). Fresh- water aquaculture in Indonesia started with the stocking of common carp in backyard ponds in West Java and subse- quently expanded to other parts of Java, Sumatra and Su- lawesi in the early twentieth century (Budhiman 2007). Indonesian aquaculture continued to expand, and land resources devoted to aquaculture (brackish and freshwater ponds) grew from 0.3 million hectares to 0.7 million hect- ares between 1961–1965 and 2001–2005, with the rate of expansion accelerating over time (Fuglie 2010). Among Indonesia agricultural sectors, aquaculture continues to develop rapidly; Fuglie (2010) analysed Indonesian agricul- ture production since the 1960s and noted that while the growth rate in food crop output slowed appreciably in the 1990s and early 2000s, growth in horticulture, animal prod- ucts and aquaculture remained strong. Today, both capture fisheries and aquaculture are impor- tant contributors to the Indonesian economy, providing food security through primary production, income genera- tion in rural areas, and generating significant export © 2013 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd 1 Reviews in Aquaculture (2013) 5, 1–25 doi: 10.1111/raq.12017