Economic Analysis of Commercial Aquaponic Production Systems

Project Overview

Project Type: Graduate Student
Funds awarded in 2013: $9,975.00
Projected End Date: 12/31/2015
Grant Recipient: University of Kentucky
Region: Southern
State: Kentucky
Graduate Student:
Major Professor:
Dr. Timothy Woods
University of Kentucky

Annual Reports


  • Vegetables: greens (leafy)
  • Animals: fish


  • Animal Production: feed additives, feed rations
  • Crop Production: nutrient cycling
  • Education and Training: decision support system, extension, participatory research
  • Farm Business Management: agricultural finance, budgets/cost and returns, feasibility study, new enterprise development, whole farm planning
  • Production Systems: agroecosystems, holistic management
  • Sustainable Communities: urban agriculture

    Proposal abstract:

    The purpose of this project is to provide literature that analyzes the economic viability of small to medium scale commercial aquaponic food production systems. There is limited information available that focuses on alternative production systems, capital budgeting, and effective marketing techniques employed by commercial aquaponic producers. In order for our modern food system to gravitate towards more sustainable food production techniques, it is necessary to inform the general public of ways to profitably produce sustainable food products. This project will provide this information by analyzing 3 different commercial aquaponic systems, collecting data for capital budgeting analyses, and determining how commercial aquaponic producers profitably market their products.

    Project objectives from proposal:

    1)    Identify and analyze 3 different commercial aquaponic production systems.


    2)    Collect data for capital budgeting analyses of identified commercial aquaponic production systems.


    3)    Analyze the supply chain and marketing techniques employed by various commercial aquaponic producers.

    Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the U.S. Department of Agriculture or SARE.