A. Species
Scientific name: Aerodramus fuciphagus
Common name(s): Edible-nest swiftlet
Global IUCN Red List Threat Status: Least Concern
B. Location of use
Geographic location(s):
- Peninsular Malaysia
Country/Region: Malaysia
C. Scale of assessment
Scale of assessment: Sub-national / Sub-region / Sub-State
Name/Details of location: George Town, Penang
D. Timescale of use
Start Year: 2013
End Year: 2014
E. Information about the use
How is the wild species sourced?: Wild species sourced from the wild but reared/cultivated in a managed site
Type of use: Extractive
Practice of use: Ranching, farming or cultivation or wild species
Lethal or non-lethal: Non-Lethal
Does this use involve take/extraction of: Only parts or products of the organism
Purpose(s) of end use: Food and feed and Medicine and hygiene
Motivation of use: Basic subsistence, Income generation from trade (individual/household/community) and Largescale commercial exploitation for trade
Is this use legal or illegal?: Some use is legal and some is illegal
F. Information about the Users
Which stakeholder(s) does the record primarily focus on?: Local people
G. Information about the sustainability of use
Is there evidence that the use is having an impact on the target species?: Wild species sourced from the wild but reared/cultivated in a managed site
Has an assessment (or judgement) of sustainability of the use of the target species from an ecological perspective been recorded?: No, sustainability not determined
Has an assessment (or judgement) of sustainability of the use of the target species from an economic perspective been recorded?: No, sustainability not determined
Details of assessment carried out: this study
Brief summary on why the use has been assessed/judged to be sustainable or unsustainable: Authors state since many of the buildings used are converted pre-war heritage shophouses in urban residential areas, the industry has generated a considerable amount of controversy regarding its impact on urban health, (in)tangible heritage, and the urban environment. Swiftlet houses have been criticised for preventing a healthy environment for other businesses and residents to operate and live in; devaluingneighbouring homes and businesses; while also creating noise pollution through the swiftlets and loud speakers (or ‘tweeters’) used to attract them. What is at stake here, is precisely the issue of competing livelihoods, which are dependent upon particular landscape forms, and the associated implications for socio-ecological wellbeing. Various political, cultural and economic aspects result from the Penang State Government’s reluctance to fully deal with the problems posed by the swiftlet farming industry in George Town.
Has an assessment (or judgement) of sustainability of the use of the target species from a social perspective been recorded?: No, sustainability not determined
Details of assessment carried out: this study
Brief summary on why the use has been assessed/judged to be sustainable or unsustainable: Authors state since many of the buildings used are converted pre-war heritage shophouses in urban residential areas, the industry has generated a considerable amount of controversy regarding its impact on urban health, (in)tangible heritage, and the urban environment. Swiftlet houses have been criticised for preventing a healthy environment for other businesses and residents to operate and live in; devaluingneighbouring homes and businesses; while also creating noise pollution through the swiftlets and loud speakers (or ‘tweeters’) used to attract them. What is at stake here, is precisely the issue of competing livelihoods, which are dependent upon particular landscape forms, and the associated implications for socio-ecological wellbeing. Various political, cultural and economic aspects result from the Penang State Government’s reluctance to fully deal with the problems posed by the swiftlet farming industry in George Town.
Has an assessment (or judgement) of sustainability of the use of the target species from a human health perspective been recorded?: No, sustainability not determined
Details of assessment carried out: this study
Brief summary on why the use has been assessed/judged to be sustainable or unsustainable: Swiftlet houses have been criticised for preventing a healthy environment for other businesses and residents to operate and live in; devaluing neighbouring homes and businesses; while also creating noise pollution through the swiftlets and loud speakers (or ‘tweeters’) used to attract them.
Has an assessment (or judgement) of sustainability of the use of the target species from an animal health/welfare perspective been recorded?: No, sustainability not determined
Details of assessment carried out: this study
Recommendations provided in the record to maintain or enhance the sustainability of the use of the target species
Non given
Record source
Information about the record source: scientific_pub
Date of publication/issue/production: 2017-01-01T00:00:00+0000
Source Reference(s):
Date of record entry: 2022-12-01