Fishing about and about fishing
M. Ben-Yami Column World Fishing, May 2014
"IS WORLD BANK ALSO AMONG THE PROPHETS?"
An 80-pp booklet, entitled FISH TO 2030: Prospects for Fisheries and Aquaculture - World Bank Report Number 83177-GLB (available also free on-line at World Bank and and FAO websites), represents a global view of fish supply and demand generated by an improved International Model for Policy Analysis of Agricultural Commodities and Trade (IMPACT). Based on trends in the production of fishing and aquaculture and in fish consumption, it produced with the help of a multitude of graphs and tables, projections of global fish supply and demand all the way to 2030. In 16 years from now, my younger readers would be able to see how good it was. The Report, is authored by a team composed of Mimako Kobayashi and J.Anderson from the World Bank (WB), Siwa Msangi from International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), FAO, and M. Day from University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff.
In the Foreword, Juergen Voegele, Director WB's Agriculture and Environmental Services Department, highlighted the impressive growth rate of the world's production of food fish that kept prices down and fish more accessible to consumers. He called for increased investment and new and safer and appropriately adapted technologies fitting local conditions.
In view of major seafood companies telling WB that they want to "secure access to reliable and environmentally sustainable supply chains", Mr. Voegele sees a major opportunity for developing countries in "matching growing market demand with this private sector interest" by investing in improved fisheries management and environmentally sustainable aquaculture. The WB along with partners like IFPRI and FAO, wants to "support developing countries in their efforts to manage their fish production sustainably through tailored and innovative solutions that work".
Let's first look at some facts published mainly by FAO in 2012. Most fishermen and fish farmers in developing countries are smallholders. While the flow of seafood exports from developing to developed countries has been increasing, in 2010, 38 % of fish produced in the world was exported, with 2/3 of the exports in value going from developing to developed countries (FAO 2012). In 2010, some55 million people were engaged in fishing and aquaculture, 90% of them being small-scale fishermen. To them, sustainable production and improved management of marine and coastal resources, including fish stock and habitat, would improve their livelihoods and food security, as well as help building and augmenting resilience of coastal communities in the face of climate change threat.
The report discusses three themes: (1) the health of global capture fisheries, (2) the role of aquaculture in filling the global fish supply-demand gap and potentially reducing the pressure on capture fisheries, and (3) implications of changes in the global fish markets on fish consumption, especially in China and Sub-Saharan Africa. It builds on the publication Fish to 2020: Supply and Demand in Changing Global Market. WorldFish Center Technical Report 62. Washington, DC. By Delgado, C.L., N.Wada, M.W. Rosegrant, S.Meijer, and M.Ahmed,2003 . Their "basic" model, allegedly successfully approximates the dynamics of the global fish supply and demand over the 2000–08 period, with outlook on the global fish markets into 2030, applying the most plausible scenario. Accordingly, the global fish supply will increase from 154 M mt in 2011 to 186 M mt in 2030. Aquaculture’s share will continue to expand, so that by 2030 fishing and aquaculture will be contributing equal yields, the aquaculture supplying over 60 percent of fish for direct human consumption. The aquaculture will continue to grow, while the global yield from capture fisheries stagnates at around 93M mt during the 2010–30 period.
However, in fact one may disagree with the authors' satisfaction of the "Fish to 2020" study, because it overestimated growth of capture fisheries and underestimated the growth of aquaculture by projecting for the 1997–2007 period, a growth rate at 3.4% a year, while in reality the rate was of 7.1%, a difference of over 100%. Anyway, at the back of the book's front page is printed in small letters: " The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work….".
I think that those letters should be much bigger. After finding what their model would tell them, if fed with the most plausible that's what they considered the most probable data, and using the result as "baseline", the authors fed it with six alternative sets of data (scenarios) to compare each such case with the "baseline" case.
Scenario 1 assumes aquaculture growing by 50% faster than under the baseline, lower costs of production, and other technical factors, but at the same feed requirements per kg of fish. The aquaculture production in 2030 would expand from 93.2 to 101.2 M mt, stressing the fishmeal market. Against the 2030 baseline case tilapia production would be higher by 30%, that of mollusks, salmon, and shrimp by more than 10%. All fish prices, (but those used for fishmeal and oil), would be lower in real terms by up to 2%. Fishmeal price would be higher by 13 %, while fish oil by 7%.
Scenario 2 assumes increased use of fish processing waste in fishmeal and fish oil production, and investigates its potential effects on market and aquaculture yield. Thus, fishmeal production in 2030 would increase by 12 percent and fishmeal price would be reduced by 14% relative to the 2030 baseline case, boosting the aquaculture yields and fishmeal and fish oil production, and reducing the competition for small fish between the reduction industry and direct human consumption.
Scenario 3 assumes a major outbreak of farmed shrimp disease in Asian countries, which supply 90% of global shrimp production. Production reduced by 35 percent would cause rise of prices. Non-affected countries would increase their shrimp production, but unable to fill the supply gap. However, the model says, a recovery will make the projected impact negligible by 2030.
Scenario 4 is a case of increased demand in China for salmon and shellfish by 2-3 times (over the baseline), causing the global aquaculture production to increase to more than 115 million tons by 2030. Thus, China in 2030 would consume by 60% more on the account of all other regions. Also, fishmeal price in 2030 would increase by 29% and fish oil price by 18% percent. Over 300 thousand tons more of fishmeal would be produced, at the expense of 1M mt of fish fit for direct human consumption.
Scenario 5 assumes global fishing gradually climbing to the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) that's 10% above the current level, with the resulting increase in the production of small pelagic and other fish for reduction and lesser pressure on the feed market. Although, the rapid expansion of aquaculture production is expected to continue, fishmeal price would go down by 7%. While consumption in some countries should grow, the authors call to "substantially reduce inefficiency often prevalent in the harvest sector", whose global cost was estimated in 2009 by the WB's "Sunken Billions" study at $50 billion/year. Unfortunately, I was unable to find where the sunken billions are sunken throughout the fishing industry. Although 90% of the fishermen are employed in the small-scale sector, I'm afraid the "billions" are sunken elsewhere…
Scenario 6 considers the impacts of global climate change on the productivity of marine capture fisheries. With all the due respect to the WB and co., I'll save my readers this, in my opinion, rather far-fetched prophecy.
What worries me a bit, however, is all the talk of increasing efficiency, improving fisheries management and environmentally sustainable aquaculture, the WB's desire to "support developing countries in their efforts to manage their fish production sustainably through tailored and innovative solutions", etc. This, because it's not accompanied with any explanation of how all this should be done. Hope, not again TACs, ITQs, catch shares, and more of the same. And the devil is always in the details.
No doubt, opening some windows to the still distant future was a remarkable effort. On the other hand, one could suggest numerous other scenaria, not less reasonable as the above six, and equally probable and bearing a plethora of outcomes. Well, this is always the problem with the future, it's hard to predict and it holds plenty of surprises, which is perhaps why the Jewish sages have been saying: "Since the destruction of the Temple, prophecy was given to fools…".